As I have already said, I come here not to dwell on the mechanics of this Department. There are many more people in this House well able to deal with the mechanism of this Department. I come here to speak as an outsider, as an ordinary member of the public. I have already mentioned a matter that has been ruled sub judice and I wish to clarify my position in that regard. It is in connection with the extradition of Seán Bourke. While I in no way condone——
Committee on Finance. - Vote 20—Office of the Minister for Justice (Resumed).
That a sum not exceeding £292,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1969, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, and of certain other Services administered by that office, including a Grant-in-Aid; and of the Public Record Office, and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of Historical Documents, etc.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).
I must remind the Deputy that this matter cannot be raised in this fashion.
Is it sub judice at the moment?
The matter has been ruled out.
I do not think it is.
The Chair has already ruled on this matter.
Having cleared my position, I should now like to dwell on how first offenders, particularly juvenile delinquents, are dealt with. This first offence can be committed in the exuberance of youth. They are brought before the court and in many cases much publicity is given to their actions. Their cases could be dealt with outside the ordinary code of criminal justice. It should suffice to bring these lads before a peace commissioner and issue a warning. That should meet the case and ensure the future not alone of that boy but also the family's good name. We have cases of juvenile delinquents and, indeed, district justices in administering the law should in many cases cease setting themselves up as psychiatrists sermonising and lecturing those unfortunate boys and girls and telling them what they should and should not do. Such district justices overstep their powers in these matters. Let them administer the law and give their decisions and let the other matters be dealt with by the parents.
These matters, particularly with regard to juveniles, could easily be handled by a peace commissioner instead of having the family going to all the trouble, expense and the worry and leave it at that. I would ask the Minister to give that careful consideration. If boys, particularly, are convicted and sent away for some trivial offence they meet in institutions boys who are much worse than they and, therefore, start off on a career of crime because they have not been enlightened and have not had the benefit of proper parental control. They are sent to such institutions as Daingean or St. Patrick's and thus enter into an atmosphere that leads them on the road to crime in their adult years.
I should like to deal particularly with the Adoption Board. This board is doing a tremendous job of work and its members are to be congratulated for the manner in which they delve into all the details before they allow any child to be adopted. They are doing great work and they should get every encouragement from the Department. All of us in public life, whether we are on local authorities or in Dáil Éireann, know exactly how this Adoption Board works. We know the trouble that is involved. We know the inquiries that are made and we know the visits that are paid afterwards to the people who adopt these children. This must be encouraged and I would ask the Minister to give the Board more and more encouragement, whether financial or otherwise, because of the great work they are doing. One result of their work is the closing of the old reformatory schools and the orphanages where young boys were treated as if they were scum with no intelligence and who were sent out late in life as third—or fourth-class citizens with the stamp of the reformatory written all over them. The Adoption Board have done something to wipe out the stigma of the orphanage and I would ask the Minister to continue to help in every way the work of the Adoption Board.
Hear, hear.
The Minister mentioned the matter of bail and the problem the giving of bail presents. I speak again as a layman but with some experience of how this works. I agree with the Minister in what he is attempting to do with regard to bailees. I know of a case where a person was on bail and during the term he was on bail he committed 85 offences.
He was certainly working overtime.
He was but where did it happen?
In Limerick.
No, it happened in Ballyfermot.
He was not a native.
Is that matter sub judice?
This matter of granting bail at every hand's turn to professional criminals is a matter that deserves serious consideration and I congratulate the Minister on what he is doing in this respect. There is the old habitual offender; up he goes, out on bail and away he goes on his career of crime, back again, in and out and in most of these cases, like the recurring decimal, every day he is in and out of prison. Some of them would prefer to be habitually boarded in prison than living in society as we all have to do.
I do not know whether the Minister will allow discussion on the Criminal Justice Bill. Let us impress on him that as far as we in the Labour Party are concerned we oppose every clause and sentence in it.
Having said that, I should like to come to the question of prisons generally and the treatment of the criminal be he an old lag or a young criminal. The position in regard to criminals should be tackled more from an educational viewpoint. There is no use sending a fellow into jail, giving him a shovel, a pickaxe or a whitewash brush and telling him to scrub the floor, whitewash the wall or paint the windows and so on. In Portlaoise they have to do farming work. That is not the solution. Psychiatric treatment and classes should be arranged within the prison walls. Criminals, particularly those who are in for the first time, can be rehabilitated by such means. That encouragement should be given to them so that, when they emerge from the prison gate, they can walk into society and be accepted again as ordinary law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately, that is not the case at present. An indelible brand is imprinted all over them through no fault of their own maybe. It is a disease that can be cured; and psychiatric lessons should be part and parcel of prison life.
Many of these cases are due to alcoholism. I know that the Minister would get the full co-operation of that noble body, Alcoholics Anonymous, in this matter. They would be only too delighted to go into prisons and lecture to the prisoners on the disease which has overcome them and which perhaps has been the cause of putting them inside prison walls. There is no use in giving a fellow two years in jail and branding him for the rest of his life as a criminal. Most of them suffer from diseases which should be treated as diseases. Treatment with a whitewash brush, a shovel or a pickaxe is not the correct treatment. That is only giving those people time to communicate and converse with criminals worse than themselves. I would ask the Minister to take cognisance of this if he is going to reform the law and if he is going to treat this matter in the serious manner in which it should be treated but was not treated in the past. I speak as a layman who mixes with people. I am not talking about the mechanics of the Minister's Department. They mean nothing to me. That is a matter for lawyers. Let them battle it out; I am not interested in them.
I want to come now to what I regard as the most important point, and that is the Malicious Injuries Act. I speak again from experience, without any technical or legal knowledge. In this Malicious Injuries Act you have the local authority saddled with responsibility for something done by somebody outside the jurisdiction of that local authority. It may be done by a juvenile or man from outside the borough or the area in which the act is committed and thousands and thousands of pounds can be involved. It is a battle then between the local authority and the insurance company. It goes to the law, and there are you. The man who committed the offence could be from Athens. It is in the news at the present time and that is why I mention it. He could be from anywhere coming into our city and causing damage to the extent of thousands of pounds. Then the local authority is saddled with compensation is most of these cases. The ratepayers have to put their hands into their pockets and pay for something for which they have no responsibility. I have raised this at local authority level and protested to the Department about it because of our experiences in Limerick. I hope the Minister will agree that the ratepayers should not be saddled with this expense. This is a matter of great importance. We have in Limerick many experiences of this kind. I speak from experience, having served over 20 years on the local authority.
Having said what I said about the district justices and their lectures, I want to impress on the Minister: let them administer the law and stop. I want to come now to another matter, that is, the question of the delay in the Land Registry Office. I do not know what they are doing over there in Chancery Street. I know I have a pain in my finger from writing letters to them—folio this and folio that and when is it going to be done. Most of my complaints are coming from the legal profession in Limerick. They ask me: Will you get on to the Land Registry? Will you get this done and will you get that done? I do not know for the life of me what they are doing over there and who is there to do anything. It takes months and months, particularly in the mapping section. Whether that is because they are understaffed or inept or dilatory, I do not know; but I know from experience that the delays caused there are absolutely unnecessary. The Commission set up to price a gallon of milk took about six years to put a price on the production of a gallon of milk. The Commission set up on education took about eight years to tell us something we all knew before they started. But I cannot for the life of me understand what the delay is over there is Chancery Street.
I would ask the Minister, if he has to use the whip, for God's sake use it and do not have unfortunate people waiting, particularly people who intend to marry and are looking for a map of an area or this, that or the other thing to build a house. The loans are granted on the production of this document and the grants are made on the production of that document—and these documents are held up for months on end. I am not the only one who has put this point to the Minister. It is not a matter confined to a particular constituency; it concerns the whole country and it must be remedied one way or another. If they are understaffed, give them staff. Let us have efficiency and let those people who want to marry and build a house go to work, because by their building a house other people are being provided with work.
I want to conclude by congratulating the Minister on the introduction of the portable machines the Gardaí are now using.
Walkie-talkies.
They are certainly a great acquisition. Most important of all, they are a great time-saver. Men can be on the spot and can be directed to a particular place within seconds of any particular happening. It was a great idea and I hope it will spread to other areas. We have had experience of it in Limerick and we were all very happy at its introduction.
I urge on the Minister the importance of satisfying the people who uphold the law, the men who work a 24-hour day, our Gardaí. If they are not satisfied—I must congratulate them on their speedy detection of crime; as the Minister said in his speech, our statistics of crime detection compare more than favourably with other European countries—we shall be killing the goose. These people must be satisfied and happy in their work. They must be given decent conditions of work. They have not got them, particularly in Limerick. I ask the Minister to send any of his inspectors to any Garda station in County Limerick to see the conditions in them, particularly their allowance of fuel for the year. It would not keep them going for two months. They get the cheapest available fuel —any old stuff is thrown into the Garda station—because it is given by tender. I know it from my experience in my constituency.
If these premises were subject to inspection by the local authority, we in Limerick would condemn them out of hand. For instance, we condemned the Garda station in William Street in Limerick 20 years ago as being dangerous but nothing has been done since. Wherever he gets the money to provide these men with decent offices, a decent place in which to work, the Minister should do it speedily even as a tribute to the hard and great work they are doing in the national interest.
When Deputy Coughlan congratulated the Minister on the use by the Gardaí of portable machines, I hope he was not referring to the proposed introduction of the breathaliser.
We will leave that to the Donegal poteen drinkers.
The last speaker referred to Land Registry problems. As a Deputy who deals a lot with land registry in the matter of speeding up the acquisition of sites for house-building, I must say that in nine cases out of ten I get replies back from the Land Registry Office to say: "The papers in this case have not been lodged by the solicitor and when we receive these papers we will expedite the proceedings."
That is correct.
In most cases I have an early reply from the Land Registry Office. Apart from the type of cases I have mentioned in which the papers have not been lodged, I find otherwise there is great expedition in land registry dealings. That has been my experience. I have heard solicitors from the other side say their experiences have been different. Admittedly, they have more contact with land registry than I but that has been my experience.
On the question of school attendance. I mention it for the purpose of getting information from the Minister. I should like to know how many cases under the School Attendance Act came before the courts in the last 12 months. My impression is that the School Attendance Act is in a semi-lapsed condition. This has happened for a number of reasons. First of all, I admit that today, with the emphasis on education in all its branches, the public and the parents are conscious of the need for education. It is, therefore, quite possible that we have advanced—I know we have—in school attendance and that there would not normally be as many cases as there were some years ago.
However, I still have the feeling that the School Attendance Act is not being used effectively. I am not blaming the authorities for it. It is very discouraging for Gardaí to bring such cases before the courts and to find that they are dismissed summarily without any reference to the number of times the particular cases have come to the courts and without any reference to the circumstances. It is seldom that any disciplinary action is taken at all. In this respect I must again express objection to the amendment of the Act last year or the year before, particularly to the stipulation that school-going children can be brought to court. I objected to it at the time the Bill was being debated. I think it is bad legislation and that it should be amended because it is the duty of the parents and when there is failure in that duty it is the parents who should be brought to court and not the children.
As I have said, not enough action is being taken mainly because the Gardaí find it most discouraging, having gone to all the trouble, firstly, of visiting parents and giving them warnings and then going back later to find the warnings have not been heeded, and then as a last resort bringing the cases into court where very little is done about them. It is necessary we should have in operation a School Attendance Act which will give results. We are not getting results now.
The second matter I wish to mention is the operation of the Road Traffic Act, again in the same context —first of all the difficulties Gardaí have in finding the culprits, those who offend on the public highways, those who cause injury and death. There is difficulty in finding those responsible for accidents. We see in the newspapers accounts of accidents of a serious nature due to gross negligence and carelessness on the part of motorists and others. We read, however, that in the courts the sentences imposed make us rub our eyes, have another look at the paper and say to ourselves: "Surely in a case like this the person should not have got off scot-free or with such a light penalty." At the moment some of the accidents on our public highways are a disgrace to the motoring public. Most of them are caused through carelessness and thoughtlessness and a fair number are caused by an excessive use of alcohol. I know it is not the duty of the Minister to interfere with the district justices but, as it is a serious matter, it is no harm to say here what we think and what we read in regard to these cases.
The next matter I want to mention is the recent controversy in regard to licensing of guesthouses for the consumption of alcohol.
I might remind the Deputy that there is a Bill before the House. If that is so, it is not permissible to speak on the subject.
If the Minister has introduced legislation——
The Deputy may not be going to develop the topic but if what he has to say is in regard to something that has already been mentioned on First Reading, it would not be permissible to anticipate legislation. If what he has to say is in regard to existing legislation, that is all right.
Fair enough. I will not go any further with that. The next matter I want to mention is the worldwide wave of protest marches and demonstrations experienced in all democratic countries and recently in what used to be regarded as totalitarian countries. I agree that this is a good healthy sign of democracy. Any group or organisation should have the right to have orderly marches, protests, peaceful demonstrations in support of their own cause or of any cause which they may adopt. This is democracy at its best. It is the safety valve which allows the particular problem of a group to be brought to the notice of the public and the press and provides an opportunity for the public generally to learn what that group has to say. It is, however, a feature of such marches that while the promoters are genuine and are correct in staging a public protest, march or demonstration for the purpose of airing their grievances, the marches are used by others who have ulterior motives. They are used by hooligans who want to do damage; they are used by looters who want to cash in on the disturbance which is caused. It is a pity that this is happening. Police authorities in every country in the world are finding it difficult to cope with the extraneous elements which follow in the wake of genuine protesters or marchers. This is something that is reaching this country now. It would be a pity if the good name of our Gardaí were affected by their dealing with the undesirable elements in these protest marches. It would be a bad thing if the good name of the organisation staging the protest should be lost because of actions of which they are the nucleus, and unwilling nucleus at that.
This is a problem and the Minister should have the wholehearted support of all the Members of the House in efforts which he may have to take to deal with this sort of thing. If the Gardaí go out against undesirable elements in these events it should not be said that they are against the promoters or against those who have very good reason, indeed, to march and to protest.
I do not think that the Minister will take it amiss from me if I describe the speech that he made in introducing this Estimate yesterday as a humdrum statement. When we look back upon the stormy debates and the frequently bitter discussions that we had in this House not so many years ago on the introduction of the Estimate for the Department of Justice it is a source of public comfort that we can have a humdrum speech on the introduction of the Estimate for the Department of Justice which, as Deputy Burke pointed out yesterday, is responsible for the maintenance of law and order, and even a humdrum debate on that Estimate.
I am not very proud of my knowledge of ancient Roman history but when I came into this House on the first day of this session of the Dáil, the first thing I noticed was that the protective grille had been removed from the visitors' gallery. My mind went back to some time ago when an old friend of mine and I used to walk up by Ship Street in order to avoid the depredations of the Black and Tans here in Dublin. On the way home from court we passed Ship Street Barracks. There are steps going up from Ship Street into the Castle. When the gates were closed, the Black and Tans were in operation or there was some disturbance in the city and, when they were open, things were quiet. My friend recalled that that was like the Temple of Janus. The Temple of Janus had its gates open when the city was peaceful and the country was free from conflict. When the gates were closed, there was disturbance in the city. The removal of the protective grille can be taken as an indication to the public that the country as a whole is peaceful and free from conflict. May I recall what Deputy MacEntee said here, mostly by way of interruption, the other day during Question Time when he referred to the ill-advised passage of the Republic of Ireland Act? It would not be unhelpful to suggest to Deputy MacEntee that in his less provocative mood he might think a little longer and, perhaps, come to the conclusion that the removal of that grille was in some way at least due to the passage of that legislation by the Oireachtas.
Deputy O'Higgins when he was replying to the Minister paid a well deserved tribute and expressed goodwill to him in his new office. That recalls to me the fact that I think I ought to put on record here, that apparently, there has been a change, a welcome change, of policy in regard to the appointment of the Commissioner of the Garda. I should also like to place on record my own appreciation of the fact that it now appears to be the policy of this Government, and I hope it will long continue to be the policy of this or any other Government that succeed it, that the high officers of the Garda should be recruited exclusively from the members of the Garda. I cast no reflection on the two highly-distinguished persons who occupied the position of commissioner of the Garda for a number of years.
It is a great incentive to young, ambitious men in the Garda Síochána to know that they have the option, by hard work, by their own ability and with a little bit of luck, of gaining the highest commissioned post in the force. It is proper policy that that should be adopted. It is better for the Garda and for the country. It gives them the chance of reaching, through their own efforts, high positions. It enables the system of promotions to work more rapidly and prevents the blockage of promotions which took place in the force when there was not this movement. It is a matter of great satisfaction to me that a change has been made and I hope it will continue in the future to be as it is now.
Speaking of the Garda logically leads me to mention the very welcome change referred to by the Minister in his speech, that is, the relieving of Gardaí of duties in connection with the parking of motor cars. The Minister gave disturbing statistics of the increase of crime here. As everybody knows, there are a lot of burglaries in the city and suburbs. It is degrading for the Gardaí to be placing tickets on cars while those crimes are being committed and the criminals are operating at their leisure. Duties in connection with parking offences requires no intelligence. All the Garda has to do is to put a sticker on the windscreen of a car and make a note in his book. That is a waste of time and public money. It is, therefore, very welcome to me, and I am sure to the public, to find that the Gardaí are now being released from these duties, duties which must be soul destroying for them and a cause of annoyance to the public.
Recently there has been a tendency on the part of the public to be critical of the Garda, to be over anxious to find fault with them—the root cause of all this antagonism towards the Gardaí at present is the manner in which duties relating to traffic offences are handled by the Gardaí. It is to be deplored that Gardaí feel they have a right to lecture the owners of motor cars. A commissioner stated that he had regarded it as his function and duty to impress on young Gardaí coming out that courtesy and politeness to the public are absolutely essential. When Gardaí give lectures like this there is no comeback on the part of the offender—or, if there is, it is paid for in the courts.
A friend of mine, whom I know to be a very law-abiding citizen, was trying to offer an explanation to a Garda on one occasion but the Garda said: "Look here, my boy, if you give me any more guff I will take you down to a place where my word will be taken against yours". That is the sort of thing which causes annoyance to the public and it is, therefore, a good thing that the Gardaí are to be taken off traffic offences.
The statistics given by the Minister for the increase in crime are somewhat alarming. But in spite of that alarming increase and in spite of the fact that there is so much world unrest, I think we can take comfort from the fact that we are the most law-abiding people in the world today. That is a rather high-sounding phrase, but when one looks at all the unrest in the world I think I am justified in saying this. On British television the other night I heard a young man say that he was looking forward with pleasure to a demonstration which he said was only the beginning of the revolution in England. We can take comfort, too, from the fact that our people have grown up in this country. They have become more politically educated and more politically mature. We are at present as free as possible from the terribly disturbing symptoms afflicting the USA and Great Britain.
The Minister made reference to the programme of law reform. As I have said before, I have faith and confidence in and respect for the work being done by the Law Reform Committee. They are doing a very difficult job extremely well, as is shown in many of the law reform measures that have come before the Oireachtas. Of course, they cannot please everybody. They do not even please me, although I am sympathetic to their work and I appreciate the efforts they are making to bring law reform up to date and into line with modern conditions. They are officials doing a job but they sometimes go too far in their zeal for reform of the law. They sometimes look too far into the Continental system. They forget we have our own system here fashioned for our own needs and that we do not want too much of the Continental code. It is the Minister's responsibility when these people put forward their very well thought out suggestions for law reform, to cull from those suggestions —some of which may arise from zeal or perhaps too much learning or too much research into other systems— those which are suitable and useful for our own country and circumstances.
Deputies on the Labour benches spoke about what the Minister has said in regard to bringing in legislation on malicious injuries. From time to time views change and vary. On strict theory the malicious injuries code was a British system introduced into this country in order to penalise the ordinary natives of the country, because the landowners of that time thought they were not getting a fair deal from some of the so-called peasants of Ireland.
That is the basis of the malicious injuries code. On the other hand, if there are people going around maliciously destroying property, then there is some duty on the public to help the Garda in their investigations of these matters and the prosecution of them, if possible. To that extent there is a justification for the malicious injuries code. However, I do not want to discuss the matter. It is a matter which is neither black nor white. There are views on both sides. A relation of mine was walking down Grafton Street some time ago and he saw a gentleman taking up a large implement and throwing it through a plateglass window in one of the Grafton Street shops. It was a somewhat difficult situation for him, and the gentleman who did it turned round and said to him: "Do you want to make an issue of it?" My relation said he did not. Of course, if there was neither insurance nor the malicious injuries code, the position would be somewhat difficult.
On the other matters of law reform the Minister has given some indication of what he intends to do. I have two suggestions which are not very important, because these things are working all right at the moment, but it is proper that the law should be settled straight away. It has recently been held by Mr. Justice Kenny that it is no longer necessary in spite of the statute, to get the fiat of the Attorney General to sue a Minister. That is the decision of the High Court. However, it is a matter that may at some stage be brought higher and possibly be reversed or it may even be affirmed. There is a condition of uncertainty about it at the moment, coupled with the fact that we still have the archaic British law in this country based upon and proceeding from the old legal British maxim that the King can do no wrong. An ordinary citizen cannot yet sue a Minister of State or any of his officials because of that principle, and because also of the principle that a civil servant or officer of the State is not the servant of the Minister, the Minister cannot be liable. That is gone in England for some years, and it is time it should be reversed here. It is illogical that any citizen should not be entitled to sue any Minister just the same as he can sue any other citizen. It is based upon a principle entirely outworn and one deriving its origin from the old maxim to which I referred: The King can do no wrong.
The next matter to which I should like to refer is that mentioned by Deputy Coughlan of the Labour Party, the question of bail. The Minister indicated that he intends to bring in what I think is a rather restrictive provision in connection with bail overruling, in effect, the decision of the Supreme Court. I did not anticipate any discussion on that, but again because it was mentioned I should like to issue one note of warning, that what the Minister says should be further considered.
The decision which I think brought the Minister to the point of introducing this legislation was a decision of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, under the Constitution, is the guardian of the liberty of the citizens of this country and there should be profound respect for any decisions of our Supreme Court, and decisions springing from principles enshrined in the Constitution should not be lightly set aside, even though there may be, as the Minister indicated in the few passages in which he dealt with this matter in his speech, a good case for setting it aside.
In individual circumstances he can make a case. Deputy Coughlan made a case about 85 offences being committed by a person when he was on bail. That might happen. There may be instances where it would be wrong to have a man out on bail, but the general principle should be the over-riding consideration in the Minister's mind. I would ask the Minister, before he introduces this Bill, at least to have the Supreme Court decisions further examined and to give it very much more respect that apparently it is going to get in this Bill that is indicated.
The Minister also referred, if only indirectly, to his intention of increasing the jurisdiction of the district court and the circuit court. Nobody will object to a reasonable increase in jurisdiction in both courts but, once again, I would ask the Minister to consider very carefully the danger of going too far. An action involving £500 or £600 is a big action for a citizen of this country, even taking the fall in the value of money into account. The district court is supposed to be the people's court and over the years tributes have been paid to the district justices for the manner in which this court has operated since it was founded in 1923. But it must be remembered, in considering the extent to which increased jurisdiction should be given, that the district justices are operating under very difficult conditions. If big cases are brought before them there are no facilities for looking up the law or for having legal matters properly argued. The same applies to the circuit court.
People are entitled to go to the High Court with important cases. It must be remembered, as far as the individuals concerned in a case, that there is no other case in the whole world, in the whole judicial system in this country or anywhere else, that is of equal importance to that case. Every citizen should have the opportunity of going to the High Court. The efforts that have been made in recent years to minimise the costs in the circuit court and the district court have been largely futile. People need not think that by increasing the jurisdiction of the circuit court or the district court they are going to reduce costs.
It is not only the legal costs, the costs of my own profession or of the solicitors' profession which are involved. There are also the costs involved in witnesses' expenses, in particular, the expenses of professional witnesses such as engineers, doctors, photographers and all the rest. These expenses far outweigh those of the legal profession. Therefore, I would ask the Minister to consider carefully this question of increasing the jurisdiction of these courts and not to overdo it. A reasonable increase is not merely justified but is necessary. By letting people go to the district court you may save expense but you may also do grave injustice. It was once said that the function of the inferior magistrate was to be quick, courteous and generally wrong. Well, now, do not let him go loose too much on an extended jurisdiction on that principle.
That leads me to the question of free legal aid. I am not really acting as an advocate for either my own profession or the solicitors' profession in this matter but I think I am entitled first of all on behalf of my own profession to pay tribute to the Minister that in his introductory speech there is not even an undertone much less a tone or a suggestion of menace to my profession or to the solicitors' profession. We have had enough of that for some years and I am glad that there was not even an undertone of it in the Minister's speech yesterday. The free legal aid scheme was introduced not long ago and members of my own profession and of the solicitors' profession felt it a matter of duty, although many of them hated doing criminal work, to put their names on the panel. It was not in order to get the miserable fees that they did this but to do the duty asked of them in the public interest.
The system has not been applied to the district courts and I think it is necessary that it should be. The Minister should carefully consider introducing the system for the proper kind of cases in the district court. We have had the case of a man whose solicitor appeared in a district court five times for a preliminary investigation but after five adjournments the district justice in the end refused informations. If the case had gone to a higher court the solicitor would have got his fees but he does not get them in the district court. The Minister should reconsider all that.
Undoubtedly the Department of Finance will object—I remember hearing an official of that Department being described as a walking negative, meaning that he said "no" to everything— and no doubt they will say "no" to this but a case should be made for my profession and the solicitors' profession in regard to a certain type of case which occupies a considerable time in the courts, namely the running down case. Both solicitors and barristers, by the method they adopt and through custom which has grown up over the years, are saving the taxpayer money in legal aid by the system of having two seniors and a junior in these running-down cases. They are really doing a social work which is unpaid. In many cases you know that you have not got a chance of winning. You go into court knowing that you are going to get nothing out of it. In England they pay for this legal aid but we are doing the job for nothing. The Minister should inform the Department of Finance that they should pay for this type of work for the right type of case and, in addition, they should increase the miserable fees which are at present paid to those whose names are on the panel in the Circuit Court and in the Central Criminal Court. Nobody wants these cases—personally I would not touch them—but people put their names down purely as a matter of duty and they are quite perturbed when they are asked to take on a case and take it on for a miserable fee.
I am not going to speak about this famous Criminal Justice Bill which is causing so much trouble except to refer to one matter in regard to criminal justice procedure. The first thing which should be done is to get rid of that awful Green Street building. A prisoner is supposed to be innocent until he has been found guilty by a jury but if you go into Green Street for a criminal case you find that you could almost cut the atmosphere it is so heavily charged against the prisoner. It is a little better now than it used to be. This is something which the Minister should consider. If it requires legislation, then it should be put into this Bill instead of some of the clauses which are in it.
It is completely absurd to have an accused person stuck up in the dock. Anybody who is familiar with Green Street knows the awful passageway that lies behind the dock. One is also familiar with the tones of menace used by the county registrars. There was one such man, since dead, who was particularly menacing when he read out the charge: "You, so-and-so, are charged that you did in the County of Dublin, so-and-so" and so on and when I was up there I always felt I was the prisoner in the dock. The prisoner in the dock has to say "Guilty" or "Not Guilty". His counsel cannot say that for him. A small reform which could be carried out would be to make it possible, if a prisoner is professionally represented, for his counsel to answer for him. This procedure comes to us from the British procedure when there was some distinction between a felony and a misdemeanour. As I say, the professional man should be entitled to plead for his client instead of having all this rumpus read out, putting the prisoner in charge of the jury, and so on. I notice that one of the circuit court judges made some observations recently on the fact that he had no dock. I understand that one of the committees which is advising the Minister has recommended that the dock should be taken away and the Minister said that he has accepted that recommendation. I hope he has.
Another extraordinary thing is that in the course of an ordinary civil case your client is behind you and so is your solicitor. If you are appearing for an accused person in any court he is a mile away, surrounded by bars. You cannot get to your client to question him about some point raised by the prosecution. You may see a solicitor running up to him and surreptitiously passing him a note. The dock should be done away with and the accused person should be brought nearer to his professional representatives.
I hope that the press will not add me to their growing list of those whom they say are casting aspersions on them but I think I am entitled to object to the way newspapers always refer to the prisoner or accused person. He is never "Mr. Jones" or "Mr. Robinson". He is always "Jones" or "Robinson". Does that not clearly show that far from assuming that the person is innocent he is guilty because he is "Jones"? Then you have the awful way in which some judges on passing sentence say "Take him away" as if he were a piece of dirt. At least let the newspapers wait until after an accused person has been convicted before they refer to him as "Jones" or "Robinson". At least an accused person is entitled not to be regarded through the instrumentality of the press as a man already found guilty. That is a small point.
These are some small matters which the Minister might consider in connection with his law reforms. That is all I wish to speak about at the moment and I should like to wind up by saying that we have problems in this country but they are not anything like what they are for the Home Secretary in England or the police there. We are entitled to pay this tribute to our own people for that condition. They have grown in political education, especially as they showed recently in their voting in the referendum, and they have a more fundamental respect for the law than even the British people had in years gone by.
That, I think, should be fostered by the Minister. The relation between the Gardaí and the public should never be allowed to deteriorate. At the same time, there should be nothing like the persecution of motorists with parking tickets, and all the rest of it, because from these beginnings stems antagonism ultimately towards the Gardaí. We have gone through a good deal but we have now a country with which, I think, we are reasonably entitled to be satisfied. We can take comfort in the degree of peace and law and order that we have today.
It has been said that a policeman's lot is not a happy one, but I think the job of the Minister for Justice in any country in the world today is not a happy one because, all over the world, in both democratic and totalitarian societies there is a challenge to the Establishment. In a democracy it is recognised that people have a right and a duty to protest, and protest publicly, if they so desire. In totalitarian countries protesters are dealt with in a way we would not tolerate here. Every speaker so far has praised the Gardaí for their conduct generally. I join with previous speakers in urging the Minister, though I do not think there is any need to urge him, to deal generously with the Gardaí from the point of view of both salaries and conditions. I know the Minister appreciates the position even more so than I do and will act accordingly.
While there is a tendency to praise the Gardaí there is also a tendency to leave it to them to preserve law and order without very much help from the public as a whole. Earlier in the year the members of the municipal council were subjected at each meeting of the council to threats and, indeed, to actual physical assault. Had it not been for the Gardaí some of them would have suffered grievous injury. On one occasion some protesters broke into the meeting and assaulted one of our members. They were ejected by the Gardaí. They resisted. Now I thought the Gardaí were restrained in their conduct to the point of being almost foolish. Members of the press and members of Dublin Corporation saw the way in which the Gardaí removed these people, but the very next day we had the usual cry about police brutality. This is an imported catchcry. The worrying feature is that we have those in our community joining in protest marches who really should know better. Their aims may be quite worthy. In the housing march there were people who did not have proper houses, but they were used by another element, an element which did not care whether they got houses or not, for their own nefarious purposes. They saw an opportunity of creating trouble and strife. We should, I think, have regard to the intentions of these troublemakers who lead protest marches before deciding to support them. When that is done we can really regard ourselves as a mature people.
Deputy Costello said we are one of the most law-abiding peoples in the world. I suppose compared with other countries—the United States, Britain, France—we are law-abiding. However, unless the people give their full co-operation to the Gardaí, that proud boast could easily be negatived.
I welcome the decision of the Minister to set up a commission to inquire into the conditions and salaries of the Gardaí. I look forward to a satisfactory finding by the commission. A word of thanks is due to the chairman and members of the Commission for devoting their time, energy and talents to seeking to bring about a satisfactory solution to the difficulties that exist.
The Minister mentioned the censorship of films. He gave some details. Twenty years ago censorship ensured that no films would be shown which might adversely affect youth. Things have changed now. Even if films for public showing in cinemas are censored, there is no censorship where television is concerned, apart from that on the home station. Some day someone may discover what effect and influence television viewing is having on youth. Possibly youth does not look very much at television; youth is more inclined to frequent the dance-hall or watch the pop group. The task of the Minister in trying to achieve a proper standard of entertainment is a hard one. We cannot, of course, wrap ourselves in cottonwool. Neither can we keep out outside influences. We must face the fact that the day when we could exclude such influences is gone and the only thing we can do then is to gear our society to meet the new challenge.
The censorship of books has been debated here on several occasions. Today, there is what is regarded as a more liberal approach and, if one criticises certain books, one immediately gets letters of protest, advising one not to be narrowminded. Now I think books are far more dangerous than television viewing because the printed word can leave a much more indelible impression than the fleeting scene on some television or cinema screen. I criticise the Minister's predecessor for lifting the prohibition on certain books. I have since read some of the books and I have not changed my mind about them. Looking at those countries in which censorship is either non-existent or negligible one finds that crime statistics are very high. One also finds that the people are not really a happy people fundamentally. I urge the Minister to give the lifting of a prohibition order on any book very deep thought before he takes action.
The Minister referred to malicious damage. As Deputy Costello said, there are various views on this. The ratepayers have to pay for malicious damage. Surely there should be some way of making the perpetrators of this damage pay for the damage. There is a problem; one of the biggest fires in this city was caused by a person who was sentenced for the offence but who could not pay one penny towards the damage he did. Perhaps society owes him a debt because of his upbringing; I do not know. But that gives little comfort to those who must foot the bill by way of increased rates.
The prison service is also a responsibility of the Minister. Each year, I mention the prison officers because I regard these men and women as every bit as important, in our scheme of things, as the Gardaí. I do not think we can pay them well enough or give them conditions good enough in view of the very difficult task they have to do. The crime rate statistics show that their work will not decrease. I should like to see this service well paid and well cared for. We must at all times get people for it who are dedicated to duty. Unless we get the right person in the prison service, more harm than good will be done. It will be much easier for the prisoner if the right type of prison officer is there: our whole attitude should be towards rehabilitation.
In concluding, might I ask the Minister to bear in mind the wonderful reputation which the Garda Rowing Club have achieved. Through their sportsmanship and ability, they have brought a new image of the Garda to many people. If there is such a thing as leave for these men, I hope the Minister will be very generous about it.
The words I shall use at the beginning of this speech are borrowed from the Minister. Really, they belong to another debate which will probably be one of the most outspoken and long drawn-out debates ever in this House. I refer to the Criminal Justice Bill, which the Minister mentioned when moving his Estimate. I hope he will live up to the promise he gave that, when the Bill came to be discussed in this House, he would dispel misconception. Unless the Minister wishes for as big a shock as he got from the results on the two referendum Bills, he will dispel misconceptions in respect of the Criminal Justice Bill by getting his Department to work as fast as they can to produce the Minister's amendments to the Bill before it ever comes into this House. That is merely a passing remark, as was the remark of the Minister. However, it is no harm that he and people such as Deputy Cunningham should know the position. Deputy Cunningham has said he thinks people should have a right to demonstrate and to march — evidently without asking the permission of the local Garda officers. It is well that such people should be warned of the attitude towards this Bill, on its face value, even of Fianna Fáil back-benchers and people outside this House.
I join in the tributes to the Garda. There is no need to traverse the same ground as has already been covered by speakers from all sides of the House except to say that the tributes are richly deserved. I add my voice to the pleas from all parts of the House to improve the lot of our Gardaí. Their lot is not a happy one at the moment and they deserve better. So, indeed, do the Garda pensioners to whom reference was made so often in this debate. I do not repeat the reasons, as they have already been given by many speakers, but I mention the matter again so that the Minister will know the feeling of the House.
Serving Gardaí deserve the fullest support and co-operation of the Irish people. There is a new spirit of lawlessness in this country. By that, I do not mean an increase in crime but the sort of hooliganism that is being justified all over the country and, indeed, all over the world. It appears quite right and proper that anybody with any sort of grievance may squat, singly or in numbers, on the public highway, and obstruct the doctor going to an urgent case or the priest taking the Last Sacraments to some person or even the young Romeo who is going to meet his young Juliet, irrespective of the rights of other citizens. The Garda will have to show a great deal of patience and forbearance in the face of that sort of approach to public problems. Recently, in Dublin, some protest marchers, who started off to go to a certain Embassy, threw bricks through the windows of shops and hotels and other places on the way back. That is not patriotism. That is not the exercise of civil rights. It is hooliganism.
Another sorry aspect of all this was underlined in my constituency. The Cork Fire Brigade Chief had to indicate that in Cork last year the number of false alarms was 159—a 100 per cent increase on the previous year. The grim lesson to be learned there is that in 1956 only six false alarms were dealt with in Cork. It indicates the difficult world ahead of the young Garda when he comes out of Templemore. I am glad to note that the Minister intends to introduce legislation to encourage the public to co-operate with the Garda in the sure knowledge that, if they are injured while doing so, they have absolute indemnity from the State.
I wish the Minister had been a little more explicit about his intentions as regards the malicious injuries code. He said legislation is at present being prepared to consolidate, amend and reform the law of compensation for malicious injuries. We have heard that before in this House. We have been told for a number of years that this will happen. The matter has been quite a burning problem for years. One would think the Minister would give some indication of the manner in which he intends to amend or reform the law on malicious injuries.
I should like to return to the subject of the Garda Síochána for a moment to refer to a very worthy section of that Force. There is a determined effort to make the words "Special Branch" a dirty word. This new technique is being used by those who have subversive leanings. The Government is "the Establishment". Similarly, the Bishops are not "the Hierarchy"; they, too, are "the Establishment". The "Special Branch" is referred to in a tone of voice which conveys that those whom the Special Branch investigates are being persecuted; it is equated with police brutality when the police try to stop a noisesome mob. The most recent references to this description quite interest and intrigue me. In the Irish Times of Tuesday, 22nd October, 1968, we read that on Sunday, 21st October, 1968, Mr. Jim Fitzgerald, a theatrical producer, claimed that there are people in Telefís Éireann who are being persecuted by the Special Branch. He went on to say he could name names and the people should be present but they were so fed up with the whole thing that they would not bother their backsides being there.
This intrigues me. It is something with which the Minister should deal because if it is true that the Special Branch are investigating some of those who are active in RTE it strikes me that there are some elements in RTE whose activities, either within or without RTE, call for investigation. I do not believe that we have a Special Branch which goes around investigating people whose activities do not call for investigation. I believe if there are people working in the centre of our mass medium of communication whose activities call for investigation by the Special Branch it is a matter so serious that the Minister should bring it to the notice of the House.
I am glad that Mr. Jim Fitzgerald in a twisted sort of way exonerates the newsroom people in RTE. Of these he says — I gather he does not intend the reference to be complimentary — that they are all old-fashioned Catholics who can be frightened. He says political influence is most easily executed through religion and it is the old type of religious people who are accustomed to an authoritarian state who are most easily influenced.
There are many good citizens in RTE and I would question the bona fides of Mr. Jim Fitzgerald who complains about people in RTE being persecuted by the Special Branch. I deprecate the use of the word “persecute” in relation to the activities of the Special Branch. They are there for the comfort and care of the State and those who come under their surveillance, even though they may say they are being persecuted, no doubt deserve what they get.
I return briefly to the Minister's forecast of legislation in respect of malicious injuries. I have said already that he should have been more explicit in stating what he intends to do. Does he intend so to amend the malicious injury code that local authorities will no longer be in danger of getting huge bills due to the fact that somebody, possibly living outside their area, has caused damage running into tens of thousands of pounds? If so, he should also investigate, if he amends this particular code as I think he should, the impact on insurance tariff rates, of such a reform because at present that particular measure relieves many insurance companies of liability to pay large amounts which ordinarily they would have to pay.
We are dealing with law reform and there is one particular and important aspect of law reform to which I draw the Minister's attention. Unfortunately, it probably refers more to my constituency than to any other because I have the misfortune to represent the constituency of Cork city which has been described by sea captains with experience of ports all over the world as one of the dirtiest ports in the world. The situation is — and I speak fully briefed by those who know most about this shocking scandal that exists in the second city of the State — that about 80 females, from girls of 13 up to women of 52, are being used in a prostitution racket at the port of Cork in a most shocking way.
This has led to a situation within the last few weeks in which girls of 14, who were really what is known as "rotten drunk" around the quays of Cork, were being conveyed by foreign sailors into foreign ships for purposes which can well be imagined and the Garda Síochána and the Port Chaplain had to stand by while these girls were taken on board and could do nothing about it. That is wrong and bad. The situation under existing law is that these girls are visitors of the captain and crew of the ship and the Garda have no right to cross into that ship to remove these girls whose souls and bodies are being destroyed in a conscious cooperation between citizens of Cork who do well out of this particular trade.
The situation at present is that undoubtedly the Garda can do nothing and at this stage, as the Minister is dealing with law reform, I think he should treat this as a very urgent problem. I know that the Minister has investigated this because I have addressed Dáil questions to him on the matter before, and any insufficiencies there are in the law at present should be righted and amended so that the Garda can rescue these unfortunate girls. I am not talking so much about the women of 52 or about the married woman who has her own car and takes herself and some of her older and more experienced friends to those boats: I am talking of little girls of 14, 15, 16 or 17 who are being attracted to those places by the hope of excitement.
I shall tell the Minister how it happens. They are taken to public houses in Cork — and I can give the Minister the names of them as also can the Port Chaplain and the Gardaí— and there they meet the foreign sailors. There they are given drink and some Members of the House will recall that as a result of this procedure one girl was murdered and another was drowned. When these girls get there they can be shipped like cattle by special taxis from the publichouses to the boats and sailors can and, indeed, have phoned these public houses— there are only a few of them — and have said: "Send us down a car load of girls" for the purposes I have already indicated.
This is a sort of minor white slave traffic which is being operated in my constituency and I deem it my duty as a Deputy of that constituency to bring it to the notice of the Minister and implore him to do what he can to stop it at this stage. I want to ask him why is it that when the licences of the publichouses in question came up for renewal on the last occasion a few weeks ago — the licensing session is in September each year — there was no objection made by the Garda to the renewal of these licences. Perhaps from the technical garda point of view it is easier to have these people concentrated in small areas so that the Gardaí can know where they are.
I think it should be approached from another angle — that these are well-known centres to which little girls can be taken by their elder sister, by their friends and by various others interested in prostitution. I would ask the Minister if he would investigate whether under existing law the public service vehicles licences of taximen, who transport these girls as if they were cattle to the slaughter of their bodies and possibly of their souls, can be denied to them. If not, I would ask the Minister to investigate how that law can be amended to enable this matter to be dealt with.
I might say that the use of drugs is now also suspected amongst these girls. So we have drugs, drink, venereal disease, pregnancies and various other things being propagated as a result of the vicious vice racket in my own constituency. The Minister cannot say he is not hearing about it. I have brought it to his attention before. I would be glad if the Minister would accede to a request I have made to see the port chaplain and to learn from him what he has seen night after night, week after week, month after month, so that the Minister himself may realise the enormity of the problem in Cork city.
I do not intend to keep the House much longer, but I have something very important to advocate to which I have drawn the Minister's attention on previous occasions. I am referring to the common law rule of caveat emptor— let the purchaser beware — under which, if somebody purchases something and finds there is anything wrong with it, he must bear the loss. That was only when you purchased something like bacon, butter or something you could inspect, say, perhaps, a beast, a bull, an ass or a horse. Then there came the Industrial Revolution and the Sale of Goods Act incorporated into such contracts conditions and warranties. It protected the purchaser. That was a very sound thing even in those days. Nowadays legislation of this nature is even more necessary. If I buy a TV set, what do I know about the workings of it? How am I supposed to know if there are any defects, latent or patent, in it? If I purchase a motor car, how am I expected to know whether there is anything wrong with the engine, the chassis, or any portion of the motor? The same thing applies to electric irons and various other things, the insides of which are mysteries to the average man. When we purchase one of these things, we find that the manufacturers, the wholesalers and the retailers present to the purchaser a document which is dignified by the description of warranty or guarantee. Woe betide the man or woman who signs that guarantee. What he or she is doing is signing away all the rights given to him by the Sale of Goods Act. If anything goes wrong with any of the things I have mentioned, all the purchaser can get in the case of a TV set, for instance, is a guarantee which says “Send back the TV set and, if there is anything wrong with it, we will replace the part”. But you have to pay for the transport of the TV set, the repair man's time and the cost of transport back to you. This is something which should be altered by legislation. A weak attempt has been made to do that in the Hire Purchase Act. It has not been satisfactory. I would suggest this is the time for the Minister to review this in order to assist the unfortunate purchaser who believes he is getting something wonderful when he gets a guarantee as well as a TV set, a radio, an electric iron or a car.
I would not like any wrong significance to be read into what I am going to say next. I would like to refer to something which has given me cause for much disquiet and which has given many litigants in this country even greater cause for disquiet. It is the practice which has grown up, under a bond of friendship usually, of the district justices meeting the Garda superintendent or the sergeants after the court hearing and having some social time with them — perhaps a cup of tea, coffee, lemonade or whatever district justices and Garda officers drink when they get together. I see nothing wrong in that at all in the ordinary way.
As I say, I do not want anything sinister to be attached to it. I say this, and I have found it time and again, that the ordinary litigant who goes into court, fighting his case, feels "What chance have I when the district justice is going out with the superintendent or the sergeant afterwards? Since they are friendly, is he not going to have a bias towards me?" I am not suggesting this bias is present in the district justice's mind or that the fact that the district justice is friendly with the superintendent will in any way influence him. The cliché I am about to mention is very true: "It is not enough that justice should be done but it should appear to be done". I am certain in the civil courts or in the High Court if one of the litigants went out of the court with the judge after the case there would be a strong protest. I would suggest that the Minister should tactfully suggest to both the district justices and the officers that they should not consort together on such occasions as these. Deputy Costello in his few words earlier on —if I heard him correctly — referred to the question of legal aid. I would like to refer to the fees which are paid to members of the legal profession at the Bar in that regard. I understand —the Minister can correct if I am wrong — that when the legal aid panel was first opened certain fees were agreed on between the Minister and the Bar for a trial period. That period has gone on for many years and nothing has been done to increase the fees, although wages and allowances of all descriptions have increased.
I would like to refer to the Minister's plan to introduce traffic wardens. It is a good idea, but in a way I regret it for the reason I referred to already— lawless elements and the lawless wave sweeping all over the world and approaching our own country. I rejoiced when I saw the Garda Síochána standing outside the schools waiting for the children to see them safely across the road. I always felt that here we had public relations officers with children at their most impressionable age and that each child who stood there waiting for the Garda to assist him and preserve his life and limb from traffic would look upon the Garda at this earliest age as his friend and guide. I thought this was one of the most healthy things that could happen. I regret now that the Gardaí are being removed and that traffic wardens are being put there instead. I realise the Minister's difficulty: that the Gardaí are being highly paid and that they have other duties to perform. But I feel that, if the Minister were operating a commercial firm and if he were looking for a public relations officer, he could not have got better value than the value he got from introducing the Guard in the guise of a friend, mentor, assistant and protector of young children. That would pay rich dividends in the years to come. I do not suppose anything can be done about it now but I think the Minister should cogitate on the suggestion and hesitate before he extends any further the number of traffic wardens.
It is very difficult to say anything on this Estimate that has not already been said. The whole field of the Department of Justice has been very extensively covered and I hope that, as a result of this debate, the Minister for Justice will go from the House reinforced in the knowledge that this has been not alone a very practical but a very useful debate. Therefore, it is not my intention to detain the House or the Minister who I am sure is anxious to have his Estimate concluded after what we consider has been a very trying debate.
Nevertheless, there are a few observations I wish to make. With regard to one of these observations I cannot say whether it is a reflection on Radio Telefís Éireann or a reflection on the Department of Justice. I remember some months ago there was a very special "Late Late Show" on which a number of youths displayed their ability as to which of them would be able to administer the greatest number of stitches to their colleagues with knives. I do not think I have ever seen such a degrading programme. I do not know whether the police authorities were consulted before a public display over Telefís Éireann on the use of these knives among a certain element in this city and elsewhere was given. I would have felt that rather than give the widest possible publicity to the disgraceful conduct of slashing each other with knives this was something that should be concealed and hidden as far as possible. There is a certain element in this country that can not only appear on television but can actually boast that they can meet their colleagues in arms. The one way which to them proves who is the best in using these knives is which has received the greatest number of stitches as a result of the infliction of wounds.
We all know the Gardaí have a difficult time with people using knives not alone on their associates but on anybody who intervenes? I want to pay a special tribute, if I may, to the Gardaí particularly in the city of Dublin. A short time ago they made short shrift in the city of a certain element who were out to create distrubance by the drawing of knives and such activities.
We have a police force of which we can be very proud, a young police force, one which was established under very trying and difficult conditions. Unlike, perhaps, other police forces the Garda were established during a difficult period. During the past 40 years the Garda have acted in a manner which has reflected very great credit on them. It is only right that a tribute should be paid to the retired commissioner of the Garda, ex-Commissioner Carroll. Many tributes have been paid to commissioners who spearheaded the activities of law and order in this country. I take great pleasure in paying my tribute because ex-Commissioner Carroll was a Laoisman and, as the Parliamentary Secretary will agree, it is seldom a Laoisman will get to the top but in this case a Laoisman got to the top. He must rank as one of the outstanding commissioners of the Garda. He was a man who came up from the ranks, realised the problems and difficulties and can be regarded as an outstanding policeman not only in this country but in Europe. I wish his successor every success.
Our police force is something of which we can be justly proud but there are a number of aspects in connection with our police force which we must bear in mind. In order to have a dedicated police force they must be contented in their employment. They are the custodians of law and order and they are the people who protect the public and defend life and property. That is the purpose for which the Garda were established. We have as we had in the past a certain amount of uneasiness within the force on the question of pay claims. I feel, and I am sure many others share my views, that they are the section of the community who have the most difficult task to perform and whose lives in the discharge of their duties are in great danger. That is why I think that such people, who are there to safeguard life, to protect us and our property, should rank among the best paid people in the State. I would deeply regret if any young member of the Garda who was completely dedicated to his work as a policeman had any hesitation about remaining in the force because of the attractiveness of more comfortable employment elsewhere or that he might be compelled to emigrate to join a continental police force or even the police in the United States or Canada. I think every effort should be made to pay our men well. The pay of all grades of the Garda should be very substantially increased. There is no member of the general public or no member of the ratepaying public who can or should complain about this because the very people who will benefit as a result of greater efficiency and greater contentment on the part of the Garda are the general public.
As has been said by many Deputies they are there to safeguard life and property and to protect the general public against all kinds of intrusion. While I am speaking on the activities of the Garda it is regrettable that we have had this odd spectacle of members of the public standing by and seeing members of the Garda Síochána attacked. It displays bad citizenship on the part of the public. It is easy to understand it because our country is a comparatively young country and we had a foreign police force here for many years suppressing and defying the people, whereas our present force is there to assist and help the people. It is difficult to get it into the minds of our people that the Garda Síochána are their friends. It has been said by Deputy Barrett that our young people are now realising this and I think it should be taught in our schools particularly in civic lectures that the Garda Síochána are there for the use of the public and are always available to help us, to co-operate with us and assist us, that their main purpose is to be the friends of the people and in no degree to be the enemies of the people.
A number of Dublin daily papers in their editorials seriously criticised the general public who stood by from time to time and saw members of the Garda Síochána attacked by mobs and by rowdies who had no respect for themselves, for the public or for the Garda. People may say it is difficult for the general public to intervene. They do not have to intervene. They could go to the nearest telephone kiosk and telephone the Garda station for other Gardaí to come to the aid of the one attacked. I hope that a campaign will be started by the Minister for Justice for a greater degree of co-operation between the public and the Garda. I am happy to say that whatever prevails in the city of Dublin there is in rural Ireland a very good spirit of co-operation and friendliness between the Gardaí and the public.
The old-timers who are now out on pension were very successful and what was mainly responsible for their success was the fact that they mixed with the public and chatted with them. They had their ear to what was going on. If there was any crime in an area they always had the support of the public in detecting whatever crime was in that area. I hope the younger members of the Garda who may not be as familiar with the public, particularly in rural Ireland, will familiarise themselves with the public just as the older members of the force did. I think the force deserves the greatest possible credit. At the same time, in so far as it is possible members of the Garda, who are experienced in crime detection, should be released completely from traffic duties. There should be a very highly-trained section of the Garda for traffic duty alone and when someone is entering the force he should be asked if he would care to specialise in the detection of crime of one kind or another or if he would prefer to devote his energies to traffic duty. I have seen members of the force on traffic duty who I considered to be excellent men in the detection of crime. I often felt that they were wasting their time on traffic duty, watching parking offences and so on. However, I suppose the Garda authorities probably know more about it and know what the men are best suited for and it is difficult for a lay person to decide what sphere of activity a member of the Garda is best suited and most qualified for. The force should be divided into different groups and there should be a highly-specialised group for dealing with traffic and a highly-trained group for dealing with other offences. I agree that the radio communication and the patrol equipment have been vastly improved in recent times. That is a good sign and I hope that the Department of Justice, irrespective of cost, will see that the Garda are equipped with the most up-to-date methods of communication.
Consideration should be given to the introduction of more police dogs. I do not know what the views of the Minister or the views of the police authorities are on this. I understand that there are a number of highly-trained police dogs but to what extent I cannot say. This is an essential part of a good police force.
If not already organised, a special mobile squad should be formed to deal with housebreaking, men who are specialised in dealing with housebreaking. Housebreaking not alone in this city but in the country has become alarming. While the funeral of a friend of mine in this city was taking place and while the relatives were out at the Requiem Mass and burial the house was ransacked and everything of value — silver, jewellery and everything the thieves put their hands on — was taken. Is that not the lowest form of theft? This is something which is dragging on and it must be stopped. The sad part of all this is that district justices are too lenient with this type of person. There is no great encouragement for a specialised squad to deal with housebreaking or to make a successful arrest when instead of the rigour of the law being applied to such people who can be described as a menace in society they are given a suspensory sentence of one month or two months. There is one way to stamp out this housebreaking. People's property must be saved. The way to stamp it out is to apply the full rigour of the law. District justices and others have failed miserably in their duty to deal with offenders responsible for breaking into private houses at dead of night, breaking in on old people, who in many cases were living alone and were subjected to serious assault by the intruders solely concerned with looting all they could from these good and law-abiding citizens. District justices and those who pass judgement should examine their consciences as to whether they are really doing justice to the people who want their property safeguarded when, too frequently, these judges and justices give the benefit of a doubt that probably does not exist to people who are continually housebreaking and threatening the lives of others. The time has come to examine the whole legal structure with a view to putting down such crime.
Another type of crime which is not only usual in the city but throughout the country also is breaking into parked cars, raiding their boots and so on. A careful citizen who parks his car will usually lock it but there appears to be a well-organised and equipped squad with keys which, in many cases, open these cars. When such offenders are discovered the law should show them very little mercy. If a citizen parks his car he is entitled to expect to find it in the same place and undamaged when he returns. Because of the continuance of such crimes, interference with cars, housebreaking and other types of crimes to which I have referred, old people being attacked in their homes and savagely assaulted. I believe there is only one way we can counter that and it is by having the Garda force built up rather than reduced in all areas. In the larger towns the number of Gardaí has been reduced in recent times. That was, and is, a mistake. It may be the opinion of the Minister for Finance who wants to economise or of the Department of Justice that fewer Gardaí will be able to maintain proper law and order, but for the detection of crime the force should be brought up to full strength.
In rural Ireland I think it is the duty of the State, whether the work be undertaken by the National Building Agency or not, to provide the most modern type of houses for members of the Gardaí. I am glad there has been an improvement in the standard of Garda barracks——
Not in Limerick.
Within the past ten years——
I was in the cells there a few times and I know all about it.
——in rural Ireland there has been a considerable improvement in Garda barracks but that is only a small part of the big task that must be undertaken. I ask the Minister to ensure that the provision of additional Garda barracks where these are required shall be undertaken with the least possible delay.
Many Deputies have referred to Garda widows' pensions and there is little I can add to what has already been said. In my own constituency I was particularly interested in the case of the widow of a member of the Gardaí who lost his life while on duty some years ago in County Cavan. Gardaí should at least be encouraged in their work by knowing that, if they die in the discharge of their duties as members of the force, their wives and families will be properly provided for. I am disappointed at the scale of pensions provided for Garda widows. It is generally agreed that the Garda and his wife must live up to a higher standard than any others in the area. They must remain aloof from the public, not through snobbery but for the sake of impartial discharge of their duties. But the moment the Garda's wife becomes a widow her circumstances are so deplorable that great embarrassment is caused in the case of people accustomed to better times. It is extraordinary that a native Government after 40 years has not adequately provided for widows of Gardaí. There can be no comparison between other widows and widows of Gardaí and the time has come when the Government should consider introducing decent pension schemes for widows of Gardaí.
I want briefly to refer to the question of transfer of members of the Garda Síochána. We have frequently been told that political interference in such transfer does not and cannot take place. That is all cod. There has been political interference with members of the Garda in the discharge of their duties. This is well known and established. It is most regrettable that members of the Irish police force cannot impartially discharge their duties because of the fear and threat of being transferred. The transfer means complete disruption of their homes, breaking up of family life as well as disorganisation of the education of their children. We have seen more than one case where, because of the impartial exercise of their duty by members of the Gardaí, they are transferred to the most remote areas in the country. If we want to create greater confidence in the force and confidence, respect and love amongst the members of the force for the authorities, greater care must be exercised when it comes to interference in the work of the Gardaí. It is wrong that there should be any question of political interference or political intervention, either by members of the Government or by Members of Parliament who may seek to have Gardaí transferred. I venture to say that there is no Member of this House who would like to be in the position that anybody superior to him could direct that he be transferred from one place to another. That is the position in which Gardaí find themselves.
The Minister for Justice has introduced his first Estimate for the Department of Justice. May I wish him luck? I hope and trust that, as a legal man, he will do his part so far as is possible to divorce his Department completely from interference in the matter of the transfer of Gardaí. This is a matter that should be left to the sole discretion of the commissioner.
And the Deputy knows that it is.
I wish I were satisfied of that.
He is the only one who has jurisdiction to do this. The Minister has not.
Of course, the Minister knows that we had not always the present commissioner and we had not always the former commissioner. It should be borne in mind that there are numerous ways of having transfers effected. There may be a whisper into the ear of the chief superintendent without the commissioner knowing anything at all about it. I am not saying that chief superintendents can in any way be misled by such whispers. Nevertheless, it is wrong that there should be any interference with the Garda Síochána in the discharge of their duties.
The Deputy must know a terrible lot about it when he speaks about it in this way. He must be dabbling himself.
I am not dabbling. I know a lot about it and so does the Deputy.
Deputy Geoghegan should not blush about this now.
I do not think any Deputy has paid tribute to the television programme, "Garda Patrol". I wish to pay tribute to that programme which is attractive, well-designed, well presented and has produced outstanding results. It is an excellent programme. The Minister should place on record the appreciation expressed by Members of this House of the Garda authorities who are responsible for the presentation of that programme.
The Minister has in mind various types of legislation to be introduced in the coming year. We cannot deal with legislation on the Estimate but it is only right that the Minister should be forewarned that free speech and the right of free assembly are cherished by our people. Our ambition is to ensure that this State will never be turned into a police state. Therefore, the Minister should carefully consider any legislation which he may be introducing——
I do not want to interrupt the Deputy at this stage but legislation before the House cannot be the subject of discussion on the Estimate. The Deputy may not anticipate debate on the Criminal Justice Bill.
Everybody else has.
I agree, Sir, and I think you will agree with me that that is exactly what I said at the outset.
Providing the Deputy does not pursue it.
I assure you that I shall not pursue it because we have ample opportunity at another time to deal with it. The Estimate does provide an opportunity of saying that any group of people in this country who wish to combine in an orderly protest are certainly entitled to do so. It would be a very sad day for this country if any group, say, a group of auctioneers or a group of solicitors that had a protest to make could not go out and march and make their protest. Providing that they did it in an orderly manner, as naturally they would, they should be allowed to do so.
That is the essence of democracy.
The same applies to the trade union movement and to the farming organisations. If they want to march in this city or elsewhere, providing they keep within the law, there should be no law to restrict their activities.
What about TDs? Could they march too?
There will be a couple like yourself marching early in the new year. I can see that numerous Members of this House will be marching out and not marching back.
The Deputy is telling his own story now.
I am not including the Minister for Justice in that because I am sure he will be able to rig his own constituency so that we will see him here again. The idea of this becoming a police state is not brought about by the activities of the police themselves but by instructions that have been given by the Government to the police authorities to carry out. There are a few little things that I feel should be done in the interests of harmony.
Did we not avoid that police state by the result of the referendum? Surely, we killed it for a long time?
Let us hope so. If we want to continue the good spirit of friendliness and co-operation between the Gardaí and the public, is it not high time that instructions were issued to the Garda Síochána that they should devote their energies to something besides sticking tickets on motorcars and taking the names of decent people who may be making a reasonable protest? The detection of crime, such as house breaking and the safeguarding of life and property are the real duties of the Garda. It is a cause of embarrassment to the Gardaí to have to spend their time watching how long a car is parked, putting tickets on windscreens and, in the event of a perfectly legal protest, having to take the names and addresses of those who are perfectly entitled to make their protest against living conditions. No blame attaches to the members of the Garda in this respect. They are carrying out instructions. They should not be put in that embarrassing position.
I should like to make a brief reference, if I may, to the prisons, especially the prison in my own constituency of which I have a reasonable knowledge. My knowledge of Mountjoy, though, is extremely limited.
: Thank God.
: I must say that the manner in which Portlaoise Prison is conducted and administered reflects the greatest possible credit on the Governor, on his staff and on all the hardworking and devoted prison attendants employed in that institution.
Does the Deputy get many votes there?
I am sure that the Minister for Justice must be aware of the splendid condition in which that prison is kept. He must be aware also of the high standard of the food which is made available within the prison. I recall calling there unexpectedly on one occasion. I requested the Governor to let me have the same dinner as the prisoners were getting. The meal consisted of well-cooked, good, wholesome food and was, in my opinion, second to none. The food was of an excellent quality, mainly grown on the prison farm.
All the lands surrounding the prison have been well worked, well manured and are in an excellent state of cultivation. I feel, however, that the houses provided for the prison staff at Portlaoise—they can be seen on the main Dublin-Cork road—are out of date.
Which side is the Deputy on now?
The time has come when members of the prison staff should be provided with a more modern type of living accommodation.
Swimming pools, no doubt, to complete the lovely picture the Deputy is painting.
Yes, I agree. There could be swimming pools.
The Deputy must get a fine fistful of votes around there.
I am sure that the Minister will visit Portlaoise at some convenient time and when he does he will not be impressed by the appearance of the houses in which the prison staff live. They look drab and are very old. These houses are not architecturally attractive and something should be done about providing more modern houses there. The prison grounds are beautifully laid out. I visited Armley prison in Leeds for the purpose of seeing a prisoner——
No doubt, a client.
A constituent?
If I am not mistaken some of the Deputy's constituents were in the same prison but, needless to say, I did not make inquiries. The atmosphere in the prison was cold and drab and the conditions there could not be compared with those in either Dublin or Portlaoise.
However, something should be done about the young offenders who are sent to St. Patrick's. It is high time that the Government took some positive action in regard to St. Patrick's. It is not a fit institution for young offenders. The time has come when we must have an entirely new approach to this question.
A good deal has been said about our young people running wild. I do not believe that. Our young people today are as good as ever they were. They may require a little more advice or they may be slow to take advice but, having regard to the modern world in which we live with its attractions for our young people, I believe they are a lot better in this country than in any other part of the world.
It is difficult to say what is responsible for the amount of crime that exists among young people. Perhaps it is because so many of them are living in a dream world. Perhaps it is because of the cinema or the television or, perhaps, they have reached the stage when they must have some outlet for their energies. It may be that there is not proper supervision in some homes but it is difficult to point one's finger in that direction because crime has been committed in families where there has been excellent supervision in the home. Some crimes committed by young people occur when the father of the family is away working and maybe the mother is out working as well, depriving the family of a good deal of home life. During the few moments I have left, I wish to make some reference to a matter in which I am particularly interested, that is, the part which the Garda have played in the prevention of accidents. As we all know, since the introduction of the speed limit on the dual carriageway between Naas and Dublin there has been a considerable improvement and we have had no fatal accidents on that stretch of road since.
The time has come, and is, indeed, very ripe, when the most serious view possible should be taken of the drunken driver. The drunken driver is not only a danger to himself but can be responsible for taking the life, say, of the father of a large family who may be returning to or from his work. Any action which the Garda take or any action which the courts may take in order to ensure that our roads will be free from drunken drivers should have the full support of all the Members of the House. With the increased volume of traffic on our roads driving is hard enough for people who are fully sober and conscious and any driver who takes to the road in a drunken condition deserves to have the law fully enforced against him.
I would ask the Minister to make every effort to speed up the activities of the mapping section of the Land Registry. It appears to me this section is understaffed. This should be remedied in view of the importance and the urgency of the issue of new folios to people, because people will not get loan facilities from the local authorities until their new folio is issued. No blame whatever attaches to the staff of the Land Registry who have always been courteous and highly efficient, but if the staff was increased it would certainly lead to greater expedition of the work.
I trust the Minister will consider the points raised on this Estimate by the various Deputies, particularly those from this side of the House, because those raised on the far side of the House have been extremely limited. Certainly the Minister for Justice has got from this side of the House, particularly from Deputy John A. Costello and Deputy Stephen Barrett, food for thought which will assist him in no small way in moulding the policy of his Department and in keeping him informed of what the people want. It is very well established that not alone the Minister for Justice but all his colleagues in the Government have been living on the moon and are not close to the problems of our people.
I should like to commence by offering the Minister my best wishes for the success of the work he is doing in this Department. I am very much concerned about his intentions to alter the law on bail. There is ample justification for this. I do not think bail should be given to the habitual offender who so often avails of this to commit further crimes. In the event of his altering the law in regard to bail, it is very important for him to consider a special remand home for people who have been deprived of bail, because we must remember they are not guilty until convicted, and no matter how serious a charge may be against them they are innocent until proved guilty.
One other aspect of the Minister's speech to which I should like to refer concerns these maintenance orders where wives are deserted. The Minister proposes to increase the maximum amount, but there is no purpose whatsoever in increasing the amount that may be paid to a deserted wife if there is no means of enforcing this maintenance order. I have seen so many cases where maintenance orders were made and could not be enforced on husbands in England. This is a bad state of affairs, and some form of reciprocal arrangement should be made with Britain to enforce these maintenance orders in England.
I had occasion quite recently to seek the assistance of the Adoption Board. I was surprised that I did not get any co-operation from the Adoption Board, who told me they could only deal with a case through a solicitor. As a public representative acting on behalf of people who are not in a position to pay for solicitors, I think the Adoption Board should have given me the information I requested. Recently I checked on adoption societies and I was very disappointed to notice that there is no doctor on the committees of some of these adoption societies. It is important that we have doctors on these committees who will, perhaps, be in a position to assess cases a lot more sympathetically than other members. I would ask the Minister to look into this important problem.
Again in regard to adoption societies, I understand that both of the adopting parents must be of the same religion as the mother of the child to be adopted. I should like to ask the Minister what happens in the case of mixed marriages. This is something we should consider, as it works very much against certain people. The maximum age for adoption is nine years and I am wondering if there is a case to be made for increasing this. While on the subject I would ask the Minister to consider introducing a simplified system of registering births which have not been registered or amending the surnames of children who no longer use the surnames of their original parents. This presents a problem for foster children and the situation is made very complicated and difficult for them. We have seen a few cases where children adopted by Hindu mothers were not covered by the Adoption Bill. This is something we should look into.
I should also like to refer to the Garda Síochána who are doing an excellent job. The greatest criticism of the Garda perhaps is that they are a bit too humane. This is the only country about which it can be said the police force are really sympathetic and understanding. They work under tremendous difficulties and in the country they live and work under medieval conditions. Their hours of duty belong to another age. In the courses for Gardaí I should like to see basic psychology and sociology included because this is important for them.
Progress reported; Committee to sit again.