We now come to Vote 22. Votes Nos. 22 to 27, inclusive, may be discussed together. The Minister will move Vote 22.
Estimates, 1982. - Vote 22: Office of the Minister for Justice.
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £11,580,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31 day of December, 1982, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, and of certain other services administered by that Office, and of the Public Record Office, and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of historical documents, etc., and for payment of a grant-in-aid.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose that all the Votes for which I am responsible be taken together but I shall endeavour to answer any questions on any particular Vote.
The total Estimate for all the Votes for which I am responsible is £241,851,000 made up as follows:—
|
£ |
|
|
Vote 22 Office of the Minister for Justice |
11,580,000 |
|
Vote 23 Garda Síochána |
177,263,000 |
|
Vote 24 Prisons |
40,690,000 |
|
Vote 26 Land Registry and Registry of Deeds |
5,253,000 |
|
Vote 27 Charitable Donations and Bequests |
92,000 |
|
Vote 25 Courts |
6,973,000 |
This total of £241,851,000 compares with a total Estimate for these six Votes of £221,199,000 in 1981, £368,000 of which was received from the Vote for Remuneration — £306,000 to the Courts Vote and £62,000 to the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds Vote.
I would like to take this opportunity to say a few words concerning the various areas for which I, as Minister for Justice, have responsibility.
The overall provision in the Garda Vote is £177,263,000. Of this amount almost £136,000,000 is needed for salaries and allowances, including overtime, and a further £22,000,000 for the pensions of former members and widows of former members of the force. Other major items of expenditure provided for are £7,500,000 for travelling and subsistence, £5,300,000 for Garda transport and almost £2,900,000 for radio and other equipment and office machinery, including computers.
The sum of over £177,000,000 for Garda services this year is a measure of the ever-increasing level of resources which it is necessary to allocate to the prevention and detection of crime. Deputies will be aware from the budget statement of the Minister for Finance that, apart from this Estimate's provision, a further £2,500,000 is being provided for the recruitment and equipment of extra gardaí. When I took up office as Minister for Justice I quickly realised the urgent need for a substantial increase in the strength of the Garda Síochána, particularly the need to provide for an increased Garda presence in the streets of our cities and towns. I consider that a high level of uniformed Garda patrols is an important element in the fight against crime and I have taken steps to see that this will be a reality before very long.
Since taking up office I have arranged to have the intake of recruits accelerated and expanded. Since 10 March a total of 297 recruits have been appointed to the force, which means that the Garda Training Centre, Templemore, is now filled to its existing capacity. In addition, I am having extra accommodation made available by the use of prefabricated buildings and by renting accommodation, with a view to having a total of approximately 1,000 recruits appointed this year. Moreover, I will shortly be announcing details of a Garda Síochána recruitment competition to be held next autumn with a view to the recruitment in 1983 of a further 1,000 members.
Increasing Garda manpower on its own, of course, is not enough; it is important to ensure that it is deployed and organised so that it can respond in the most effective way possible to the ever-increasing demands being made on it. The greater availability of transport and modern communications facilities for the force means that new ways of improving the level of service to the public and of combating criminal activity should be possible. Studies in this connection have recently been carried out by a team consisting of representatives of the Garda Research and Planning Unit and the Operations Research Unit of the Department of the Public Service. These studies have been overseen by Garda management in conjunction with my Department and a scheme designed to improve the policing of rural areas was introduced on Monday 7 June in two pilot Garda districts — in Claremorris, County Mayo, and Thomastown, County Kilkenny. I understand that these schemes are having some initial "teething" problems, but of course this can happen in any new experiment. Indeed, it was precisely because of such a possibility that the new arrangements have been introduced on a trial basis. The schemes will be carefully monitored over the coming months to see how effective they prove to be. Hopefully they will be successful, so that they can be extended to other rural areas. The special policing needs of Dublin and other densely populated areas are also being examined to see whether a more effective response to them is possible by organisational or other changes in the force.
There is no restriction on the provision of back-up services and equipment for the Garda. Arrangements are at an advanced stage for providing them with a new national radio communications network of the most sophisticated kind which will undoubtedly be of great practical assistance to them in carrying out their duties. A substantial part of the new system will be operational before the end of this year and a major expansion of the network will take place during 1983. This network will be exclusively for Garda use — it will be operated, controlled, installed and maintained by members of the force. Extra Garda radio technicians have recently been recruited and the Garda Radio Section is being completely reorganised and expanded.
Computer facilities on the general Public Service computer have been available to the Garda for some time past, but they have now been provided with their own computer, under Garda management and operated by Garda personnel. A number of Garda divisional headquarters are provided with direct links to this computer and in the near future such links will be provided to all divisional headquarters stations as well as to some other major Garda stations.
The provision of the additional manpower and equipment which I have just outlined should contribute significantly to the capability of the Garda Síochána to deal effectively with the crime situation, which is a matter of the greatest concern to me and to the Government.
As the recent debate which took place during Private Members' Business on crime and vandalism in Dublin ranged in some detail over the whole crime situation, I propose to confine myself to-day to a few brief remarks on the subject. The latest published report on crime of the Garda Commissioner is for the year 1980, but it is expected that the 1981 report will be available in a few weeks' time. The number of indictable offences for 1981 was 89,400, which represented an increase of 22.8 per cent on the 1980 figure. On this figure of indictable offences, 2,478 were in respect of offences against the person, 28,916 in respect of offences against property with violence, 57,642 in respect of larcenies, etc., and the remaining 364 were in the miscellaneous category. The detection rate in 1981 was slightly down on the 1980 rate — 36.6 per cent against 39.9 per cent. The foregoing figures are provisional at this stage.
The figures demonstrate clearly the seriousness of the crime situation in this country. It is a situation to which this Government are responding with vigour and determination. We are firmly committed to doing everything necessary to maintain law and order. The programme of expanded Garda recruitment, the deployment of the force to optimum advantage and the provision of technical resources are but some of the measures we have already taken.
The situation in Northern Ireland continues to require the deployment of substantial Garda and Army personnel and resources in Border areas. During 1981 the Garda seized a total of 207 firearms, including five machine guns, almost 20,000 rounds of ammunition and a wide variety of explosives. These successes undoubtedly contributed to the saving of many lives and I would like to express thanks and appreciation to the Garda for a job well done. I would also like to convey my appreciation to the Army for their continued assistance to the Garda in a wide variety of difficult and dangerous tasks.
The use of Garda and Army personnel and resources in Border areas continues to be a severe drain on public funds — funds that could be put to more productive use in these times when every penny is needed to provide jobs for our increasing population of young people. However, we must face up to reality and I wish to stress that for as long as is necessary this Government will do all that is necessary to ensure that the rule of law is maintained.
An aspect of particular importance in the drive against crime is enlisting the support of the general public. It is important that the general public be aware of the trend towards increased crime and that they have a full realisation of the contribution they can and should be making towards the maintenance of law and order. I have recently launched a national advertising campaign with the object of increasing public awareness of crime and vandalism and of generating greater co-operation from the public in its prevention. As part of this campaign a publicity and action programme is being carried out with the assistance of the Garda Síochána who are already doing excellent work in this area through their juvenile liaison officers and community relations officers. The programme will consist of a number of measures including schools lectures on such subjects as drug abuse and criminal law and special projects on the subject of crime prevention. There will also be a full programme of lectures to clubs, associations and other groups on the whole area of crime prevention and community welfare. Ideas are being invited from the public on crime and vandalism prevention.
I am confident that there will be a favourable public response to this campaign and that more and more of our people will be encouraged to work in close partnership with the Garda in preventing crime and in that way improving the quality of life in the community.
The total net estimate for the Prisons Vote exceeds the corresponding figure for 1981 by £3,768,000, an increase of 10 per cent. The bulk of the increases is attributable to the provisions for salaries, wages and allowances and for buildings and equipment (Subhead D).
The increase under Subhead A is £1,523,000 or 7 per cent on the 1981 Estimate. This is attributable in the main to the developments which have taken place or are taking place at Mountjoy, Limerick and Cork prisons. Those developments, which include the provision of additional cellular accommodation at both Mountjoy and Cork and the housing of male subversive prisoners at Limerick, require a substantial increase in manning levels at each of those institutions.
To some extent the increased manning requirement can be met by recruiting additional prison officers and assigning them to those institutions. There will remain, however, a continuing need for increased manning in those institutions at particular times during the day, a need which can only be met by overtime working. There is also the need for overtime working by existing staff until newly-recruited staff become available for effective duty. To date in 1982, 30 prison officers have been recruited and it is expected that 100 recruits will have joined the service by the end of the year. Recruited officers undergo a 12-week induction course before being assigned to an institution.
Estimates providing for an expenditure of £11,539,000 had been settled for the prisons' capital programme for 1982 when I took up office. Following a review of the general situation as regards law and order, however, the present Government were concerned at the lack of custodial accommodation which results in a considerable number of convicted offenders being discharged from custody when they have served only part of their sentences. As a consequence of this review a decision was taken to provide additional funds for the prisons' capital programme in an effort to provide more places as quickly as possible. This Government also took into consideration the job creation content in the programme, in the context of the general employment situation. As announced by the Minister for Finance in his budget speech, an additional £4,000,000 has been made available for prison building, in conformity with the Government's decision, bringing the total prisons' capital estimate to £15,539,000. In addition, there is provision of £1,900,000 for maintenance, renovation and adaptation works and for the supply of equipment.
During the current financial year design work and site preparation work for the new high security prison, to be located on lands adjacent to Portlaoise Prison, will be brought to conclusion and actual building work should be ready to go ahead in 1983. The staff accommodation to replace the existing obsolete accommodation at Portlaoise is well advanced and is on target for completion in 1983. Perimetering and site preparation works for the Wheatfield site in County Dublin are practically completed and the buildings to house engineering services to cater for both a place of detention for male juveniles and a women's prison are at present under construction and will be completed in the early part of 1983. Design work on the custodial buildings is well advanced and it is hoped to commence building them in 1983. Design work and site preparation work on a place of detention for juveniles in Cork is also well advanced and I hope that building work can also commence next year.
The decision to transfer some prisoners from Portlaoise Prison to Limerick Prison has given rise to the need for a considerable upgrading of security at Limerick. This, in turn, has created a need for additional accommodation for staff and for storage. Building of new staff accommodation and of new storage facilities to meet this need on the former Clover Meats site adjoining the prison has commenced and is due for completion this year.
The modernisation programme for Mountjoy Prison is continuing and the new visiting and reception building is completed and is being fitted out for occupation in the very near future. Work on the design of a new boiler house is at an advanced stage and construction should be ready to commence next year. The perimeter security wall around the Mountjoy complex is being renovated over part of its length and totally replaced over the remainder, where it is too low and insecure. The former hospital building is being renovated to serve as a separation unit for difficult prisoners. Inter alia, this will enable us to end the use of the barracks at the Curragh for the containment of such prisoners. Pending full completion of the unit, cells which have been completed will be used to accommodate an overflow of prisoners from the main prison which will reduce the need to release prisoners early to which I have already referred.
An extension to the training unit at Glengarriff Parade, has commenced and when completed will provide expanded training facilities and give greater flexibility to the allocation of training places.
Buildings to provide educational and work training facilities in Cork Prison and in Arbour Hill Prison are almost completed and should be fitted out in the next couple of months. The northern cell block of Cork Prison which had to undergo major reconstruction is due for completion this year.
The Capital Estimate also includes provision for water and sewerage works at Shelton Abbey, staff quarters and other facilities at Loughan House and fitting out of a central stores depot at Santry, County Dublin.
In view of the urgent need to provide additional custodial accommodation, I have directed my Department to seek out and acquire a premises that could be converted to an open place of custody with the minimum of adaptation.
There is also a provision of £300,000 in the Capital Estimate for the acquisition and renovation of premises for use as centres for offenders on probation from the courts and for offenders on release from custody. Already this year, premises for probation workshops have been acquired in Dublin, Dún Laoghaire and Galway. The renovation and adaptation of premises in Cork, acquired in 1980 for use as a probation hostel, is also under way. It is hoped to acquire premises in Longford and Athlone later in the year for a workshop and a workshop cum hostel respectively.
When the adaptation and renovation of these premises is completed, they will be leased by my Department at a nominal rent to local voluntary committees who will run the centres in association with the Probation and Welfare Service of my Department.
This service operates on a countrywide basis and provides a social work service to the courts, the prisons and places of detention and some special schools. There are about 2,000 offenders under its supervision, mainly from the courts and on temporary release from prison. The availability of hostels, day attendance centres and workshops in the community, to which offenders under supervision can be referred, makes the supervision exercised by the officers of the service more effective. My Department provide grants towards the running costs of the hostels, day centres and workshops which operate in association with the Probation and Welfare Service. The amount provided for these grants in the 1982 Estimates is more than twice the amount provided in 1981 — £514,500 as compared with £246,000.
I should like to take this opportunity to thank the various voluntary committees who are working with the Probation and Welfare Service in the establishment and running of centres for offenders. Theirs is a task which does not receive much public recognition but it could not be more important. As I have said before, I believe that one of the most effective ways of controlling crime is by involving local communities in this process of crime prevention. The members of voluntary committees who give up so much of their free time to the running of hostels, day centres and workshops are engaging in an effective method of crime prevention. They are providing support in terms of accommodation, work training, social development and recreational facilities for offenders who, generally, have not otherwise had the benefit of them. By endeavouring to instil in them a sense of social responsibility, the committees and the probation and welfare service try to help young offenders to turn away from a pattern of behaviour which in many cases undoubtedly would lead to a prison sentence.
As Deputies are aware, the increasing pressure on prison accommodation has resulted in some prisoners being released before their normal release date in order to avoid overcrowding. In fact, the practice of early release is not a new development but has been increasingly used as part of the planned programmes developed by my Department for returning all but the most hardened and dangerous offenders to the community as quickly as possible. This is a well organised development and generally involves some measure of supervision of the offender from the date of his actual release to the date on which his sentence ends.
While there is always some element of risk in releasing offenders from custody early, the risk is thought to be acceptable. I am, however, concerned that in the past few years successive Ministers for Justice have been forced, in order to avoid greater evils, to allow the temporary release of some prisoners without any supervision in order to make room for newly sentenced offenders. The accommodation problem is caused by an increase in the numbers of persons being committed — so far this year the total number committed is up on the same period last year by about 700 — and by some increase in the length of sentences being imposed by the courts. The position is aggravated by the necessity to use Loughan House as a special school instead of an open centre and the fact that Limerick prison is no longer available for "ordinary" prisoners. The major building programme I referred to earlier will not afford any relief for some years yet — apart from the coming into use later this year of the second wing of Cork prison, which will provide 40-50 additional cells.
The alternative to early unsupervised release would be to abandon our general policy of single cell occupancy and to resort to doubling or trebling in cells. The objections to this are obvious. Cells in general are small and were designed for one prisoner only; the only privacy a prisoner has is in his cell and he loses this with doubling-up; recreational and workshop facilities would be stretched by additional numbers. All this would increase tension and the danger of disturbance which could lead to parts of the prisons being put out of use. If this were to happen even in one place the whole prison system would be very seriously disrupted. I have accepted, as did my predecessors, that the arguments against doubling-up outweigh those in favour of such a policy and hence, unsatisfactory as it is, there have been at times no viable alternatives to the early unplanned releases. However, I can assure the House that, even when the pressure is greatest, every effort is made to ensure that there is a reasonable possibility that those being released will not be involved in crime again before their normal release date. Nevertheless, I am not at all satisfied with the situation, and, since taking up office, I have been looking at every possible way of reducing the pressure on accommodation both by increasing the amount of accommodation available and by using alternatives to imprisonment as much as possible. Work is now in progress or planned at Mountjoy which it is hoped will provide a significant number of additional cells in due course. Some of these have to be used to accommodate the prisoners who will be transferred from the Curragh which I am planning for the end of the year. The opening of Trinity House at Lusk, County Dublin, by the Minister for Education later this year will release Loughan House for use as an open centre that will accommodate perhaps 70 or more. I have also significantly increased the strength of the probation and welfare service in order to enable that service to increase further the number of offenders — at present about 2,000 — under supervision.
I have already mentioned the work of the probation and welfare service. I think that I should now refer to two specific areas of their work, one already successfully operating for the past few years and the other about to be introduced. The scheme of intensive supervision of offenders released from custody commenced in 1979. The scheme is an alternative to full custodial treatment and involves intensive contact between a probation and welfare officer and a small group of eight or so offenders. The offenders selected are expected to show a positive commitment to the scheme as an alternative to remaining in custody. It is hoped to give the young offenders selected for the scheme sufficient support to enable them to solve their difficulties with the community. The scheme is operating in Dublin, Cork and Limerick and group counselling sessions are held and leisure time activities organised. A resource centre for the scheme has been established in Dublin which incorporates a workshop where basic skills in painting, woodwork, metal work and welding are taught to offenders by a qualified instructor. Efforts are made by the probation and welfare officers involved to sort out any employment, work training, educational, health and family problems which the offenders may have. During 1981, 260 offenders were released to the scheme and 45 were carried over from 1980. Of these, 156 completed supervision successfully, 55 were returned to custody for breaching conditions of release and 94 were still under supervision at the end of the year.
The second scheme is one that will enable the courts to require offenders to perform work in the community rather than go to prison or to a place of detention. When all those measures have come into effect, I am hopeful that the situation will have been brought under control and that the prison system will be able to function efficiently and humanely without undue recourse to unsupervised early releases.
I would now like to review developments in work training and education in the prisons. The education service to the prisons and places of detention has continued to expand and there are now the equivalent of 58 full-time teachers, all provided by various vocational education committees, involved in education in the prisons and places of detention.
This expansion of the education service reflects the importance which is attached to education in the prison context for, apart from providing a useful occupation for prisoners, it performs the important functions of helping prisoners to cope with their sentences, of widening and strengthening the options prisoners will have open to them on release and of affording them opportunities for increased self-development, self-esteem and self-reliance.
I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the teachers provided by the vocational education committees for their commitment to the work involved and of thanking the committees concerned for their co-operation during the past year.
The library services in the prisons and places of detention provide an important back-up to the educational programmes. These services are provided by local public libraries in all the places and I would like to take this opportunity to thank the librarians concerned for their help. Since the beginning of 1981, two full-time librarians, seconded by Dublin city libraries, have been engaged at Mountjoy prison to co-ordinate library services for the Dublin prisons and places of detention.
The objective of the work/training programme is to provide prisoners with active employment during the sentence so that they can develop or maintain the work habit. The programme consists of two main branches. These are, firstly, intensive industrial training as recommended by AnCO and CERT and secondly, occupational work at all the places of custody. Industrial training takes place at the training unit, Glengariff Parade, where AnCO type engineering courses of six to nine months duration are provided. The courses include introduction to industry, welding, engineering machine operation, general engineering for operatives and electronic assembly. During 1981, 56 offenders completed courses and, of these, about 60 per cent obtained employment or went on for further training with AnCO.
There are plans for the further development of the work training programme. These envisage the expansion of industrial training activities in construction, catering, engineering and electronics and the continued development and expansion of general workshop activities. A notable development has been the acquisition of 60 acres of farm land adjacent to Shelton Abbey from the Department of Fisheries and Forestry. This will enable the development of a farm work programme to take place which will provide a valuable work outlet at the centre.
While on the subject of work, I should mention that work parties of prisoners under supervision from a number of prisons are engaged in work projects among the community. Projects taken on have ranged from painting and decorating old people's flats to the construction of halls for young people. Only projects which are of benefit to a substantial or needy section of the community and which, because of lack of funds or otherwise, could not be done in the normal way are taken on. The whole scheme depends on the willingness of the prison officers concerned to take on extra responsibilities and also, of course, depends on their technical abilities. I am very pleased to say that all the projects completed have been to the highest standards and I feel that the officers and offenders are deserving of credit.
I come now to the area of my Department's responsibilities relating to the courts, the overall provision for which is £6,973,000 in 1982, an increase of 14 per cent. Broadly outlined, these responsibilities range from the preparation and promotion of any necessary legislation governing the establishment, constitution, jurisdictions and functioning of our courts, to ensuring that all courts and court offices have the resources necessary to enable them to function effectively.
As Deputies will, I am sure, be aware the most important development in recent years, as far as the courts are concerned, has been the introduction on 12 May last of new jurisdictions in the District and Circuit Courts, as provided in the Courts Act, 1981, which increased the monetary limits of the jurisdiction of these courts in contract and in tort cases from £250 and £2,000, respectively, to £2,500 and £15,000. It also conferred new jurisdictions on them in family law matters.
The changes in jurisdiction provided for, in particular, the additional jurisdiction given to the District Court, are of considerable importance as far as public expenditure is concerned. They involve a significant transfer of civil business, including family law business from the High Court, which at present is seriously in arrears. Apart from this the High Court is the most expensive court of first instance both from the point of view of those who have recourse to it and from that of the State, which must largely finance its operation. As far as litigants are concerned, legal costs in the High Court are undoubtedly high. In family law cases these costs can have particularly severe effects on the family unit since, irrespective of the award of costs to one party, the total costs are payable out of family assets. In addition to the costs of operating the court, the State must in many cases, through the civil legal aid scheme, also pay for the costs of representing one, and sometimes both, parties.
Over recent years there has been a reduction in the number of civil actions in the lower courts — their jurisdiction limits having been eroded by inflation — and a corresponding increase in the number of such cases being put down for hearing in the High Court. In addition, family law cases, which are not subject to monetary jurisdiction limits, had tended to be concentrated in the High Court mainly because only the High Court could give the full "package" of reliefs frequently sought, although the lower courts could give some reliefs such as maintenance and barring orders.
Unfortunately, the operation of the new jurisdictions has been held up by the refusal of some of the court staff concerned to operate them pending the resolution of certain claims which their union had submitted on their behalf. Talks are continuing between the union concerned and my Department with a view to finding a basis for an early settlement of the dispute. I think in all the circumstances it is best that I should make no further comment just at this stage.
Other provisions of the Courts Act, 1981, came into effect in May of 1981, the most significant being the abolition of the right of a person accused of an indictable offence to opt to have his trial transferred from his local Circuit Court to the Central Criminal Court and the substitution therefor of a right of transfer to the Circuit Court in Dublin. This has meant that no new cases, other than those such as murder, in respect of which the Circuit Court has not got jurisdiction, have come before the Central Criminal Court since May of last year and, while, it provides relief for the High Court, it has made necessary the appointment of a temporary Circuit Court judge so that an additional judge can be made available to the Dublin Circuit to deal with criminal work.
It was also found necessary during the year to increase the number of High Court judges by two so that the number of High Court judges, including the President, now stands at 15. As Deputies are aware, there is a large number of High Court jury actions at present awaiting hearing and I understand from the President of the High Court that in an effort to reduce the backlog he has arranged special jury sittings of the High Court for periods of two weeks each in Naas from 14 June and in Trim from 5 July at which actions that in the ordinary course would not come to trial in Dublin before October will be offered a hearing. He also proposes to arrange additional jury sittings in October at those venues outside Dublin where the High Court on circuit normally hears such actions. In particular it is intended that two High Court judges will sit in Cork for two weeks in October. These measures have been made possible following the appointment of the two additional High Court judges to which I have already referred.
One of the jury courts in the Four Courts was destroyed by fire in October of last year. This courtroom is at present being reconstructed and is expected to be ready for use very shortly.
Later this year it is proposed to move some High Court offices from the Four Courts to alternative accommodation in order to make space available in the Four Courts for the provision of two more High Court jury courtrooms which, it is hoped, will become available in 1983. This will substantially increase the capacity of the High Court to hear jury actions.
In the area of the provision of court resources, the greatest problem is accommodation. Responsibility for the provision and maintenance of court accommodation, with certain exceptions in the Dublin area, is vested by law in local authorities. This has given rise to particular problems in a number of areas but improvements are effected whenever opportunity and local finances allow. In a number of cases within the past couple of years, for example, particular local authorities have been able to improve the quality of the accommodation provided for some District Courts by obtaining the use of satisfactory premises such as community halls on a rental basis. The reinstatement of Tralee courthouse was completed last autumn and that of Waterford courthouse is expected to be finished in the very near future. Several local authorities are considering quite extensive repairs and improvements to a number of courthouses and others are dealing with less extensive works on an ongoing basis.
In Dublin two new jury court suites became available in the Four Courts last year — one for High Court business, including family law, and the other for the joint use of the High and Circuit Courts. The Four Courts Hotel site, which has been acquired by the Office of Public Works, will be developed as an office block to accommodate the various court offices at present housed in the Four Courts building, thus freeing further areas there for development as additional courtrooms and ancillary accommodation. Planning for the office block project is at an advanced stage and I understand that tenders for the construction phase will be invited as soon as the financial situation allows.
In the meantime, in order to satisfy the immediate requirements for additional court accommodation on a temporary basis, the Office of Public Works have leased Dolphin House at Essex Street where additional District Court civil, family law and traffic Courts and a new Circuit Court family court will be provided. The building is expected to be ready for occupation later this year. Unfortunately, the premises were not regarded as suitable for the provision of the additional jury court facilities which are urgently required by the High Court. It has been decided, therefore, to transfer the Official Assignee's Office and that of the Examiner from the Four Courts to Dolphin House and to relocate the Probate Office within the Four Courts, so that their accommodation can be redeveloped as a jury courts complex earlier than would otherwise have been possible.
The accommodation available to the Children's Court has been a cause of concern for some years now and the position deteriorated last November when the Dublin Castle premises were declared unsafe. The court is at present accommodated on a temporary basis in the Morgan Place wing of the Four Courts. However, the Office of Public Works have under consideration at present a premises which could provide adequate and suitable permanent accommodation for the Children's Court and I am very hopeful that its accommodation problems will be solved before much longer.
The long-standing difficulty with regard to court accommodation in Rathfarnham was resolved earlier this year when adaptation work in the former school premises at Willbrook Road was completed. The court moved to the new accommodation after the Easter recess.
On the subject of law reform I shall be brief and, since a number of Deputies are new to the House, perhaps I should explain why. As I understand the situation — and the Ceann Comhairle can confirm this — it is not within the Rules of this House for a Deputy to advocate legislation in the course of the Estimate Debate. For that reason I think that any statement by me about particular legislative measures in my area of responsibility would be inappropriate, even if it were technically within the Rules of the House, as it would not be open to Deputies to deal with these issues. While this is the position that applies to legislation generally, I think Deputies will appreciate that it is of particular significance as far as the Justice Vote is concerned since the Minister for Justice has responsibility for a fairly wide area of the law. Accordingly, I propose to confine my remarks to saying that my legislative proposals, including proposals under preparation at present in my Department, will in due course be brought to the notice of Members of the House in the usual way.
Since 1970 the intake of work in the Land Registry has increased at an average annual rate of about 10 per cent. There was a higher than average increase of 18 per cent in 1981, but that is being counterbalanced by a decrease of 7 per cent up to the end of May 1982 compared with the corresponding period in 1981.
The Land Registry was partially reorganised in 1970-71 as a result of the implementation of recommendations of a study group set up in 1968 by the then Minister for Justice. The study group was reconstituted in 1974 and furnished two reports between then and 1976, both of which were accepted for implementation.
The first report recommended the establishment of a new map record system. The existing maps had become badly damaged through usage over the years. There was also the problem that about 50 per cent of them were on a outdated six-inch scale and needed to be revised on the 25-inch scale. When it is realised that there are about a million registered holdings the amount of reconstruction work involved can be appreciated.
Because of the constant increase in the volume of work progress on the establishment of the new system was slow until, on 1 October 1979, a new scheme for producing copy maps was introduced which has had the double effect of reducing delays in the issue of maps and accelerating the reconstruction programme. A measure of the success of the scheme has been that the arrears of copy map applications have been reduced from 5,735 at the beginning of October 1979, when the scheme was introduced, to 1,679 at the end of May 1982. This has meant a reduction from two months to eight days in the average delay in issuing maps and has happened despite a substantial increase in the lodgment of applications — 7 per cent in 1980 over 1979 and 39 per cent in 1981 over 1980.
The study group's second report recommended a comprehensive reorganisation of the Land Registry structure as a whole. This has now been effected and the results are very satisfactory.
Additional accommodation was obtained in Bow Street in 1980 and was occupied during 1981 by the staff handling a programme of computerising and Land Registry folios and the ground rents purchase scheme.
Final arrangements are now being made for the implementation of the computerisation programme and I hope that it will commence within the next three months or so. I am convinced that it will make a significant further contribution both to the efficiency of the registry, particularly where callers to the public counters are concerned and to the security of the Land Registry's records.
A total of 18,888 applications for vesting certificates under the ground rents purchase scheme have been received up to the end of May 1982 since the scheme came into operation on 1 August 1978. I am very conscious of the importance to the community of an efficient Land Registry and I will make every effort to ensure that it is provided with the facilities to enable the service to continue to improve.
Several improvements have recently been introduced in the Registry of Deeds including making provision for searches to be made by post as well as by attendance at the Registry of Deeds office and arranging that fees may be paid by cash as well as by Revenue stamps. A further package of reorganisation proposals is under discussion with the relevant staff interests. These proposals include the integration of the staff structures of the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds and the computerisation of some of the Registry of Deeds records.
My other areas of responsibility include the Public Record Office, criminal injuries compensation tribunal, adoption, censorship of films and publications, aliens' control and charitable donations and bequests. However, following a Government decision my functions in relation to adoption are to be transferred to the Minister for Health. I do not intend to comment on those areas now but I shall endeavour to answer any question that Deputies may wish to ask.
I am somewhat disappointed with the Minister's speech in that it does not refer to a matter which impinges on the life of everyone and that is the area of crime. I know the Minister referred to the Fine Gael Private Member's motion which we discussed here a couple of weeks ago but it is not good enough for him to duck the issue or to duck the question of law reform in the criminal area which is so urgently needed.
I take this opportunity, as the first I have had, to answer to some extent the scandalous and disgraceful remarks made by the Taoiseach on the Order of Business some weeks ago. The Taoiseach's remarks had no basis in fact, were scurrilous and not befitting a person holding his high office. I wish to tell the House that I can only assume the Taoiseach's remarks were based on rumours which were perpetrated against me while I was Minister in relation to allegations of "interfering with the gardaí" during my term of office.
On an Estimate the Deputy is not allowed to make comments on a statement by any other Minister, only the Minister in question.
We are dealing with the Justice area and comments made in the House on it. It is only fair that I should be allowed to make my point. I must consider it an honour that I was considered important enough or dangerous enough for the Taoiseach to attack. It is understandable because his remarks came so soon after his crushing defeat in my constituency. If I was to base my criticisms of the Minister and the Taoiseach on remarks and innuendoes I would never stop, but I do not listen to rumours. I reiterate that the rumours which were spread about me when I was Minister that there was political interference with the Garda is totally and utterly untrue.
While on the question of political interference, I hope the Minister takes note of the fact that there have been far too many political appointments in the Garda Síochána. I am not talking specifically about the time since the Minister took office but I am speaking in general. There has been far too much room for speculation that promotions, transfers and so on are received through the political affinity of the people involved or through contacts or influence. It would be a very bad day's work if that impression was given. I warn the Minister not to be tempted. I specifically raise the security area of the Garda Síochána and the speculation which there was recently in some newspapers in relation to this. I will not say any more on that other than if there was a development in this area, the House might have to seek time for a full scale debate.
We advocated the setting up of a national Garda authority. One of the things it would do is remove the suggestion that there might somehow be political influences within the Garda. Such authority has very substantial merit. I do not pretend that it is easy to appoint an authority. It cannot be set up overnight without thinking out what its role and functions will be and reconciling its autonomy and independence with the inevitable answerability of the Minister in the Dáil. I do not pretend that there are no complicated questions to be answered. There are. However, there is overwhelming merit in the suggestion that there should be a national Garda Authority which would deal with promotions, transfers, housing, accommodation, police tactics, training, organisation and reorganisation and, more importantly, it would involve the community in Garda matters at a very high level.
It is vitally important — and I shall revert to this later — to involve the community at all levels in the area of crime prevention and detection in regard to law and order. One of the great benefits of a Garda authority is their involvement of people from the community at the highest level in contributing to the organisation and performance of the Garda Síochána. By the "community" I mean people from outside the Garda Síochána — of course people from within it on the representative bodies — but I mean specifically the media because I believe they have a particular role to play in observing that things are done well and correctly. We happen to be in a very fortunate position in that overall we have a Garda force of which we can be proud in most respects. Not even the strongest advocate of the Garda Síochána will attempt to pretend that everything is perfect — of course it is not — but by and large, in comparison with other police forces in the western world, we have a Garda force of whom we can be proud. However, there are many problems, many organisational deficiencies, many organisational arrangements which have outrun their usefulness, restrictive practices — all of these needing attention. I believe a Garda authority, representative of the community itself and of the associations representing the gardaí, would have a decided advantage in effecting the necessary reorganisation and changes to make them even more effective as a force than they are at present.
One of the more positive aspects of the Minister's remarks was his disclosure, not for the first time, that the training school in Templemore is now full. The Minister did not say that the provision for so doing was made by me as Minister, although I must concede that the Minister has made further provisions for an even larger increase in numbers at Templemore, on which I must congratulate him. However, I must make the point that I have not noted from his speech, nor do I remember in the budget statement, any financial provision for extra gardaí. If I am wrong in this respect perhaps the Minister would be good enough to point out to me where such financial provision is made for extra gardai. This is terribly important because over the past few years numbers have been spoken about as different crises have arisen, as if we were about to have thousands of extra gardaí overnight in response to a particular crisis, while in reality there was a diminution of their numbers. I do not believe that to be the situation obtaining at present. I am confident that we are in for a very sizeable increase in the numbers of gardaí this year and I see that the Minister promises the same next year, which is to be welcomed.
No matter what reorganisation of the Garda Síochána is achieved, no matter how their efficiency is increased, no matter how many extra gardaí are recruited, we will not solve the crime crisis at present being experienced in this city and country generally. I use the phrase "crime crisis" because that is the term the Minister used himself. I have said many times that we are in a desperate crime situation in which life has become unbearable for so many people. In speaking of the crime situation — given its extent, especially in the more crimeprone areas — we might be tempted to deal solely with its symptoms. Of course we must deal urgently with those, but we must not lose sight of the causes of crime and we must not divert or forget to pursue solutions for those causes while urgently tackling their symptoms.
I happen to believe that there are five principal causes of crime today. Drugs constitutes a massive problem. We have juvenile drinking, which is a chronic problem, worse than ever before. We have unemployment at a higher level today than ever before. But there are two fairly new factors — of course drugs and their abuse is fairly new also — two fairly decisive factors. One is that too many parents have abandoned responsibility for their children. The second is that the community in general has lowered its standards so much that to all intents and purposes it has abandoned any sense of right or wrong. We have drugs, we have excessive drinking, we have unemployment, we have low community moral standards and we have neglect on the part of parents of their children. I believe they constitute the principal causes of crime.
Perhaps the Minister when replying — he did not say much about it in his opening remarks — would tell us in more detail what he and his colleagues in Government, especially the Minister for Health, propose to do or can do to reduce the drugs problem. For instance, when in office the Minister for Health, the Attorney General and myself were preparing as a matter of urgency a revision of the Misuse of Drugs Act. I shall be glad to hear from the present Minister — I note his comment about not speaking about legislation, although I do not accept it — if changes are proposed with regard to a strengthening of the law in the drugs area. I should be grateful if he would let us know what additional steps he proposes (a) in regard to the Drugs Squad, (b) in the drugs investigatory unit at headquarters and (c) in the general drugs training for gardaí in each division and whether he has any other plans in relation to drugs. I should say specifically that I was persuaded as Minister for Justice by what I considered to be very concrete evidence that our courts are all too tolerant, too easy on those appearing before them accused of pushing drugs.
There is widespread consensus that there is something particularly nasty about a drug pusher. There is something very exceptional, even among the criminal community about drug pushers. I believe there is a widespread consensus that the law and the courts should reflect the seriousness of drug pushing. I believe an element in all this is that many of the drug pushers — I saw this in one of the Garda magazines published in the last few days — are very often among the middle class in the community. There tends to be a bias in the courts towards middle class, well-off people. You often see testimonies that they are from nice respectable families, that this is out of character and they get off much more frequently than they should. During my time as Minister for Justice I had on my desk a catalogue of instances of very serious drug pushing, not just of cannabis but cocaine, heroin and other very heavy drugs and when the pushers were brought to court they got very light sentences or even suspended sentences. Is there to be a strengthening of the law in the drug area? What other proposals has the Minister got? I am sure he agrees with me that one of the great causes of the crime spiral today is drugs.
Juvenile drinking is another serious factor, especially in relation to petty crime and vandalism. Petty crime and vandalism are a greater annoyance to people than serious crime, although both must be tackled. I believe that the selling of drink of all kinds to young people in supermarkets, off-licences, pubs and people going around in broken-down vans who sell wine at all sorts of sporting events and playgrounds is the cause of a lot of the problems in relation to juvenile drinking. I have seen ten year old children in my constituency drunk during the day. When the Minister was Minister of State at the Department of Justice during the previous Fianna Fáil Administration he initiated a review of the law on juvenile drinking as well as on other matters. When I was Minister that work was continued by his successor, Deputy Dick Spring, as Minister of State. I hope the Minister will be able to bring in legislation very soon to deal with this matter. I am sure it is too much to hope that it will come in before the summer recess, but I hope if we come back in October that this legislation will be brought in then. If he does that he can be assured of goodwill in relation to it from this side of the House.
A lot needs to be done in relation to juvenile drinking. As well as making it more difficult for young people to buy drink in the places I have mentioned, we must deal with the explosion of disco drinking, hotel extensions, bar extensions and the glamourising of drink. It is important to bring in legislation to control it and to stop the exploitation of young people in this area. I believe it is one of the primary causes of vandalism.
I know the Minister has not got a particular role in relation to unemployment and community morals, but perhaps in his reply he will tell us precisely the percentage of those who are unemployed who end up in prison. I believe it is about 85 per cent. If that figure is correct it indicates the correlation between unemployment and crime and highlights to us the need to tackle unemployment as a major contributory cause of crime. If unemployment continues to climb it is reasonable to expect crime to soar.
It has often been said that parents should be made responsible for the crimes committed by their children. I know there are all sorts of legal issues involved here but I believe there would be widespread support for the idea that parents should be made responsible for the crimes of their children and should be penalised when their children commit crimes. This is something which should be discussed, because I believe too many parents in our society have abandoned their children. They do not know where their children are and they do not care. When I was Minister for Justice many parents came to me from all over the city and further afield and said their children were in St. Patrick's institution for three or four days and they did not know anything about it. I usually asked them: "When your child did not turn up at home the first night did you inquire about it?" I very often got the reply: "No, but he often stayed out a few nights".
If that happened once or twice we would consider it isolated cases of unusually careless parents. But this happens so many times that I can only deduce that the habit is much more widespread than it ought to be and contributes seriously to crime and vandalism. Too many fathers, and mothers, too, spend too much time away from their children, not knowing what those children are doing. Too much time is spent in the wrong places. This is part of the wider problem which contributes most significantly to crime — the lowering of moral standards in the community generally, the abandonment of any sense of honesty, of right and wrong. We politicians must examine our own consciences in this regard. Are we giving the lead in the community? Are we saying "That is wrong, we will not do it.""That is dishonest, we will not do it."? Are we frequently doing the opposite — by our very example bringing out the worst in others? Crime is wrong, but it will flourish so long as the consensus in the community does not condemn it.
It is unfortunate but true that we are tolerant of crime. In some areas we admire it, sometimes secretly. The criminals in certain parts of the city are idolised. Ten or 15 years ago, when there also was high unemployment, we did not have the crime problem we have today. Ten or 15 years ago and before there was a sense of morality in the community, a sense of right and wrong. We politicians, as putative leaders of society, have a job to give example and must answer the question straight "Have we always given good example?". Perhaps I should put that into the present tense "Are we being honest, are we giving good example?" We politicians, the church and the media have a role to play in restoring to society the sense of right and wrong, or increasing it. To do that would be better than recruiting 10,000 extra gardaí. We will need a sense of morality more and more as the unemployment figures rise and the crime rate with them. People can justify crime when there is no sense of right and wrong. That is the difference between the present day and ten or 15 years ago.
Meanwhile, we must deal urgently with the symptoms of this terrible crime rate. The Minister will forgive me for being perhaps a little cynical at the announcement of his campaign against crime on 17 May last, eight short days before by-election day in Dublin West. He will also forgive me for being cynical about his claim because no reference whatsoever was made to the need for legal changes or his plans for legal changes — plans which six short weeks before he had promised the Garda Representative Body Annual Conference, and, if I am not mistaken, the Sergeants' and Inspectors' Annual Conference would be introduced in the near future. A publicity programme is announced, without one word about changes in the law.
I was speaking earlier about honesty and dishonesty. Has this not to do with the real politics of this Dáil, the fear that perhaps The Workers' Party will not support him, or Deputy Gregory will not support him, or perhaps that we will pull the wool over his eyes and trip him up?
Perhaps Deputy Mitchell will not support me.
That is what I said.
That would be the problem.
I am glad that the Minister has interjected. When I was in precisely the same situation as he is in now, depending on similar support, I did not baulk at making preparations and telling people about them. I was going to introduce legislation as soon as was practically possible, because I believe that it is vital and urgently necessary.
I have been told by the Garda Síochána on numerous occasions that they can scarcely continue for weeks, let along months, without new legislation, that the whole system has broken down. I cannot conceive of a situation where my successor has not been given the same advice. Yet we will not have the legislation for which he himself pressed when in Opposition this side of the summer recess.
We will support legislation provided that it is protective and considerate of civil liberties and incorporates the necessary balancing measures. The crime situation in this city is beyond party-political differences. I am sorry that the Minister's interjection a moment ago betrayed the real reason for the absence of the promised legislation before this summer. At the earliest we will have this legislation in November or December. Meanwhile, people in the city — and the Minister knows the constituency as well as I — are being terrorised out of their houses, forced to live behind bars and barbed wire, living in fear, not just in isolated areas but in vast tracts of this city. I do not need to tell the Minister this — he is not a Deputy for Dublin but has enough Dublin Deputies in his own party. Deputy Briscoe, in particular, has articulated a particularly hard line on this matter. He was not slow to articulate that hard line up to 9 March, when there was a change of Government. I have not heard him articulating it so eloquently or convincingly since. This is an urgent matter and the Minister will have the full co-operation of this side of the House if he brings in legislation which adequately protects the civil liberties of the citizen.
Would the Deputy like to adjourn the debate?
Before the House rises, there is a certain matter within the jurisdiction of the Minister for Justice which the Minister might comment on in relation to a threatened go-slow by the training officers in Templemore Garda Training Centre. Could the Minister tell the House what is happening in this very serious matter?
That matter could not arise at this time.
It is very much within the jurisdiction of the Minister for Justice.
We do not have the time, Deputy. This is on account of the time.
I realise that, but perhaps the Minister would give an assurance that he will attend to the matter, which is very serious, in relation to his proposals to have as many people as possible going through the training school as quickly as possible.
The Deputy can be assured that I take a constant interest in my duties.
Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 4.02 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 22 June 1982.