asked the Minister for Justice the cost of restoring Portlaoise Prison arising out of the recent disturbances.
141.
Written Answers. - Portlaoise Prison Disturbances.
140.
asked the Minister for Justice when it is intended to publish the results of the departmental inquiry into the recent disturbances in Portlaoise Prison.
144.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will issue a general statement on the recent disturbances in Portlaoise Prison: and the action, if any, apart from official and semi-official inquiries, he intends to take in the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 140, 141 and 144 together.
I have thought it right, particularly in view of allegations that are being made, to give the House a fairly detailed statement. The statement that I have is rather long—about four typescript pages—and my formal proposal is that I should, with the Ceann Comhairle's permission, circulate it, on the understanding that if any Deputy wished to raise any supplementaries he could of course exercise his right to put down a further question. But if Deputies, and in particular Deputy Andrews who has asked the question, would prefer that I should read the reply in full now, I shall be glad to do so.
Following is the statement:—
The main recent disturbance took place on 29th December, and involved a group of prisoners numbering nearly 140. Since then a widespread campaign has been set in motion which seeks to create the impression that the prisoners concerned are being needlessly subjected to intolerable conditions and that reasonable requests on their part continue to be ignored by me. I wish to say quite categorically that this picture represents a gross distortion of the facts.
For some time before the disturbance, these prisoners had been asking for—or, as they put it, demanding— the removal from the prison of a group of six or seven prisoners. During the same period a campaign was being organised to press for the restoration of food parcels. The House will recall that, in the aftermath of the escape from Portlaoise last August, the Government decided that the privilege of receiving food parcels regularly would have to be terminated, but, as was made clear at the time, exceptions were allowed for a few special occasions such as Christmas and Hallow'een. As part of the growing pre-Christmas campaign for the restoration of food parcels prisoners requested relatives and friends not to avail themselves of the single-parcel concession allowed for Christmas.
Very shortly before Christmas some prisoners informed the Governor that they were making a final approach to him and that, if the prisoners whose presence they objected to were not removed immediately from the prison, action— the nature of which was not specified —would follow.
On 23rd December the main group locked out from their section of the prison the prisoners in question. It was only when it was made clear to them that this action would not be accepted and that order would be restored by whatever means were necessary that they desisted.
In the afternoon of 29th December a group of 27 prison officers were overpowered by prisoners of whom there are nearly 140 in the group. The prisoners took the officers' keys, placed them in cells and proceeded to barricade the prison block with cell doors, mattresses and various items of furniture. The methods used to remove cell doors were such as to do severe and costly damage to them.
Garda and Army reinforcements had to be assembled and at about 8 p.m. they, with the help of prison staff, broke through the barricades that had been set up and released the hostages. In planning and carrying through this operation they had for a considerable time to operate without the benefit of the prison lights as the lighting system had been put out of action by the prisoners who had removed fuses. No serious injuries were sustained.
The system adopted to secure the release of the hostages included the use of water jets from rubber hoses as well as the firing by Army personnel of some rubber bullets over the heads of prisoners as a warning. The use of water hoses unavoidably resulted in the discharge of a great deal of water about the prison and in the wetting of mattresses, bedclothes and so on. Prison staff with the help of Garda and Army personnel then had to remove all this wet material from the cells and in general to try to restore the prison to a stage where some kind of reasonable regime could be operated. For many of the people concerned this meant working right through the night and well into the following day. I have already paid tribute to all concerned for their sense of duty and I am glad to do so again now.
Amongst the damage caused by the prisoners—apart from the serious damage to cell doors already mentioned—was damage to furniture used in barricades and what appears to have been simply wanton damage to recreation equipment that had been provided by the prison for them, including a billiard table and table tennis tables. The central heating system was also damaged and so was a toilet.
The prisoners' action was of course also responsible for damage unavoidably done through the use of water hoses and in the subsequent clearing out of cells. A particular problem was that the breaking of the toilet could have led to the contamination of water flowing about the floors.
The cost of repairing the damage caused, including of course both material and labour costs, is estimated to be of the order of £14,000.
Even before this situation arose, staff in Portlaoise were working very long hours and, as cells could no longer be locked and the entire prison was in a state of disorder, it was, quite simply, impossible for the staff to supervise prison visits, examine letters or undertake anything other than the most immediately essential work. In those circumstances there had to be a general suspension both of visits and of letters. The situation has now been restored to the point where letters can be and are again allowed but demands on staff and the work still to be done will not make it possible to allow visits, except in exceptional circumstances, for some time yet—the present estimate is about a week.
I cannot hope to keep up with the kind of propaganda machine that is now being turned against the Government, and me in particular, in connection with the Portlaoise prisoners. I shall therefore confine myself to making a few comments which, as far as I am concerned, are matters of fact. These are as follows:
1. Of the various decisions made relating to conditions in Portlaoise, not a single one has been made out of vindictiveness or out of a desire to impose a repressive regime.
2. Only one decision on the recent disturbance was a disciplinary decision. That was a decision that 28 days' remission would be forfeited and even that decision was not punishment for the sake of punishment but punishment designed to convince everybody concerned that acts of force, violence or other disorder on their part will not gain anything but will have the contrary effect.
3. Dry mattresses and bedclothes were made available to prisoners almost immediately but beds could not be made immediately available. According as beds could be made available they were installed, but the prisoners said they would not use them—firstly, apparently, on the basis that nobody would use a bed until everybody had one and subsequently on the basis that they would not use beds until the cell furniture had been restored exactly as it had been previously. I may say that there is no question of restoring the kind of furniture previously in the cells after the experience of how it has been abused. Adequate cell furniture will, however, be provided.
4. Food parcels. The prison food is not just good—it is excellent both in quality and variety. The best way I can put it is to say that when outsiders were invited to call and see for themselves, a typical reaction was to suspect that what they got must have been specially prepared. It was not. Nevertheless prisoners are allowed to purchase certain items themselves, at the cost price to the prison. In these circumstances food parcels are quite unnecessary and are of course a major security hazard. They have been abolished by Government decision and unless prisoners are deliberately and for extraneous reasons setting out to create a confrontation —a confrontation which they cannot win—they will accept the reality of the position.
5. Some prisoners are on hunger strike, apparently for the restoration of the position as it was before the August escape. It will be clear that there can be no possible question of this. It is not possible in the circumstances obtaining in the prison to know how many are in fact not taking solid food. I have no doubt that most of them will shortly act sensibly in this matter. The problem is that in any group of this kind there can be a small minority who can talk themselves into a situation from which they may find it difficult to extract themselves. I now appeal in all sincerity to the leaders of the group, men who must know that this talk of vindictiveness and hardship is quite simply a propagandist exercise, not to take risks with the lives of people whose ultimate decisions they may be unable to control and stop now before it may be too late. There is no future in this kind of tactic.
The departmental inquiry into this disturbance has ended. It was undertaken simply to ascertain all the relevant facts. It will not be published.