(Cavan) asked the Minister for Local Government if the accumulation of approximately 4,000 malicious injury claims awaiting hearing in the Dublin Circuit Court is due mainly to delay on the part of Dublin Corporation in processing these claims; and, if so, if he will arrange with the commissioner administering the affairs of Dublin Corporation to deal with this enormous backlog of claims without delay.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin Malicious Injuries Claims.
38.
I have no information available in my Department about delays in dealing with malicious injury claims or the reasons for any such delays.
(Cavan): Is the Minister aware that in reply to a question by me last week his colleague the Minister for Justice said the accumulated arrears of about 4,000 malicious injury claims in Dublin were not due to any congestion in the court or any failure to provide judges but was due to delay on the part of Dublin Corporation in processing these claims? The Minister did say that steps were being taken to improve this position, as far I can recollect.
No application has been received by me from the corporation to sanction additional staff or overtime working to deal with these claims.
(Cavan): Will the Minister take this as an application from me to get in touch with the commissioner administering the affairs of Dublin Corporation with a view to having this huge backlog of malicious injury claims awaiting decision duly processed without delay so that they can be brought before the court and determined?
I shall inquire into the matter.
Would the Minister not agree that greater efficiency would be attained in the processing of malicious injury claims if the responsibility for processing such claims was centralised in one Government Department instead of being multiplied through every local authority?
I am aware that there is a particular issue in County Meath.
That is not what I asked. Answer the question.
It is not the intention of the Government that the State should take over this responsibility from local authorities.
Would the Minister not agree that greater efficiency would be attained if they did?
I doubt it.
Why?
There is no reason to believe there would be. I imagine the opposite would be the case.
There is duplication in every local authority——
I do not think there is duplication.
(Cavan): Arising out of the Minister's reply that it is not the intention of the Government to take over responsibility for malicious injury claims, would he agree that the Government have set a precedent by relieving the ratepayers of Dublin city of a substantial claim of a malicious injury nature arising out of the blowing up of Nelson's Pillar? Would he agree that the situation that exists in Cavan/North Meath is exactly similar to that in Dublin and would he not think it reasonable that the Government should follow the precedent which they themselves established in Dublin?
I do not think it is similar at all. The Government did a large part of the damage in Dublin themselves.
(Cavan): Perhaps they engineered it all, for all I know.
(Interruptions.)