Deputy Edward Collins has given notice of his intention to raise the subject matter of Question No. 61 on today's Order Paper.
Adjournment Debate: Waterford Garda Station.
I wish to thank you very sincerely, a Cheann Comhairle, for allowing me to raise this urgent matter here this evening. I should like to express my surprise at the Taoiseach being so apparently upset about the matter this morning. I was also surprised that the Parliamentary Secretary chose not to reply to the question this afternoon. I wonder if there is something sinister in his not doing so.
The position regarding the Garda station at Waterford has assumed an air of national importance because I have been informed that similar conditions may prevail elsewhere in the country. However, I shall confine myself today to the conditions prevailing at the Waterford station.
At the outset, I should like to give a brief history of the Garda stations in Waterford. The Garda force occupied the military barracks in Waterford city up to 1939 when, on the outbreak of war, they were temporarily transferred to premises at Adelphi Quay. I would like the House to know that this temporary arrangement lasted for 29 years—an extraordinary temporary arrangement I must say.
I understand that in 1939 a spacious site was purchased by the Board of Works for the express purpose of erecting a new Garda station in Waterford, but absolutely nothing has been done in the intervening period to erect a station. In October of 1968 the Garda were again temporarily transferred to the present station, if one so wishes to call it a station, at South Parade in the city.
The present serious—I emphasise the word "serious"—position arose in the early hours of the morning of the 5th February, 1970, when the ceiling of the public office fell in and when four gardaí had to rush from the room into the street and, in so doing, avoided what would have been a serious accident. The Garda doctor and a prisoner who were in an adjoining room also had to rush out of the building and the Garda doctor has since registered a complaint about the condition of the building.
On the following day the gardaí and the Garda sergeants, having examined the report of an independent architect on the condition of the building, passed the following resolution and I quote from the copy in my possession:
1. In view of the findings of an independent architect of the firm of C. Harvey Jacob & Associates, regarding the dangerous condition of South Parade Garda Station, Waterford, as outlined in a report from that firm dated 6th day of February, 1970, the members of South Parade Garda Station unanimously decline, in their own interest and in the interests of the public, to transact any official business within the confines of No. 15 South Parade, Waterford, officially known as South Parade Garda Station, Waterford.
This decision will take effect from 6.30 p.m. on the 6th day of February, 1970.
2. A Garda service is now being provided from an annex at the rear of No. 15 South Parade, Waterford.
This, in effect, means that there is no radio communication service from that station and also that the service now being provided by the Garda is being provided from a converted bicycle shed at the rear of the building. This is an excellent status symbol for any Garda force.
I went personally to the Garda station and examined it. I found more than 30 members of the Garda Síochána trying to work in a room the dimensions of which were 24 feet by 15 feet.
A Deputy
What is the average height and weight of each garda?
Deputy Collins.
Who is looking for the premises?
Perhaps the Deputy would be allowed to proceed.
This is a serious situation. It must be pointed out that this station is the divisional headquarters for the counties of Waterford and Kilkenny and is, in fact, the Waterford district headquarters of the Garda Síochána with a staff of 60 which, in addition to a chief superintendent, a superintendent and two inspectors, is made up of 13 sergeants and 47 gardaí.
I should also like to point out that, on entering the premises in 1968, two detectives refused to work in the basement portion of the building which was allotted to them for their office work.
I will quote some remarks from the architect's report. First of all, under the heading "Accommodation" the report describes the basement as having "two cells" so that there are two cells in the headquarters in Waterford city. Also under this heading the basement is described as having "an office and a toilet that is actually a passage way." To quote further from the report:
Ground Floor: This contains a small room overlooking the entrance and a large room at the rear. There is a rear porch over the area to the basement. There are entrance steps to the front door.
First Floor: This consists of two rooms—the front one is subdivided into two, creating an additional room.
Second Floor: This contains three small offices and a bathroom.
Attic: Contains two small slate roofed areas separated by a valley.
Under the heading "Apparent defects and observations," the report reads:
Before being occupied by present occupiers, the building was treated extensively for dry rot and woodworm. The walls are in many cases battened out in oil tempered hardboard and in some cases are covered by expanded polystyrene—this is evidence of severe damp penetration.
Towards the end of the report there is the following paragraph:
In conclusion, the structure is old and weakened and in my opinion not suitable for the weight of 60 men and the public who regularly use it. In addition there is the dead weight of storage safes and filing cabinets. Quite recently the plaster ceiling of the small front room on the ground floor collapsed suddenly with little warning, and in view of the building's history there is every possibility that this or worse could happen again. The building, in other words, is not suitable for its present purpose.
There are nine rooms for a staff of 60. I understand also there is no suitable place for interviewing people who come in on private business. There is only one toilet available for a force of 60 men. Surely in 1970 we can do better than this?
A number of questions arise in relation to this serious problem to which I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to give clear and concise answers:
(a) Why have the Board of Works not developed the site at Ballybricken which it purchased in 1939 for the specific purposes of a Garda station in Waterford? What could possibly have delayed the erection of a station for 31 years? It is gross mismanagement.
(b) Who inspected the buildings at South Parade and who recommended them for use as a Garda station? In view of the architects' reports surely it must be agreed that the buildings were not suitable for occupation by a Garda force? It is only a private house.
(c) Who authorised the payment of approximately £1,400 per annum for a lease of the building, a building which not so long ago was purchased for £1,700? Before it could even be entered and occupied by the Garda Síochána I understand that a sum of £1,500 had to be spent on renovating it.
I could give the Deputy the answer to that one.
We shall give the Deputy time. There was plenty of property available in Waterford city in the past few years, property far more suitable for so-called temporary accommodation for the Garda Síochána.
(d) Why has Waterford city been insulted by the Board of Works and the Department of Justice? This is the headquarters for Waterford and Kilkenny and the Garda station should be a showpiece. What could tourists possibly think of it? It is more like a story out of a Charles Dickens novel than an actual experience in 1970.
(e) This is perhaps the most important question of all: what about the morale of the men trying to work in such a confined area? Surely people who are safeguarding the lives, liberty and property of our people should have proper working conditions?
(f) There is no privacy available for visitors. They mix with suspects and indeed with prisoners in order to have their questions answered.
(g) There is no place to examine vehicles after crashes. It is disgraceful, especially in view of the fact that over 400 people a year die on Irish roads, that there is no place available at the Waterford Garda station for the examination of vehicles.
(h) Would the Minister consider erecting immediately a prefabricated building on the Ballybricken site? I understand that up to the moment no alternative accommodation has been found for the gardaí. Would the Minister also seek tenders immediately for the erection of a new and proper Garda station in Waterford, a job which should have been done in 1939? It is disgraceful that a force of gardaí whom I respect very highly should have been treated in this way by the Board of Works and by the Government. I am at one with the resolution which the Garda Síochána passed that this building is absolutely unsuitable for the purpose for which it was intended.
I should like briefly to support Deputy Collins and the Garda Representative Body in this connection. I have no intention of magnifying this problem beyond its proper context, but there are some rather extraordinary aspects of it which are worthy of an adjournment comment in this House.
It should be brought to the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary and, indeed, of the staff of the Board of Works itself that as long ago as 1964 a letter was received from the Department of Justice informing Waterford Corporation—it was the subject of discussion in the corporation—in response to their inquiries that working drawings for the new Garda station in Waterford were in the course of preparation and it was then hoped to place a contract at the end of 1964. We must recall likewise that a deputation from the corporation to the Department was told in the Department of Justice that the principal reason why the erection of a central Garda station had to be persisted with as opposed to a number of small stations was the fact that the then planning of the central station was at a very advanced stage. That was six years ago. Therefore, the local authority and the 60 representatives of the Force have been treated in an extremely cursory manner and this incident should not pass without public condemnation in this House.
I consider it equally extraordinary that there should have been readily available to the Minister for Justice and to the Board of Works an alternative site and instead of deciding on the site the Board of Works, as Deputy Collins has said and as has been brought separately to my notice, rented at a charge of £1,400 per annum a house which was originally purchased for £1,700.
Some disquieting questions have been raised about that contract and as to who is the speculator, who is the individual allied to the Government Party who is chasing the property which the gardaí vacated while it was literally falling over their heads. There are, as we well know, on the Adelphi Quay station side of Waterford city plenty of people involved in this and my colleagues in the Labour Party there are aware of this and we feel justified in giving full support to Deputy Collins in raising this matter on the Adjournment and seeking from the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary a full and frank explanation not only in the interests of having better working conditions for the gardaí in that station and for the members of the public who frequent that place, but Quay station side of Waterford city will get the elementary public services to which it is entitled. I therefore urge the Parliamentary Secretary to take speedy and effective action on this and to contact the Department of Justice to have the matter clarified.
Deputy Collins has enumerated all the problems that have arisen in Waterford in regard to the barracks, but the stark reality of this matter is that we have no barracks in Waterford. Deputy Desmond's theory about the speculators is all kibosh. We do not want to make this into something political. We are living in the era of the Conroy Commission and many of the recommendations made by them have been accepted by the Garda Síochána.
Waterford is a modern city, but unfortunately there are no barracks available. An architect was sent down from headquarters to seek alternative accommodation but he has been frustrated in his efforts to find any alternative accommodation. The Garda barracks were situated in the military barracks and then at Adelphi Quay before being transferred to South Parade. One architect has said these premises are no longer safe and another has said they are. I am not qualified to say who is right and who is wrong but, for my own part, I think the Garda are completely right in refusing to go into the premises.
The barracks in South Parade are now closed. Deputy Collins has explained that there are ten or 12 men trying to do the administrative work for the Kilkenny Garda Division in what is no more than a bicycle shed. A site at Ballybricken was earmarked in 1964 for the new barracks and I feel quite justified in blaming the Office of Public Works for not getting a move on with the project. It is evident that the Department of Justice are anxious to have the new barracks erected.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to examine the possibility of erecting some kind of temporary dwelling in order to facilitate the Garda.
I should like to start by saying that I believe Deputy Collins is guilty of a serious breach of privilege as far as Adjournment Debates are concerned.
On a point of order, is that not a reflection on the Chair? Deputy Collins consulted with the Chair last night and he raised the question again today. Is the Parliamentary Secretary's remark not a reflection on the Chair, who has given his ruling that the question could be raised?
I do not take it as a reflection on the Chair but I should like to state that Deputy Collins is fully entitled to raise this question.
I would have been glad to answer Deputy Collins' question and any supplementaries that he, Deputy Kenneally or any other Deputy desired to put. If Deputy Collins was then not satisfied with my replies he could have raised the matter on the Adjournment next Tuesday. I know what the Deputy's motive is but I still believe I should have been given an opportunity to reply to the question before the matter was brought up on the Adjournment.
The relationship between the Office of Public Works and the Garda authorities has always been a happy one and no one in the Office of Public Works would do anything to bring about a change in that situation. As far as we are concerned, there can be nothing but the best for the Garda.
There are two aspects to this problem: one is the provision of a new Garda station and the other is the necessity of providing temporary acommodation while that new station is being erected. Deputy Collins is incorrect in saying that we purchased a site in Waterford. The fact is that the site to be used is an old jail site which was already State property.
For nothing?
Yes, for nothing. When the station at Adelphi Quay was vacated the reason for doing so was not because the lease was up but because the building was thought to be unsafe. Several premises were inspected and those at No. 15 South Parade were thought to be suitable alternative accommodation and the Garda authorities themselves agreed that this was suitable temporary accommodation. I will be inviting tenders for the new station to be erected on the old jail site some time in April. We estimate that this new Garda station will cost about £70,000.
On the 5th February, 1970, as we all know, a portion of the roof fell in. The district inspector arranged for a new roof to be erected and the entire building was inspected by him to make sure it was structurally safe, and in his view it was. In the meantime the Garda got their own architect, who decided the building was unsafe. As a result of this a senior architect of the Office of Public Works went down to inspect the building and he found it to be safe. I say that in order to reassure the Garda.
As Deputy Kenneally has pointed out, it is very difficult to get suitable premises in Waterford itself. Once a landlord hears that the State are interested in acquiring a premises they virtually hold the State up to ransom.
We are glad to hear that admission.
I think it is a very serious admission.
The building in South Parade was inspected in 1968 by the district architect, who is a qualified man, and he was satisfied with the premises.
The suggestion that a prefabricated structure be erected is not the solution. It would take several months to erect and it might interfere with the construction of the main station. I would like to assure the gardaí concerned that the premises are safe. If they are not satisfied with this assurance then we will endeavour to secure alternative accommodation as quickly as we can. In fact, two premises have come to our notice in the last 24 hours and we are investigating the practicability of using them. There will be no effort spared by me and the Office of Public Works to ensure that the Garda in Waterford are housed to their satisfaction while awaiting the erection of the new station.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 17th February, 1970.