Bertie Ahern
Ceist:1 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach the work recently completed and currently on hand by the Law Reform Commission; and the new tasks, if any, that the commission has been charged with by the current Government. [6613/96]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers - Law Reform Commission Work Programme.
Willie O'Dea
Ceist:2 Mr. O'Dea asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself with the output of the Law Reform Commission; if not, the proposals, if any, he has to improve the output; if he has further satisfied himself with the progress made in implementing the proposals of the Law Reform Commission; if not, the proposals, if any, he has in this regard; and the plans, if any, he has to establish a separate criminal law commission. [7104/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
Since the publication of the Law Reform Commission's 1994 annual report on 31 August 1995 the commission has completed the following three reports: (1) Report on An Examination of The Law of Bail, published in September 1995; (2) Report on Intoxication, published in November 1995; and (3) Report on Family Courts to be published shortly. I also expect, very shortly, to receive the commission's 1995 annual report.
I propose to circulate in the Official Report details of work in progress by the commission, which, in the main is ongoing work arising from its First Programme for Law Reform approved by the Government and published in 1977. The Government will be giving particular attention to the formulation of a second work programme for the commission in the context of the renewal of the commission whose term of office, with the exception of that of the president, expires at the end of this year. The Attorney General has already had informal consultations with the president and members of the commission on the matter.
To date the commission has formulated 52 reports containing proposals for reform of the law, 11 working papers, nine consultation papers and 16 annual reports. This is a formidable achievement. Responsibility for implementation of the commission's recommendations is a matter for individual Departments. Progress continues to be made in that regard and this is reflected in the commission's annual reports. There are no plans to establish a separate criminal law commission.
I would like to take this opportunity to put on record my appreciation, and that of the Government, for the valuable reports and papers which the commission has produced in the last 20 years.
Some time ago the Taoiseach expressed dissatisfaction in the House with the Report of the Law Reform Commission in relation to the question of bail. Did the Taoiseach ask the commission to consider this matter again? Does he accept that the absence of a clear Government policy on and commitment to this matter gives the impression that the Government is not serious about combating crime?
I did not express dissatisfaction with the commission in regard to their report on bail, I expressed concern about a report which did not contain recommendations, and the reason that report did not contain recommendations was that the Government of the day did not ask for them. That was an omission on behalf of the then Government. When asking for such a comprehensive report it would have been more sensible for that Government, if it was concerned about the bail issue, to ask the commission, in addition to producing what is a very useful dissertation on the subject of bail, to produce recommendations for action. That omission on the part of the Government, not of the commission, was the cause of my comment.
I imagine the previous Government, when it asked the Law Reform Commission to examine the question of bail, allowed the commission, as is normally the case, to use its best judgment, which it does very well. My recollection is that the Taoiseach criticised the report produced by the commission. Did he ask the commission again to make recommendations on that report, if that was what he found objectionable with it, and what is the Government's view on the matter?
The best course is the one the Government is following, that is using the report which has been presented, a very through report in so far as it describes the position and the legal options, as the basis for recommendations which the Government would formulate on the matter rather than send it back to the commission. That is the most expeditious way of dealing with the matter now. It is regrettable the then Government did not ask the commission to make recommendations, but that is not a big problem at this stage. Now that we have the report let us deal with it in the way I have described. The Government will consider this matter quite soon. It recognises there is concern about offences committed while on bail and will address that matter shortly.
The Taoiseach said that the term of office of the Law Reform Commission will expire later this year. Is the President of the Law Reform Commission free to engage in party political fund raising?
That should be appropriately the subject of a separate question.
Can the Taoiseach not answer it?
The requirements in regard to any matter concerning the conduct of members of commissions is laid down in legislation and if Deputy Harney consults that legislation she may find the answer to her question. If, however, she chooses to put down a parliamentary question on the topic it will be answered.
Given the events of recent days and the Taoiseach's strong defence of the chairperson of the Independent Radio and Television Commission, is he aware that the Tánaiste took a very strong view when the former President of the Law Reform Commission expressed views that he did not like. He felt it was inappropriate for a person in that position to express publicly any political view. Is the current president — this will apply also to his successor — entitled to express political views and to fund raise on behalf of a political party?
The Deputy will recollect that the circumstances to which she referred were not ones where I had accountability. I was not in Government at the time.
I am asking for the Taoiseach's view, he is now in Government.
I did not express any views at the time about the President of the Law Reform Commission, even though I would not be required to answer for it here in my present capacity. If the Deputy is concerned about the engagement of the President of the Law Reform Commission in matters of current controversy or in regard to any other matter where she might feel there was a constraint that ought to be imposed on the President of the commission, the appropriate way to deal with it would be to propose an amendment to the legislation to impose such constraints as the Deputy feels are appropriate in the case. That option is open to her. I have also invited the Deputy to put down parliamentary questions if she wishes to raise this matter in a more substantive way. I am answering questions here about the general work programme of the commission and I want to put on the record of the House my appreciation and that of the Government of the valuable reports and papers the commission has produced over the past 20 years. That includes the work it did during the tenure of office of all the members of the commission during that time.
A number of Deputies are offering but we should bear in mind that there are only 30 minutes available for dealing with questions to the Taoiseach. I want to facilitate as many Deputies as possible. I am calling Deputy O'Dea who tabled Question No. 2.
I wrote down what the Taoiseach said at the time in relation to referring the question of bail to the Law Reform Commission. He described the decision of the then Government to refer the matter of bail to the Law Reform Commission as "a delaying tactic". Has the Taoiseach taken the opportunity to revise his opinion on the propriety of referring matters such as this to the Law Reform Commission?
I believe it was a delaying tactic on the part of the previous Government which could have dealt with the matter. That is not a reflection on the Law Reform Commission; it is a reflection on the previous Government.
Why will this Government not deal with the matter? It now has the report.
If the matter was as urgent as the party now in Opposition says it is, it would have dealt with it rather than sending it to the Law Reform Commission requesting a report but without asking that body to make recommendations on it. The Government is dealing with the matter as it finds it now. We have a valuable report, although it does not contain recommendations, and rather than sending the matter back to the commission a second time, as the Deputy's Leader suggested, the Government will take its own decisions on the matter and make recommendations to the House in due course.
The Taoiseach knows that various people, including members of the legal profession and criminologists, hold differing views on bail. At that time, I was strongly in favour of dealing with the matter, and that is still my opinion, but others believed it was better to ask the Law Reform Commission to write a comprehensive report. As the Taoiseach said the report is very useful but will he consider asking the Law Reform Commission to examine our conspiracy laws and the adequacy of existing legislation to deal with drugs, particularly in light of what the Minister for Justice and I have seen in the United States? Will he agree that our society should not tolerate a situation where the drug barons are well known and living a lifestyle well beyond their obvious means? That does not happen in other countries and, if the Government is interested in tackling crime, it would be a positive step towards addressing this issue. Other jurisdictions operate a system of zero tolerance to crime; we seem to tolerate all crime in this country.
I thank Deputy Ahern for his insight to what took place when the previous Government decided to refer the matter of bail to the Law Reform Commission rather than deal with it itself.
It was not a delaying tactic.
I have no reason to doubt the Deputy's version of events and I am prepared to accept that, notwithstanding collective responsibility, he was in favour of getting on with the matter but the majority of the then Government wanted to refer it to the Law Reform Commission.
The Taoiseach is not prepared to get on with it.
That is an interesting insight and I thank the Deputy——
The Taoiseach is afraid of the Labour Party.
——for that little glimpse of what was happening at the time. In regard to the second part of the Deputy's question concerning conspiracy law, I will consider carefully what he said because I have no doubt the subject matter about which he is concerned is serious. The suggestions he made are constructive and I will discuss them with the Minister for Justice and, if necessary, the Attorney General and the Law Reform Commission. My own recollection as a student of law is that offences of conspiracy are notoriously vague and potentially oppressive in their effects in so far as it is not easy to establish what constitutes conspiracy. There is difficulty in that area of law. That may be all the more reason for taking seriously what the Deputy said on the matter. I will look into it and revert to the Deputy.
Is the Taoiseach aware that there are Law Reform Commission reports on the following topics: contempt, defamation, sentencing, landlord and conveyancing law, contract law, intoxication as a defence and dishonesty? Does the Government intend to implement those worthwhile recommendations and, if so, when can we expect to see the legislation? If that is the Government's intention, why have those proposals not appeared in the Programme for Government?
All those reports were given to the Deputy's party when it was in Government.
Let us hear the reply without interruption from either side of the House.
My recollection is that the Deputy was not just a Minister of State in the Government which received those reports but a Minister of State in the Department of Justice. I have no doubt he is well able to offer explanations as to the reason he and his colleagues did not deal with those reports when he had the opportunity to do so. do so.
I am asking the Taoiseach for his view.
The Taoiseach has an obligation to answer the question.
Those reports are being dealt with now——
That is wearing a bit thin.
—— and if the Deputy wishes to put down questions, with the exception of one of the references he made, the appropriate Minister will provide him with detailed answers. The exception is the report on sentencing; the Deputy's quotation is inaccurate in so far as that report has not yet been published. It is due to be published later this year.
I wish to accommodate the three Deputies offering but we should bear in mind that almost 50 per cent of our time has been exhausted on these two questions.
The Taoiseach mentioned the law of conspiracy. Would I be guilty of engaging in too much conspiracy theory if I attributed the absence of any Labour Party Ministers in the House today——
The Deputy is so virtuous he could not be accused of anything.
——as an indication of party political pique? Where are the Labour Party Ministers today? Are they sulking in their tent or have they withdrawn from this Cabinet as well? In relation to the Taoiseach's remarks to Deputy Harney about the necessity to legislate to prohibit the Law Reform Commission President from engaging in overt political activity or fund raising, is he aware that there is no law which prevents a High Court judge from doing that other than convention? It is when conventions are flouted that Taoisigh are required to act to restore the integrity of the offices concerned.
The conventions in question derive from the fact that our judicial system is based on the common law and the common law, as distinct from Statute law, rests in its entirety on convention and precedent. That is the appropriate arrangement in regard to judges and why there is not a statutory provision. The long standing practice and principle of the Judiciary in that regard rests on the conventions that derive from the common law.
What about An Bord Pleanála and the RTE Authority?
In regard to recently established statutory bodies, obviously the statute will be considered carefully in this House and if any Members were of the view that particular constraints should be placed in regard to political activity, or any other matter, the appropriate amendments could be made. I make the point, however, that if people adhere to the statute, they are adhering to it.
That is rubbish.
The Government has had the Law Reform Commission report on bail since last autumn. The Minister for Justice announced over two months ago that she would bring urgent proposals on the matter to Government within six weeks. Will the Taoiseach accept the reason we have not seen these proposals is that the Government is hopelessly divided on the matter?
Not that old chestnut again.
May I put it to the Taoiseach that, in the context of the position of the President of the Law Reform Commission, it would be highly unethical, to say the least, for a person in a quasi-judicial position to overtly engage in the collection of funds for a political party?
I have already replied extensively on the position in regard to the law on bail to the Deputy's leader and other members of his party. That matter is currently at an advanced stage of consideration by the Minister for Justice and I expect her to bring proposals on the matter to Cabinet shortly. When the Deputy's party was in office, rather than deal with the matter they referred it to the Law Reform Commission. That was a mistake on their part but, admittedly, something for which Deputy O'Donoghue has no responsibility because he did not have the onerous responsibility of being a member of that Government.
Will the Taoiseach answer the second part of the legitimate question I put to him in regard to the President of the Law Reform Commission?
I have already answered that question several times.
He has not. He is ashamed of the answer.
Given the Taoiseach's attitude in the House today, is it not clear that his Government has lost total control of the crime problem in this city? Is it not clear that this is largely due to argument and that the Minister for Justice is not receiving the necessary resources of time or money to fight crime on the streets? There was another shooting recently. The Taoiseach's attitude is quite clear — his Government has gone soft on crime.
Funny man.
Little boy blue.
The prisons were empty when we took over, of course.
The Taoiseach should not smile.
The Deputy's suggestions are quite ludicrous. This Government has a very active programme to deal with this matter, particularly as far as the drugs issue is concerned.
The Government is not prepared to take any action except on the bail laws.
This Government is taking a range of actions which were not taken by its predecessor.
Crime is rampant in this city.
Can I take it from what the Taoiseach said that since statute law does not prevent the President of the Law Reform Commission from engaging in political fund raising, the current president is free to so engage?
There is no constraint on the President of the Law Reform Commission other than those contained in the statute law or his contract of employment. Unless he is constrained by one of those documents, he is free to do whatever he wishes. If the Deputy wishes to——
That is a very sad view.
The Taoiseach is not being consistent.
If the Deputy wishes to interrupt I obviously will not answer her questions. Perhaps the Deputy will allow me to answer her questions and restrain herself from interrupting. I have no doubt that the President of the Law Reform Commission exercises his responsibility in a very careful manner.
Is there any connection——
Deputy Molloy may ask a very brief concluding question as we are making very slow progress.
In light of the views expressed by the Taoiseach today in regard to convention, common law and statute, what statute did the young garda in Cyprus contravene which resulted in his being removed from his post abroad?
The election is over.
Let us move onto Question No. 3.
No answer.