Vol. 337 No. 4
asked the Minister for Justice if he will give details of any public relations contracts which he has placed since his appointment indicating in particular the names of the persons or firms involved, the length of the contracts and the contract sums or consultancy fees.
2.
asked the Minister for Justice the cost of the current campaign disseminating information regarding the activities of his Department.
3.
asked the Minister for Justice the cost to the State of the advertising campaign conducted between 4 and 25 May, 1982; and if he will give figures for the amount incurred for newspaper, radio and television advertising and for the distribution of leaflets throughout the constituency of Dublin West.
4.
asked the Minister for Justice the estimated cost to his Department arising from advertising in national newspapers between 20 and 25 May, 1982; the contents of such advertisements; the reason for their publication, and whether further such advertisements will be published during the next 12 months.
5.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will give details of any public relations contract entered into by his Department since his appointment or of any public relations personnel employed by, attached or seconded to his Department since his appointment, indicating in particular the names of the persons or firms involved, the nature of the contracts, if any, entered into and the contract sums, consultancy fees, or salaries paid or being paid.
6.
asked the Minister for Justice the moneys, if any, which have been set aside in his Department for public relations or advertising purposes; the amount of expenditure incurred by his Department in this area to date; and the total projected expenditure in 1982 covering all matters such as advertising on both radio and television in national and local newspapers and correspondence directly related to any advertising or publicity campaign.
7.
asked the Minister for Justice the reasons for his present publicity campaign in respect of crime and vandalism; whether crime and vandalism has decreased as a result of this campaign; or whether he believes it will decrease in the future as a consequence of the campaign.
8.
asked the Minister for Justice (a) the cost of his present campaign to alert people to the level of crime and lawlessness; (b) if any measurable impact of the campaign is evident; and (c) when the campaign is due to end.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, together.
The reasons why I launched a national campaign against crime and vandalism were set out fully in my statement of 17 May 1982, a copy of which has been placed in the Oireachtas Library. In brief, I have launched the campaign because of my concern about the increase in crime in general and vandalism in particular. I believe that it is important that people be fully aware of the trend towards crime and that they fully realise the contribution they should be making to prevent it in co-operation with the gardaí.
The campaign is but one of a number of measures which I am taking to combat crime, and quite clearly it would not be possible to state the beneficial effect of any one measure. I have no doubt, however, that the campaign will make a significant contribution to crime prevention. From the response I have received to the campaign it is clear that the public have in general reacted favourably.
The cost of the advertising campaign will be almost £150,000 plus VAT, which figure is made up as follows:
Television, £38,850; Radio, £9,720; Newspapers, £19,846; Agency Service Fee, £3,420; Production, £22,000; Campaign research and design, printing and distribution of leaflets and general information, £56,000.
Costings in respect of particular electoral areas are not available as the campaign was not organised on the basis of electoral areas.
The firm involved in the campaign is Des O'Meara & Partners Ltd., 23 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2. My Department have not entered into any other public relations contract since my appointment and no public relations personnel have been employed, attached or seconded to my Department in that period.
The publicity programme has concluded. As part of my campaign against crime I propose to have organised in the autumn, projects in schools and a suggestion scheme for the general public on the subject of crime prevention. In addition, a schools lecture programme by members of the Garda, which has already commenced, will be continuing and there will also be a programme of lectures to community groups, local clubs and such bodies.
In most of the Votes for which I am responsible expenditure on advertising and public relations is not provided for separately in the Estimates but is included in the incidental expenses provisions for each Vote. The only exception is the Garda Vote in which estimates of £45,000 for advertising and newspapers, £10,000 for exhibitions and £2,000 for public relations literature were made when the total Estimate was being formulated. The amount paid out this year for advertising, etc. is approximately £6,000 and a claim for another £6,000 is being processed. Accounts for the cost of the special campaign are now coming in and they will be processed in due course. It is not possible at this stage to make a projection of actual expenditure for the year under the various Votes for which I am responsible.
Will the Minister confirm that it was O'Meara and Company who were responsible for the distribution of letters by hand at doors throughout the country? When the Minister became involved in this campaign, why did he not use the ordinary postal services for the distribution of the literature?
The cost would have been in the region of £80,000.
Will the Minister give us the exact cost of the door to door distribution of personal letters from him? Would he name the agency concerned, and say if it was the O'Meara agency, and why did he not use the Post Office services for such distribution?
This service has been used on a number of occasions in the past by different bodies. I have said that the cost of distribution through the Post Office would have been £80,000. The cost of the campaign research and design, printing and distribution of leaflets and general information was £56,000.
Would the Minister agree that it is not in order or proper to compare a payment to an outside firm with the payment falling due between two Departments?
I have been trying to explain that such a service exists.
In view of the terms of reference of the Broadcasting Authority, would the Minister agree that the Bishop of Galway, when advertising on TV, has been described as the chairman of Trócaire? Would the Minister comment on the lawfulness of a Member of Dáil Éireann advertising on radio or television?
I am satisfied that what I did was correct.
Would the Minister agree that in a situation where the Post Office is in deficit and where in the first half of this year there has been a fall off of at least £5 million in Post Office revenue receipts, the giving of £56,000 to a private firm to distribute personal letters from him in the letter boxes of the major cities was wrong and that that money should have gone to the Post Office as a State expenditure on a transfer payment, as Deputy Cooney rightly pointed out, and retained within the State Exchequer funds? Would the Minister agree that such a proposition by the Minister of expenditure of £56,000 is wholly unwarranted irrespective of the merits or otherwise of this campaign?
It would take another £24,000 on top of the £56,000 to do that.
I would like the Minister to clarify the total cost of this exercise which I regard as a cynical exercise in self projection. What is the total cost of this advertising campaign? The Minister referred to a figure of £150,000. He now refers to £56,000 for the distribution of envelopes containing the letters from the Minister. Is that £56,000 included in the £150,000 or is it additional to the £150,000? What is the total cost?
I have already stated that the £56,000 includes the distribution of letters and other related matters.
With respect to this £56,000, is that included in the £150,000 or is the Minister telling us it has to be added on to it so that at this stage the campaign has cost in excess of £200,000? Is it £150,000 plus £56,000?
I have given the cost of what has been done already—television £38,850; radio, £9,720; newspapers, £19,846; agency service fee, £3,420; production, £22,000; campaign research and design, printing and distribution of leaflets and general information, £56,000.
I must say I was not watching this question and I am only just learning about these events now. Would the Minister agree that we have reached an outlandish position in this State when it is actually cheaper for a Minister to use a commercial service to deliver mail than to use a service which the State provides? If it is true — and this is without prejudice to the points which the Labour Deputies are making which also have large substance in them — is it not a strong case for saying that the people could be saved money all around the place by breaking in on the State's monopolies that are so impossibly dear? Does the Minister not think it is outlandish that he cannot afford to use the services that one of his own colleagues is providing?
The service that was given by this agency was such that the numbers and the volume of literature involved could be got to individual houses on a much more concentrated basis than would normally be the case.
Would the Minister accept that an untutored visitor from abroad would feel that this campaign has more to do with boosting the political profile of the Minister and his colleagues than with any serious attempt to deal with the crime problem? Would he feel that such a visitor might be helped to that conclusion by the fact that this campaign, and certainly the distribution of the leaflets, began first in Dublin West? Would he also agree that he might be assisted in reaching that conclusion by the fact that in parts of Dublin south county these leaflets have been distributed in conjunction with leaflets recommending people to contribute to the Fianna Fáil national collection?
I would not.
The Minister blatantly admits that it is cheaper to employ an outside agency than to put mail through the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Would he not agree that this gives rise to the comment by the trade unions who at the moment are apprehensive about the Department of Posts and Telegraphs going semi-State, that this is a new problem developing? Does the Minister agree that this is a very dangerous thing for him to do in the very sensitive times that we are in? Would the Minister clarify whether the money paid to radio was paid to Radio Éireann or was it also paid to pirate radios? Would the Minister also clarify whether this is a once off thing with Mr. Martin O'Meara and that Mr. O'Meara's company is not pumping money back into the Fianna Fáil election campaign?
I am satisfied that the method adopted to circulate the literature in question was the proper and correct one. Other matters that the Deputy has raised would be more appropriately asked of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. The pirate radio was not used or paid for out of any of those moneys.
Did the Minister's decision to use a private agency have Government approval? Second, when the Minister decided not to use the Department of Posts and Telegraphs did he put the question of distributing the literature out for tender?
The decision to circulate the literature in question the way it was circulated was the decision of Mr. Des O'Meara and Company.
Deputy Harte asked the question that I intended asking but the Minister has not answered it. I want to know if the £9,000 in the figures he read out for radio advertising was or is being paid to Radio Éireann or are there any other radio interests involved?
If the Deputy is trying to establish whether pirate radio was used, the answer is no.
I am calling the next question. I am not allowing any more supplementaries on this.
On a point of order, I raised no supplementary and there was a series of nine questions.
I have allowed 13 supplementaries. There are 166 people here and if everybody wanted to ask a supplementary it does not mean that everybody is entitled to do so. I tried to ensure that Members from the Labour Party and Fine Gael got an opportunity.
On a point of order, as we have never before in my experience of Question Time gone through nine questions while you have been in the Chair, surely you are not trying to set a new precedent this morning?
I am now on Question No. 9.
In view of the incomplete nature of the replies by the Minister for Justice I propose to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
I would like to conjoin with Deputy Harte on this matter and also raise these questions on the Adjournment.
