We have had a very constructive debate——
Committee on Finance. - Vote 21—Office of the Minister for Justice (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £266,010 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st March, 1967, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice and of certain other services administered by that Office, including certain Grants-in-Aid; and of the Public Record Office and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of Historical Documents, etc.
—(Minister for Justice).
(Interruptions.)
——and indeed I thank Deputy Ryan and others for their constructive contributions. The heat was generated at a later stage but certainly Deputy Ryan, Deputy Dillon and Deputy M.J. O'Higgins made very effective contributions, as did also Deputy James Tully, Deputy Dunne and Deputy O'Leary of the Labour Party. There were, too, some contributions from the Fianna Fáil benches in the same constructive spirit. This is as it should be on an Estimate of this nature, which relates to matters which all Parties, despite the heat of by-elections, would wish to see discussed in a sane and sensible manner in order to achieve the proper balance that needs to be achieved, in order to ensure that the effective administration of justice is continued. I take it that it is a basic principle on the part of all political Parties that we do seek to achieve the proper balance necessary to ensure that the common good and the individual's liberty are at the same time guaranteed.
The main point made by a number of Fine Gael speakers was in regard to the recent incident in the Mansion House concerning a meeting called by the Language Freedom Movement. I should like to state—and indeed there is very little need for me to state it—that freedom of assembly and freedom of speech are fundamental rights guaranteed in our Constitution, in our laws, and as long as I am Minister for Justice and our Government are here, and I am sure this would apply if another Government were here, these basic rights will continue to be guaranteed.
The facts surrounding this particular incident in the Mansion House were such as to indicate that at the point of time when the meeting was taking place indoors and organised by a particular organisation, which apparently decided to hold this meeting without being able adequately to control it, in that situation it would have been disastrous for the Garda to have intervened. The whole purpose of the police force is to preserve public order and to prevent breaches of the peace. Certainly in regard to any public meeting this would be the purpose of the Garda but in regard to any indoor meeting of this kind, the Garda, as a matter of practice, and of wise practice, do not move unless they are specifically asked to do so and my information is that they were not asked to intervene at this meeting. I have checked on this matter since Deputy Byrne was speaking last week. The Garda say that in the interests of public order and of preventing breaches of the peace, if they did happen to move in, they would, in the circumstances of that particular time, have added further to the disturbances already taking place.
I am constrained to make the remark——
I want to prevent any heat in this discussion, but as it did occupy so much time in the debate, I am constrained to reply to it. In any matter of an internal meeting of this kind, organised by the Language Freedom Movement or any other language organisation, or by a political Party, or by anybody, it is the basic duty of the people who organise it to steward their own arrangements, to organise their own meeting. At no stage was it ever regarded as the duty of the police force, here or in any other country, to go into an internal meeting of this kind and steward that meeting.
May I ask the Minister if he is accepting my word that at the request of the Language Freedom Movement, I asked the Commissioner of the Garda, on the afternoon before the meeting was held, on the previous day, to ensure that law and order would be observed?
On that aspect, the Garda are rightly reluctant in any way —and this is normal police practice in police forces elsewhere—to go into territory which is outside the public sphere.
The Minister is accepting my word?
I am not doubting the Deputy's word. We are all interested in preserving the rights of individuals and of associations and of people to organise themselves if they wish and the Garda are rightly reluctant to interfere in any way which would suggest that they are stewarding internal arrangements of a particular body. I think it is one of the facts of life in a democracy that if a particular person or organisation proposes to have a meeting indoors, then it is incumbent on that person or organisation so to organise the meeting by way of stewarding, by way of proper supervision of people admitted, to ensure that the meeting is held in an orderly way. It is only when a grave breach of the peace or serious offences or assaults are threatened, that the police decide to move. Indeed, in the particular circumstances, there was no obligation on the police to move and because of the rowdy situation which developed and in the tempo of that particular time, if the police had moved in, matters would have been far worse.
I refer to that matter at some length in order to put it into its proper perspective. Deputy Dillon and some speakers became a little hysterical about the whole thing. You have these indoor meetings but it is a matter for the police force to maintain public order outside, and it is a matter for the people organising these meetings to maintain order inside. If they are not able to do that, they are not an effective organisation.
A number of other points were raised during the debate. Deputy Carty and some other speakers spoke about the lack of uniformity in regard to penalties imposed in the District Courts. In the past few years, we have invested the President of the District Court with certain responsibilities and in this regard meetings may be held by the Justices of the District Court with a view to achieving a reasonable degree of uniformity; but you are up against another basic principle in the Constitution, and one in all Constitutions where laws operate in a free way, that once justices or judges are appointed, they must have judicial discretion in sentencing. One cannot regulate the actions of justices in regard to penalties and the discretion they exercise. At the meetings they have, they throw around their own ideas in an effort to achieve a degree of uniformity. That is one of the purposes of having a President of the district court to convene meetings. To seek to regulate the matter in any way further than that would be contrary, I think, to the basic principles of our law and the Constitution. But I agree with Deputy Carty and also with other Deputies that greater uniformity of penalties is to be desired. There is no question about that. I suggest that District Justices and other Judges should bear in mind what has been said in the House on this matter of public policy because it is important that public confidence be maintained in the courts. It does cause some erosion of public confidence if the public see disparity in penalties. I am quite sure most members of the judiciary are aware of this but it is all to the good that it should be raised in the Dáil and emphasised that a degree of uniformity is a desirable objective and that we have gone as far as we can to ensure it by having these regular statutory meetings of district justices over the past few years under the chairmanship of the President of the District Courts. I am convinced from my own examination of the records that a considerable amount has been done in the direction of uniformity since this procedure was adopted.
Another procedure that has come under fire in the House is the procedure of ministerial prerogative. The right to examine petitions and rectify a disparity or a wrong is also a factor in ensuring a reasonable degree of uniformity. Some people criticise this executive function and say it should not reside in the Minister for Justice. I would defend it to the end whether I or any other Minister for Justice is here. It is proper that the Minister for Justice should have that ultimate decision in respect of a petition where he sees disparity in regard to penalties. Judges are human as well as everybody else and having examined the file and having referred the matter back to the judge and to the police for their comments if the Minister takes the view that there should be some rectification of the penalty imposed, I think that right should reside in him in the interests of ensuring a reasonable degree of uniformity so that the balance is held as far as possible and no injustice arises.
A number of practical suggestions were made regarding the administration of the criminal law. I mentioned in my opening speech that I have a very substantial Bill on the stocks at present. We hope to have this published in the New Year. It is concerned with a wholesale reform of the criminal law, investing the police with new powers in regard to search and arrest but at the same time making these matters subject to the courts; rationalising the various powers which are very vague at the moment and not clear either to the police or the public; rationalising police powers regarding finger printing, bringing in new sections to deal with crimes of violence, in particular with offensive weapons. All of this was generally welcomed in the House and we shall have this legislation in the New Year.
A particular matter mentioned which I am examining with a view to incorporation in this legislation is the rather novel idea of making the offender pay the victim compensation in circumstances where that is warranted and where the compensation can be accurately assessed in lieu of a fine or imprisonment. This is an attractive idea. I am very attracted to it: it obviously attracted other Deputies also. But there are difficulties regarding the administration of it. Some of these were mentioned by some Deputies. An obvious difficulty is the difficulty of administration in regard to collecting compensation, whether it should be by way of instalments or otherwise. Another difficulty also was mentioned by Deputy O'Higgins, whom I now see coming into the House.
Perhaps I should explain that my absence was not due to discourtesy but I understood that Deputy Barrett would be carrying on the debate.
Deputy O'Higgins said that while the idea attracted him, also it could be regarded as favouring people who could afford to pay compensation to the victims against people who might not be able to afford the compensation and would therefore have to go to jail instead of paying compensation for an offence. It is an idea that I am having examined and I am hopeful that we will come up with something on this particular aspect.
Deputy Carty raised the question of bail and we are examining the bail procedure which exists at present which I do not consider to be as effective as it should be.
Deputy Cluskey and Deputy Tully mentioned the question of juries and jurors and I remarked across the House to Deputy Cluskey, I think, that we were aware of the anomalies which have arisen in this respect over the years on two counts (a) the very limited classes that fall to be called for jury service and (b) the inadequate amount that jurors are paid when they forfeit their day's pay or week's work or business on this account. On both of these aspects of the matter I have had a report from the Committee of Inquiry into Court Practices and Procedures which I am examining. It is being very thoroughly examined at present and again I hope to have legislation dealing with this subject in train in the New Year in a reform of the whole juries legislation.
I was glad to hear Deputy Dunne, and Deputy O'Leary, agree with my point of view in regard to newspapers, radio and TV. I do not want to start any row with the communications world. I have always had reasonably good relations with them at personal and official levels but far from being in accord with Deputy Ryan, who suggested that I had in some way stabbed them in the back—to use his own phrase this afternoon—I think it is a good thing that we should air our views in this House and that we should have an exchange of opinions, the way I look at it and the way other Deputies look at it. One thing I am very worried about and it has been brought out very dramatically, particularly in the US recently, that is, the imitative effect that over-highlighting crime certainly does have. While reporting is legitimate and a very good thing, over-highlighting a crime undoubtedly has had this effect as figures here and in other places show, that a few days afterwards you find other people committing the same type of crime. There was a classic example of this recently in the United States in the form of very serious paranoid murders where one found repetitions of them once the first had happened in Texas.
This does happen as a result of excessive reporting of crime. We find a definite pattern that if a certain type or form of crime is highlighted on television or in a particularly popular film or in newspaper headlines this type of crime tends to be repeated in the following weeks. That is why I mention this point in all seriousness. How to reconcile the legitimate business of the communications world with this particular aspect of the matter is something to which further thought must be given. It is important that the whole question of crime reporting be kept in perspective and if a crime occurs, if that is given appropriate publicity, it should not be too lurid, and if there is an arrest there is no need to mention the name of the person who has been apprehended. The story of the apprehension should be given a reasonable amount of publicity to restore confidence among the public. If a particularly bad crime takes place and it gets publicity and there is no follow-up in regard to any arrest having taken place, there is public disquiet because the public are under the impression that the police are not effective in getting their man. In fact they are getting their man. Our detection rate at 70 per cent is the highest detection rate in Europe and is not much short of twice what the British detection rate is. There is no reason for complacency in that, but at least it is good. My duty here as Minister for Justice in charge of our police force is to emphasise that fact and to suggest to the public that if certain criminal matters attract an inordinate amount of publicity and if they do not see in the papers any follow-up on that, it is not the fault of the police. In 100 per cent of these cases there is a follow-up; the person is apprehended in 70 per cent and in a great number of these cases there is a conviction.
The question of traffic offences was the subject of considerable discussion here. As Deputies know, the Road Traffic Bill is now ready for discussion in the House. It will be the responsibility of the Minister for Local Government. It is one of those areas of administration where the Minister for Justice has a function and the Minister for Local Government has a function. It has been suggested that it should be entirely the responsibility of the Minister for Justice, but the planning of our road networks is a matter for expert planning engineers and these are people who are with the local authorities throughout the country. For that reason it was thought better to leave it to the Department of Local Government. We confine ourselves to the enforcement aspect. It is the enforcement aspect that earns all the kicks and causes most of the comment.
On the aspect of enforcement one point was mentioned here and I am very glad to say it is covered under the new Road Traffic Bill. I agree that it is an anomalous situation that guards and their officers who are highly skilled people in the business of crime detection should have their time taken up in dealing with minor traffic offences. This arrangement is not suited to the needs of either the traffic or the crime position today. Under the new Road Traffic Bill we are seeking statutory authority for the recruitment and appointment of traffic wardens. It is hoped to recruit retired Garda or Army personnel for this purpose. Ex-members of the Garda force and possibly ex-members of the Army would be in a position to do the basic work that is involved in applying parking tickets and dealing with other minor offences.
I hope it is not intended to economise on this. I agree with the Minister's view that the question of having wardens should be looked into, but it would be a mistake to regard it as a purely secondary occupation and simply to pay pensioners a few pounds to do it.
No. The full statutory functions and powers that apply in regard to this at the moment will remain. These people will be empowered to deal with minor traffic offences, parking offences, particularly, so as to relieve trained manpower that at the moment is detailed for this comparatively minor sort of offence in order that they may apply themselves to duties more appropriate to a police force. We in the Department of Justice pushed this idea and I, in particular, was very anxious that this idea be incorporated in the Bill. You can rationalise the position much better by having the police force fully geared for work which is appropriate to a trained, disciplined organisation.
Another matter which is being dealt with under pending legislation is the question of abandoned cars which has become a menace in recent times. Mention was made of the importance of having clearways particularly in regard to traffic coming out of major centres. That has already gone into operation.
Where?
They have tried out one or two pilot plans in the past day or two.
Where?
I cannot tell the Deputy where but they have started.
Rathmines.
Yes.
Try the Belfast road.
In deference to Deputy Tully, we might try the Belfast road. Another important point which was mentioned by Deputy O'Leary was in regard to extending the system of fines on the spot to minor offences other than parking offences. This is part of a recommendation which has come to hand from the Committee of Inquiry into Court Practice and Procedures, and we are also covering that under pending legislation.
I hope you will go very slowly on that.
The original proposal for fines on the spot for motor cars was discussed fully here. Arguments were advanced for and against, but I think there is a whole range of offences of that kind—Deputy O'Leary mentioned the absence of a front or rear light on a bicycle—in which this principle could be further extended. I think there is validity in this suggestion. I know there is a theoretical argument that nobody should be penalised in that arbitrary fashion, but it is a minor offence and although there is a theoretical injustice caused, if you like, in this arbitrary imposition, there can be far more injustice in taking a person away from his work and having him hanging around a court all day.
Would the Minister include "after hours" in a public house in that?
We are examining a range of offences to which we would extend this idea of fines on the spot.
In the discussion on fines on the spot, I said I was afraid it might be the thin edge of the wedge. It looks as if I am not far wrong.
I appreciate what Deputy O'Higgins has in mind and one obviously can go too far in this direction. At the same time, there is a reasonable range of minor offences to which it could be extended outside the car-parking category. We are examining these at the moment and I hope to come before the Dáil before this time next year, if I am here, with proposals in this regard.
I am glad to notice the modification the Minister is adding in these days.
This is in deference to you.
Encouragement.
Is it that or the shuffling that goes on every now and again?
I should like to thank Deputy James Tully for his remarks about the motorcycle patrol. This is my own idea, that we should extend the motorcycle patrols considerably, as we have done. We have probably doubled them in the past 12 months with the idea of having these patrols available on busy roads to act as a deterrent as well as for the purpose of apprehension. The very fact that we have these clearly visible Garda motor cyclists moving along the main trunk roadways will act as a deterrent to excessive speeding and road misbehaviour.
Could they act as a deterrent to the crawler?
Yes; that is another day's work. The Deputy was very strong about this point of motorcars moving too slowly, and rightly so. They can sometimes be a greater menance than speeding motorists.
Hear, hear.
Another point on which some emphasis was laid by Deputy Dillon and Deputy O'Higgins was the question of the Garda foot patrols. I should like to emphasise here that there is no question of abandoning the Garda foot patrol, for the police foot patrol in any country remains the basic way of keeping in touch with the people in the area in which the patrol is taking place, keeping in touch with potential offenders and with the situation generally. I would regard the mechanisation of the Force in the way of increased motorcars, increased motorcycles, increased radio communication, as ancillary to the man on the beat. Sometimes the view is taken that there is in some way conflict between the two approaches. There is not. In fact, they both mesh in together and there has been no diminution of the number of men on the beat in this city. What we seek to do by having motor patrols and motorcycle patrols feeding into them is to make them more effective.
I do not wish to interrupt the Minister—perhaps he is going to deal with it—but I was not confining my references to the city. I fully agree with what the Minister is saying regarding the city. I was thinking in terms of the old-time push bicycle used by the garda, in the rural areas particularly.
Yes. Well, at the same time, they still have their push bicycles in rural areas. There is to be no diminution in push bicycles either.
The point is that a squad car or motorcyclist going through an area can cover ten times the ground but the garda is not getting himself acquainted with the area in the same way as the man on the beat could.
There is no doubt about what Deputy O'Higgins says and the man on the beat still remains and is very important. Even though we have had a lot of improvements since police forces were first formed, the man on the beat still remains basic to the whole situation. In the United States, Britain and here, the man on foot is basic to the whole situation. He is in touch with the area; he is in a position to get information, in a position to know really what is happening. I grant you that. What we are doing is to make his work, particularly in the bigger urban centres, more effective by bringing in a new system of two-way personal radio links-up. We have had various trials over the past 12 months in this regard. We have tried various sets. We have had discussions with our counterparts in Britain with a view to deciding what is the most effective way of doing this.
We have now come down on the side of a particular set which will enable the ordinary garda on the beat, with a pocket set that is hardly visible inside his tunic, to maintain direct contact with the patrol cars assigned to his area and with his own station. We have a complete radio network established in Dublin and in a number of provincial centres—about 14 country towns and cities. In Dublin, we are augmenting it by the purchase of about 150 of these personal radio sets as a start. At the moment they are on purchase and 150 men on the beat, inside the next month or two, will have this two-way direct radio control with the Garda motorcars in their area and with their own home station. This will be an additional strength to the man on the beat.
The only danger heretofore, particularly in urban centres, has been the isolation of the policeman on the beat from his comrades or from the station. With this means now, direct communication can be established within seconds of something happening. The 150 sets are a start. I should like to see it extended so that throughout the whole State, and especially in the bigger urban centres, we will have this system adopted which has proved successful in other centres throughout the world. One man on the beat will be able to establish direct communication and will no longer feel isolated from whatever support he needs in dealing with a particular situation.
This has been a very long debate. There is one point that occupied a certain amount of time today. A number of Deputies, particularly Deputy O'Leary, referred to it. It is the question of prison officers. The point was made that in some way they were being neglected. I should like to pay tribute to them here. That is the first thing I want to do. They are doing an excellent job. I should like to correct one wrong impression which may have been created. Deputy O'Leary, perhaps on wrong information, seemed to think that there was some difficulty in recruiting prison officers. We have no difficulty about recruiting either male or female officers.
Mr. O'Leary
What about retention?
No, we have no particular difficulty there. I grant that there may be other points that the Deputy mentioned in regard to conditions of work.
Mr. O'Leary
Length of hours.
Yes, and the time they must come in and the need for a written request before getting permission to go out. I understand that at the moment there are conciliation council proceedings in regard to their terms of service and I would prefer not to comment now and to see what emerges from that. I do know that there is conciliation and arbitration machinery operating in regard to the prison service. The rates of pay are settled through this machinery. There is a Prison Officers' Association that has acted on behalf of the officers concerned. The rates of pay issue has been settled but there are a number of questions, many of which were mentioned by Deputy O'Leary, concerning their conditions of service and these are actually under consideration under the conciliation machinery.
Are they paid overtime for any hours worked in excess of the normal working day?
They are.
Mr. O'Leary
Is it not subject to the stipulation of not getting time off within a six week period?
That may be.
The Minister feels that the case is one that should be looked into, subject to what the conciliation council come out with?
I will see what emerges from the conciliation proceedings. I agree with Deputy O'Leary that it is important that the morale of this Force should be high and I would certainly be concerned if there were any question of its not being high. I will certainly look into it. The morale of the Garda force is quite high at the moment and I should like to see an equally high morale attained in the prison service also if that were not so.
Deputy O'Higgins referred to the whole question of the Garda linking up with youth clubs in order to prevent any form of juvenile delinquency. This is going very well. The system of having juvenile liaison officers has been extended outside Dublin to a number of country towns. These officers are co-operating with various Church and social agencies. It is a matter that has to be handled delicately because it is a field in which the Garda should not move too quickly because it is a field where voluntary effort by people who wish to dedicate themselves should be paramount. The Garda like to come in and help. The system is going very well and, as I said in my opening speech, the success rate has been quite high in this respect.
I do not think there are too many more points that need to be covered. The work of the Adoption Board was referred to particularly by Deputy Cluskey. He raised certain points of detail in regard to its administration which I will have examined, but I do not think it would be practical to do what he suggested in regard to the establishment of regional boards. At present the Adoption Board are working quite well. They are moving out from Dublin and have hearings in Cork and elsewhere. I should like to take this opportunity of congratulating them on the excellence of the work done in the past 12 months. It is a considerable social achievement that over 1,000 homeless children have been allocated to parents who look after them as their own which they then become. It is one of the most heartening developments that have taken place in Ireland in the past 50 years.
I was glad of the mention on the part of all Deputies of the credit due to the Garda force. I should like to emphasise again how important it is that the public should be equally aware of the importance of the Force in preserving law and order. There are, perhaps, now and again instances of the relations between individual members of the Force and the public going wrong. I investigate any complaints that come to my notice, and the record is very good. The Force is held in high esteem. I am very thankful for the various complimentary references made by Deputies in this respect.
There was one matter mentioned which again is the subject matter of pending legislation, that is, the proposed amendment of the criminal injuries code. This is the subject matter of an interdepartmental committee report. I am having the whole question of the criminal injuries code examined at the moment with a view to legislation. The point was made—it is a very valid point that has been argued out over the years—that it is wrong, certainly on a straight look at the problem, that where insurance cover exists local authorities should have to bear the burden of compensation in the case of malicious injuries. This is a matter which was mentioned in the committee report and is one in respect of which I hope to have proposals before the Government in the near future. It also concerns other aspects of the malicious injuries code which require reform. It certainly does appear—and it is my view, too—that in any case where insurance cover is in existence it is wrong to burden local authorities with compensation for which an insurance company should be made liable and in respect of which an insurance policy is in existence. That is just one aspect of the general field of criminal injuries I should like to mention. It would be part of proposals, I hope, in regard to complete reform of the code.
Another aspect which was mentioned in this respect was the question of a member of the public going to the assistance of a garda. Again, this was the subject matter of recommendations in that report that, where this did happen and where a member of the public was injured or suffered damage in any form by reason of assisting a garda in a particular matter of public importance, where a crime or something of that nature was involved, there should be some statutory right residing in that member of the public to recover compensation for whatever injuries or damage were suffered. This is also a matter to which I am giving attention in connection with the proposed reform of the criminal injuries code.
I hope the Minister will press that through. It is an anomaly there far too long.
I think I have covered most of the points. It was a very long debate, but I think we have pretty well covered everything. It was mentioned in regard to the Reform of Juries Bill that we are extending the classes of people who qualify. This will include women as well. Deputy Cluskey made a strong speech yesterday about women's rights. While somebody else said subsequently he was more theoretical than practical, I think there is a good deal to be said for giving women the same rights as men in this respect, even though in many cases women may not welcome having to go on to juries away from their domestic duties. However, as a matter of principle it is something with which I agree.
Surely it will be only those who have no worries domestically who will turn up?
These are the people Deputy Lindsay is acquainted with.
I do not know that I would welcome it at all.
There are two points of view on it. They were put yesterday. The debate in general has been very constructive. If I have omitted any points made by Deputies —there were quite a number of points made in this respect—I will be glad to deal with them afterwards in the way of correspondence or discussion. It is important in the administration of justice that we keep up with the changing situation in regard to law and the needs of our society. As I said in my opening speech, at the moment we are interested in the whole field of enforcing court judgements not alone between here and Britain but between here and every Western European country with which we will be associated in the Common Market. This is an example of the sort of law reform which takes into account the political situation into which we are going. In general that is the sort of thinking I should like to see all the time in the Department of Justice to ensure that law reform takes place in accordance with the changing needs of the people in our society.
Our great political objective at present is to secure entry into EEC. For that reason I feel that our laws should move in that direction as well. It is going to be important, if we hope to have close trade, economic and social relations with European countries, that our court judgements and court orders would be equally effective throughout the countries with which we are associated, and that theirs are equally effective here, in order to facilitate the freer exchange of trade, economic and social objectives. I mention that as just one example. That is why I feel in regard to every field of legal reform we must always ensure that we keep in touch and require that legal reform take cognisance of the nature of our society today, but that we do not change just for change's sake. If we do have legal reform, such as the present Ground Rents Bill, which is with the Seanad at the moment, the legal reform proposed in regard to the reform of the criminal law to which I have referred, the reform of the courts in the new Courts of Justice Bill or the reform of the jury system in the Juries Bill, any legislation of reform in the coming 12 months will be legislation dealing with practical aspects which can improve the administration of law for the benefit of the citizen, and such improvement will be in accordance with the needs of our society today, and the sort of society we are moving into in the years ahead.
Vote put and agreed to.