, Limerick East): I move:
That a sum not exceeding £14,274,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1984, 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administered by that Office, and of the Public Record Office, and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of historical documents, etc., and for payment of a grant-in-aid.
Perhaps I should mention that responsibility for the Public Record Office was transferred from me to An Taoiseach by Government order dated 27 January 1984. Arrangements have been made between officials of the Department of the Taoiseach and my Department concerning the mechanics of the transfer. In any event, my reference just now and the reference in the heading to the Justice Vote, to that office and to the purchase of historical documents is the last such reference. In 1985 and subsequent years these items will be carried in the Vote for the Department of the Taoiseach.
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 £296,054,000, an increase of 8.5 per cent over the expenditure of £272,845,700 for these Votes in 1983, exclusive in each year of expenditure on the Public Record Office from 27 January to 31 December. The 1984 Estimate is made up as follows: Vote 22, Office of the Minister for Justice, £14,274,000; Vote 23, Garda Síochána, £220,988,000; Vote 24, Prisons, £46,168,000; Vote 25, Courts, £8,769,000; Vote 26, Land Registry and Registry of Deeds £5,745,000; Vote 27, Charitable Donations and Bequests, £110,000.
The element of expenditure which is greatest is pay and allowances etc., which account for 74 per cent of the total estimates and show an increase of 13 per cent compared with 1983.
The recently published 1983 Report on Crime of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána shows that 102,387 indictable offences were recorded. Of this figure of indictable offences, 2,306 were in respect of offences against the person, 41,364 were in respect of offences against property with violence, 58,283 were in respect of larcenies etc,, and the remaining 434 were in the miscellaneous category. The largest increase was in the category of offences against property with violence where 4,904 extra offences were recorded — an increase of 13.5 per cent. Offences against the person increased by 31 — a 1.4 per cent increase. Overall there was a 4.9 per cent increase in reported indictable crimes. The rate of increase, however, continues to show a reduction. The figure of 4.9 per cent for 1983 compares with 9.2 per cent in 1982 and 22.8 per cent in 1981. This is a very welcome trend and is an encouragement both to the Garda and to the general public alike to strive towards an even greater improvement in the future.
I emphasised during my contribution to the budget debate earlier this year that the need for most of the money provided in my area in the Estimates for 1984 arises from the existence of crime. At a time when scarce resources are needed for the health and welfare of our people, and for the provision of much-needed jobs, it is disheartening to have to say that the cost to the Exchequer of the various State services involved in the crime area is continuing to increase.
It is important to remember at the same time that it is only a minority that is contributing to crime and vandalism. The vast majority of our people are decent, law-abiding citizens who want to be able to live and work in peace free from any threats of violence to themselves, their families or their homes. Their basic right to do so has been increasingly challenged by criminal elements in recent years. I want to say very firmly, however, that this Government have a positive commitment to ensuring that everything necessary is done to maintain standards of law and order and that those who disregard the law will not be allowed to have their way.
The Government consider it a top priority that people should be able to go about their everyday business safe and secure in the knowledge that they and their property are protected in their homes and in the streets. We should remember, of course, that the protection of the public peace is the concern of all citizens and that there is an obligation on each and every person to assist and co-operate with the Garda in their efforts to prevent crime and vandalism. It is up to us all to take reasonable and sensible precautions to protect our property. The Garda are doing all they can in the fight against crime and lawlessness but they need the help and continuing support of the general public. I am quite satisfied that an increased awareness by the public of their duty to uphold the law and to protect themselves and their property would make a valuable contribution to tackling the crime situation. Needless to say, however, the first requirement is a well-manned, well-trained and well-equipped police force and it is my firm determination and that of the Government to ensure that the Garda Síochána have all the resources they need to uphold the law and to protect the citizens from those who continue to commit crimes and inflict injury.
The overall provision for the Garda Síochána in 1984 is £220,988,000. The major items included in this figure are £170.65 million for salaries and allowances, including overtime; almost £28 million for the pensions of former members and widows of former members of the Garda Síochána; £8.1 million for travelling and subsistence expenses, training, compensation and a range of miscellaneous expenses; almost £6 million for Garda transport; and a total of almost £3 million for radio, computer and office equipment.
The sum of £11.1 million provided for overtime compares with expenditure of £10.9 million in 1983. The amount for salaries and allowances provides for the continuation of the Garda recruitment programme to bring the strength of the force up to 11,400 and maintain it at that level. Additional manpower is one of the measures necessary to deal with the crime situation and, in the light of the continuing need to bring about a substantial reduction in the incidence of crime, the current restrictions on recruitment to the public service generally are not being applied to the Garda Síochána. So far this year, 270 gardaí have been recruited and, having regard to the present level of wastage, I expect that total recruitment in 1984 will be of the order of 350. The actual strength of the force on 31 May 1984 was 11,374 including 226 members in training. Of course, the provision of extra gardaí is not the only measure necessary to combat crime. We have had a very substantial increase in Garda strength over a short period and the time is opportune to stand back and review the utilisation of resources to see where improvements can be made. We have a duty to see that the resources of the community are used as effectively as possible in dealing with the crime problem and providing an environment in which the public can go about their daily business without fear of attack on their person or their property.
Measures to deal with the criminal aspects of drug abuse are being kept under continuing review by the Garda authorities. There are permanent units of the Drug Squad in Dublin, Cork and Limerick and special emphasis is being placed on the role of all members of the force in the prevention and control of drug abuse. Apart from the training given to new recruits in anti-drugs work, about 1,600 members of the force, representative of all Garda divisions, have so far completed a special training course, which has been operating for over three years, and which is designed to ensure that participants are fully informed on various aspects of drug abuse, preventive measures and the special skills needed in investigations. Also, the use of dogs in drug detection work has been the subject of further examination by the Garda authorities. As present, there is only one dog in the Garda dog unit trained in drug detection work but three additional dogs have recently been acquired for such work. Three members of the force have been selected for training as dog handlers and the necessary training is under way. It is envisaged that these extra dogs will be used in Dublin and it is also proposed to acquire a dog for drug detection work in Cork.
As I indicated in my contribution to the budget debate on 2 February, there are two very important areas covered by the Garda Vote which show reduced allocations for 1984 as compared with expenditure in 1983 — transport and equipment. This situation does not reflect any decision to reduce expenditure on these items. The main reasons for the reduced provision in respect of transport are the advance purchase in December 1983 of cars planned for purchase in 1984 and the purchase in 1983 of Garda cars from funds originally earmarked for ministerial cars. The reduction under the heading of equipment arises because of the substantial investment of about £3.2 million in radio equipment towards the end of 1983 which enabled some equipment to be purchased outright rather than leased, as had originally been intended.
The increase in the strength of the Garda Síochána and the consequent increase in the cost of Garda manpower to the State make it all the more essential that we ensure that the Garda are organised and deployed in such a way as to provide the most effective police service possible. A new system of policing has been tried out on a pilot basis with a good deal of success for some time in two rural Garda Districts and the desirability of extending this system to other rural areas is being considered. No decision has yet been made to do so.
Approximately £6 million has already been spent on the new Garda communications network. It is expected to have the network operational in all Garda Divisions outside the Dublin Metropolitan Area within the coming months. The network for the Dublin area will include a computer-aided system to direct and control the most efficient use of all gardaí and patrol cars on operational duty. Tenders for the supply of the network for Dublin are being evaluated at present and the placing of a contract should be possible in the very near future. I have already drawn attention to the fact that the Estimate provision for radio equipment in 1984 is less than the expenditure last year. The reason for this, as I said, is that towards the end of 1983 it was possible to make funds available which enabled about £3.2 million worth of radio equipment to be purchased outright. This in turn meant that a reduction could be made in the amount required to finance the project during 1984, without in any way affecting the rate of progress on the network or slowing down momentum in any way.
The provision for Garda computer equipment for 1984 is also sufficient to permit a significant expansion in the computer network available to the force. Tenders for the supply of equipment to link a further number of stations to the Garda computer are under consideration at present and it is intended to place a contract shortly.
I wish now to refer briefly to the system of promotion within the Garda Síochána. Sound personnel policies are essential for the success of any organisation. Having regard to the size of the Garda Síochána, its complexity as an organisation, the vital nature of the duties entrusted to it and the ways in which these can impinge on each and every one of us, it is of particular importance that the Garda Síochána should have an enlightened and effective promotion policy and system. It is essential that the system should succeed in selecting the most able officers to provide first class leadership and that it should enjoy the confidence and support of the general membership who will be aspiring to promotion. I am very pleased, therefore, to have been able to approve of the introduction of a new promotion scheme for the Garda Síochána, which is designed to achieve these twin aims and which has the full backing of the Garda Commissioner and of all the Garda Staff Associations. The operation of the scheme is being monitored by a Promotions Advisory Council, which includes suitably qualified persons from outside the force, and I am confident that under its general direction the new scheme will contribute in a very real way to the general well-being and efficiency of the force.
Training is another area of vital importance to the success of the Garda Síochána. Certain proposals relating to the review and improvement of Garda training generally are at present under discussion, but I do not propose to make any public statement about the matter at this stage. I can say, however, that the financial resources provided for Garda training are adequate to meet all present requirements.
I propose now to make some comments on prisons. The total net allocation on the Prisons Vote is £46,168,000, an increase of almost 10 per cent on the 1983 net outturn of £41,973,000. The main portions of this allocation are devoted to expenditure on salaries, wages and allowances and to capital expenditure on the Department's building programme for new prisons and places of detention — 55 per cent and 25 per cent respectively.
Expenditure on prisons overtime in 1983 was £7,305,000. The provision for prisons overtime in 1984 is £6.5 million. This represents an 11 per cent reduction on the overtime outturn for 1983. Measures have been taken recently which will lead to a reduction in overtime working in the prison service. Further measures which will have to be taken if expenditure is to be kept within the £6.5 million allocated will require careful consideration.
The allocation of £11.490 million made to prisons capital programme for 1984 is the same amount as was allocated in 1983. The main thrust of the programme will be directed towards a place of detention and a prison planned for Wheatfield, Clondalkin, County Dublin, where, to cope with the need for additional custodial accommodation, places are being provided for over 450 offenders. It is hoped to commence building the larger of the two very shortly and to make a start on the second later this year. Consideration is also being given to whether it may be possible, within the confines of the programme, to bring design work to completion this year on new custodial accommodation in Cork for about 200. Actual construction work would take about three years to complete and would have to be staged to correspond with the availability of finance for the total capital programme over the next few years.
Work will continue in 1984 on the provision of facilities for work, work training, education and recreation for offenders at Limerick Prison and on consolidating the perimeter wall of Mountjoy prison. Work will commence soon on the extension of the women's prison in Mountjoy and I hope that similar work on the women's prison in Limerick will be feasible later in the year. These extensions will provide much needed extra recreational and occupational facilities for women prisoners, as well as extra custodial capacity.
On 1 June there were two fillable vacancies for prison service grade staff on an authorised establishment of 1,562. Thus, 1,560 staff were supervising 1,643 offenders, a ratio of 0.95 staff to one offender. The ratio of staff to offender varies from institution to institution and is determined by the needs of the individual institutions having regard to security, services, regimes, etc. The staffing needs of a high security prison are obviously much greater than those of, say, the open institution.
The Estimates also make provision on the non-pay, non-capital side for a daily average of 1,578 prisoners in custody. This projection represents an increase of 11 per cent on the 1983 daily average of 1,418. In fact, it appears that it will be very much on the low side as the number in custody at present is regularly well over 1,600. The higher numbers in custody obviously add to expenditure as prisoners must be clothed and fed and provided with various services. The estimates on the non-pay non-capital side show an increase of 16 per cent on the 1983 provision and I am satisfied that this is as small an increase as can be achieved taking into account increases in the cost of living and the increased numbers being accommodated in the prisons.
The continued pressure on accommodation shows no signs of easing. I am constantly looking at ways of further increasing the available accommodation in the prisons and places of detention. Despite the considerable increase in the daily average being catered for, there is unfortunately a continuing need to "shed" prisoners in advance of their normal release date. I dealt with this matter in my contribution to the budget debate and all I can do now is repeat that everything possible is being done to minimise the practice. Towards this end a re-organisation of some probation and welfare officers' case-loads took place towards the end of last year and this has enabled a significantly greater number of prisoners to be released under supervision. This is a practice which benefits both the prisoner and society and at present the number under such supervision in the community is 339.
In the long term I believe that only the wider use of alternatives to imprisonment will stem the flow of committals to custody. The Criminal Justice (Community Service Order) Act, 1983, which gives the courts power to make community service orders will be brought into operation as soon as the necessary probation and welfare service staff are recruited and trained. Regulations under the Act and Rules of Court are currently being prepared.
Speaking of the probation and welfare service I should point out that at present about 2,200 offenders are on probation and under other supervision from the courts. This is a significant number of offenders and it is the policy of my Department to develop probation as a viable alternative to imprisonment. Towards this end my Department, through the service, is actively encouraging the establishment in various parts of the country by voluntary community groups of hostels, day-centres and workshops to which offenders, especially young offenders, can be referred. Already several such centres have been established and more are planned. The total provision in the Estimates for probation hostels and workshops is almost £1 million.
The Estimates also make provision for education and work training programmes in the prisons. I attach great importance to these programmes as it is through them that efforts are made to improve the prisoner as a person and give him skills which he did not have before. On the education side over 80 teachers, mainly from local vocational education committees, provide tuition for offenders in all the institutions. General school subjects are taught but the more typical subject areas are literacy, social education, art, physical education, languages, woodwork, drama and music. It is interesting to note that the prisons education programme is the largest single adult education sector in the country and I am anxious to see it continuing to develop so that it can adequately respond to the educational needs of prisoners.
Improvements are planned for this year, and this applies particularly to library facilities and the continued improvement of library stock. I would like to take this opportunity to place on record my appreciation of the co-operation my Department have received over the years from the various vocational education committees, who pay the teachers' salaries, the local library authorities in the development of the education and library services in the prisons, and the many other individuals and organisations involved in the education programme.
On the work-training side, the programme consists of intensive industrial training on AnCO lines at the Training Unit, Glengarriff Parade, and occupational work at all institutions to meet the needs of offenders for occupation and training. There are plans to develop this programme by expanding industrial training in engineering and electronics and by introducing construction and catering training. This development is being helped by support being obtained from the European Social Fund. Workshop activities are also being developed to provide occupation for offenders, and emphasis is being placed on using workshop resources to help disadvantaged persons in the community. I would like to place on record my appreciation of the help secured from AnCO in the development of the work-training programme in the prisons and places of detention.
The House will be aware that I have recently established a Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System under the chairmanship of Dr. T.K. Whitaker. The committee's terms of reference are such that the committee will be able to carry out a thorough investigation into the penal system. I am sure that Deputies will join with me in wishing this committee well. I can tell the House that the committee have already made considerable progress with their formidable task. Their report is likely to be a blue print for policy in the penal area up to the end of the century and beyond.
I come now to the area of my Department's responsibilities relating to the courts, the overall provision for which is £8,769,000 in 1984, an increase of 14 per cent on the 1983 provision. 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, as far as practicable, all courts and court offices are enabled to function effectively. A matter of particular concern to me at present is the delays which in recent years have developed in relation to the hearing of High Court jury actions and criminal and civil business at a number of Circuit Court venues.
In relation to the High Court in Dublin, the problem of delay can best be dealt with by having a sufficient number of jury courtrooms at the Four Courts to deal with the volume of cases being entered, and I am hopeful that this situation will shortly come about. Work has recently commenced on the provision of two extra courtrooms for the High Court in accommodation which was freed by moving some High Court Offices out of the Four Courts Building to an office block at Dolphin House, the former Dolphin Hotel, in Essex Street. One of these courtrooms will have jury facilities, and I expect that they will both be ready for use in the near future.
A further encouraging factor is that the statistics for the 1983 legal year, that is, the year ended 31 July 1983, show some significant improvements in the state of High Court business. The main features are: (a) an increase of 33 per cent in the number of jury actions disposed of during the year — 3,107 as compared with 2,328 in the previous year, (b) an increase of 61 per cent in the number of non-jury common law actions disposed of — 503 as compared with 312 in the previous year, (c) a reduction from 22 months to 20 months in the average delay from the date of setting down to the date of hearing in the case of jury actions and from 15 months to 13 months in the case of non-jury actions.
While these improvements can be attributed to several factors I think it appropriate to pay tribute to the President of the High Court for his special efforts, and also to the judges and court officers concerned, whose co-operative approach in this matter has been very significant.
In Cork the delay in hearing High Court jury actions has, in recent times, become somewhat more serious than elsewhere and, as a result, the President of the High Court has increased the number of sitting days in Cork by some 50 per cent during the present legal year, which commenced on 3 October last. It is my earnest hope that the extra sitting days will reduce the arrears to a more acceptable level, and in this connection I would appeal to the local practitioners to give some consideration to the views expressed at a symposium held by the Law Society on "Courts and Courts Administration" at which more than one speaker attributed the delays in the High Court in Cork to the unwillingness of practitioners there to settle cases. While there are some delays in hearing cases at other major centres at which High Court jury actions are held they are not as serious as the delays in Dublin and in Cork.
In relation to the Circuit Court I am aware that there are serious delays in some circuits, and the Government recently appointed an additional circuit judge whose services will be available where necessary. At present he is sitting in Cork, where the arrears are heaviest.
As far as the District Court is concerned considerable progress has been made in clearing the backlog of civil and family business which had accumulated during the District Court clerks dispute.
A computer system in the Dublin Metropolitan District which has been issuing Garda summonses for the city Garda stations has been extended so that Garda summonses and court lists for all of Dublin city and county are now computerised. This has led to a substantial saving in time both for the courts staff and for the Garda Síochána.
As regards the operation of the courts, one of the greatest problems continues to be 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, and most Deputies will be familiar with problems of this kind in their own areas. However, there have been improvements in a number of cases. The reinstatement of Waterford courthouse was completed in autumn 1982 and the new courthouse which Wicklow County Council is providing in Bray is expected to be ready for use very shortly.
Carlow and Laois County Councils have carried out quite extensive repairs and improvements to Carlow and Portlaoise courthouses. Other local authorities are dealing with less extensive works on an ongoing basis, but naturally progress in this area is affected by the current financial situation. Restoration of the fire-damaged courthouse in Monaghan is expected to begin this year, and I am hopeful that Cavan County Council will be able to make a start this year on the major works required in Cavan courthouse.
In Dublin work has started on the development of the Four Courts Hotel site 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. The office block project should be completed within three years, and conversion of the office space in the Four Courts will be put in hands as soon as possible after that.
The situation of the Children's Court in Dublin is a matter of some concern. The accommodation available to the court has been unsatisfactory for some years now, and the position deteriorated in November 1981 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, but this is proving unsatisfactory for a number of reasons. The Office of Public Works explored the suitability of a number of premises as permanent accommodation for the Children's Court without success. They now propose to adapt two houses at Smithfield to provide temporary accommodation for the court pending the provision of a purpose-built courthouse on an immediately adjoining site. I expect the temporary accommodation to be ready for use later this year and the purpose-built accommodation to be available by the end of next year.
Deputies will be aware that the money necessary to build the permanent Children's Court is being provided from the dormant funds of suitors in the High Court under a Bill — the Funds of Suitors Bill, 1984 — which recently passed all stages in this House. The new Children's Court complex will provide generous waiting and consultation facilities, with conference and duty rooms for probation and welfare officers. This will ensure that all who are concerned with the welfare of children appearing before the courts will be adequately facilitated. The plans will include separate waiting areas for gardaí, witnesses and for members of the public. There will be two courtrooms and judges' rooms. In addition to two consultation and welfare officers' rooms, a retiring room for solicitors will be provided.
The 1984 provision for civil legal aid is £1.34 million which represents a small increase of £40,000 on the total grant paid to the Legal Aid Board in 1983. This increase, however, will not allow for any significant expansion of the board's services and I do not expect that the board will be in a position to open any new law centres during 1984 from this allocation.
I am very concerned about the difficulties which face the board at the present time arising from the current staffing embargo in the public service, which is having a serious effect on the level of service which the board can offer to the public. As a result of recent discussions which I have had with the Minister for the Public Service, the Legal Aid Board are proceeding to fill some solicitor vacancies which are currently embargoed, and I hope this will effect some improvement in the overall situation.
The 1984 provision for criminal legal aid shows no increase on last year's allocation of £1.85 million. Included in this amount is the cost of paying value-added tax, currently at 23 per cent on legal fees payable under the scheme, which is ultimately recouped to the Exchequer. I might add that my Department are proceeding with an examination of the scheme to see what changes may be needed in the present arrangements for providing criminal legal aid, including changes needed to eliminate possible abuses of the scheme.
Deputies will be aware that the Minister for Justice has a special position in relation to the law and its reform, more so perhaps than any other Minister of the Government, since I have responsibility for a fairly wide area of the law. However, as I explained on this occasion last year, a particular difficulty presents itself here, one to which my predecessors have drawn attention before. As the Ceann Comhairle will confirm, it is not in order for a Deputy to advocate legislation in an Estimates debate. Accordingly, even if it were within the rules of this House for me to make a statement in relation to any particular item of legislation for which I have responsibility, it would be inappropriate since Deputies would not have the opportunity to deal with the matter. I will, therefore, say no more on the subject of law reform other than that legislative proposals which I have under consideration will be brought to the notice of the House in the usual way when I am in a position to announce them.
Another area for which I have responsibility is the work of the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds. The main bulk of the 1984 provision of £5,745,000 for the registries — over 87 per cent — is in respect of salaries. The provision for overtime in 1984 is £100,000, or 1.9 per cent of the total pay provision. This represents a further step in a pattern of diminishing overtime in recent years. For example, expenditure on overtime accounted for 8.8 per cent of the total expenditure on pay in 1978. The corresponding figures for 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983 were 4.6 per cent, 4.1 per cent, 3.5 per cent, 2.7 per cent and 2.5 per cent respectively. Most of the expenditure on overtime is incurred in the Land Registry. The total number of applications in the main categories of work lodged in the Land Registry in 1978 was approximately 185,000. The average lodgment during the years 1979 to 1983 was just over 212,000 with the lodgment for 1983 being 232,000 — an increase of 25 per cent compared with 1978. On the other hand, the staffing in 1983 for the same categories of work showed an increase of only 3 per cent over the 1978 establishment.
The Land Registry is required to be self-supporting under section 14 subsection (2) of the Registration of Title Act, 1964, which came into operation on 1 January 1967. Regular analyses of income and expenditure and adjustments of fees are carried out to ensure that this legal requirement is fulfilled. The most recent change in the fees structure became operative on 1 March 1984. In my contribution to the budget debate in February I gave details of the fees and how they compared with the fees operative in 1967. The comparison showed that the 1984 fees would have been significantly higher had the 1967 fees been used as a base and the fees been adjusted regularly in the meantime in accordance with the rate of inflation. I also provided details of delays in the main categories of work which showed that the registry was continuing to provide a reasonable public service in most areas.
It is fair, I think, to conclude that the Land Registry is giving its fee-paying public good value for money. That is not to say that there is not room for improvement; I am well aware that there is, particularly in the areas of first registration and cases involving extensive examination of title such as applications for the registration of title acquired by possession, in which there are long delays at present. Proposals have been prepared for some time which would involve a rearrangement and speeding up of the way these cases are processed in the Land Registry but as the implementation of the proposals would require a certain amount of staff restructuring it has not been possible to proceed with them because of the general Civil Service staffing embargo. However, even if there were no staffing restrictions and no matter what rearrangement or restructuring is carried out there are unavoidable delays built into the processing of these applications; for example, notice has to be served on possible interested parties in many cases and the notices may occasion objections or replies which can lead to time-consuming correspondence.
I have to say, also, that delays are often caused by the manner in which applications are presented to the Land Registry. Here I must give credit to the Incorporated Law Society for having organised during 1983, with the co-operation of the Land Registry, a series of seminars for solicitors which were addressed by Land Registry officials with the aim of minimising the need for queries on applications, thus reducing the time taken in dealing with them. Seminars were held in Cork, Kerry, Clare, Galway, Mayo and Sligo during 1983 and I am sure that further seminars will be organised if there is perceived to be a need for them.
The central office of the Land Registry is at present located in three buildings — in Chancery Street, in the Setanta Centre and in Bow Street. Efficiency would be improved if all the staff could be accommodated in one building. However, unfortunately this is a long-term prospect.
The computerisation of the Land Registry folios which commenced in December 1982 is proceeding although at a slower pace than I would wish because of losses of staff under the embargo on the filling of vacancies. Nonetheless, it is now expected that all the Dublin folios will be computerised in less than a year's time. It was decided to start with the Dublin folios because there are no duplicate folios available for Dublin as there are in the local offices of the other counties. A decision will be taken in the next few months as to the manner in which the programme will be extended into the rest of the country. The computerisation of the folios is a very big step forward for the Land Registry in this age of rapidly-developing technology. When the through-put of over a quarter of a million applications a year is taken into account, the retrieval of documents has been a huge and ever-increasing problem for the registry — and, of course, its customers — over the years. The significance of the fact that a document will be available for inspection, or as a copy, at literally the push of a button cannot be over-rated.
While proposals for major improvements in both the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds are at present in abeyance because of the embargo, the organisation and procedures in both offices are being examined on a continuing basis and every effort is being made to increase efficiency within the existing constraints. One particular initiative which I think worthy of mention is the setting up of an Image Committee in the Land Registry in July 1982. The membership of the committee is representative of most sections of the staff and its terms of reference were to activate and promote interest among the members of the staff in the improvement of the overall image presented by the registry in its daily dealings with the public and the service it offers them. Several recommendations have been made by the committee some of which it has already been possible to implement. The committee will be a continuing feature of the Land Registry operation in its efforts to provide as participative and effective an answer as possible to the challenge of public service.
The remarks which I have made in the course of this address do not, of course, constitute an exhaustive description of all the work and services provided for in Votes 22 to 27, inclusive. I welcome Deputies to comment on any aspects of the Votes, however, and, as I said at the start of my remarks, I shall endeavour to answer any questions raised.