Vol. 526 No. 1
85 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on whether the Garda has been delaying unduly the introduction of the recording of interviews in Garda stations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25931/00]
86 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made to date with regard to the proposed installation of equipment to allow for the videotaping of interviews of persons in Garda custody; the number of Garda stations currently equipped with such facilities; the total number of stations in which it is proposed to install the equipment; the proposed timeframe in this regard; his views on whether there has been an undue delay on the part of the Garda in introducing this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25933/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 85 and 86 together.
In my answer to parliamentary questions on this subject on 5 October 2000, I stated that at present only those Garda stations which took part in the pilot trials of electronic recording have facilities for audio-video recording Garda interviews with detained persons. There are six such stations – Tallaght, the Bridewell in Cork, the Bridewell in Dublin, Portlaoise, Henry Street in Limerick and Mill Street in Galway.
In July last year the Government decided that electronic recording should be introduced nationwide. It is envisaged that facilities for audio-video recording will be installed in approximately 150 Garda stations and that more than 300 interview rooms in these stations will need to be refurbished and fitted out to facilitate the audio-video equipment needed. Tenders were received in October for the supply of the specialised audio-video recording equipment needed. Completion of the evaluation of the tenders received for the specialised recording equipment and placing a contract with a supplier are scheduled for early next month. Delivery and installation of the equipment should commence in the first quarter of next year by which time I would expect that up to 130 interview rooms will have been refurbished and suitably fitted out.
I assure the House that I am fully satisfied that the Garda authorities are progressing the practical steps involved with the necessary urgency.
In the context of the information given by the Minister to the House, is he aware that ten days ago, at a Garda conference on policing and human rights held in Dublin Castle, the Attorney General accused the Garda of foot-dragging in providing video recording facilities? Does the Minister agree or disagree with the view expressed by the Attorney General?
The remarks of the Attorney General must be placed in context. I understand that in response to a contribution made on the day in question, the Attorney General stated it was his view that there had been foot-dragging and a failure of will, but he ascribed this lengthy delay to many different Administrations since the need for such recording facilities was accepted. My understanding of the position is that he was not making the point that individual members of An Garda Síochána were guilty of foot-dragging or failure of will and he does not hold that opinion.
It is almost 25 years since Barra Ó Briain reported on this matter and it is many years since the report of the Martin committee on this matter. It is 16 years since the Criminal Justice Act, 1984, was introduced, which made provision for the recording of interviews with accused persons. All the neighbouring jurisdictions on these islands which have similar legal regimes have instituted such a system of recording. I am pleased that, as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and a member of the Government, I have proceeded to put in place this necessary measure after 25 years.
May I ask the Taoiseach—
I thank the Deputy.
He may be the future Taoiseach, one never knows, stranger things have happened. Does the Minister accept that the Attorney General stated there was foot-dragging and a lack of will to carry out this reform? Does he agree with that and, if not, why has he not made a public statement dissociating himself from it? If the Attorney General was misquoted, he was misquoted in every newspaper in the land. Why has the Attorney General not corrected the misstatement, if it be so? Considering that the Minister announced funding of £7.2 million in February of this year, as recorded in the Sunday Business Post of 20 February, to carry out the work of installing audiovisual equipment in all the Garda stations that he mentioned, why has this work not been done? How much of the £7.2 million will be expended this year or is he becoming simply a Minister for announcements? Finally, in relation to cases pending in general, is he confident that the lack of such equipment will not result in convictions that have been achieved in the past being quashed?
To take the last point first, the Judges' Rules in the taking of any statement must be observed. We have taken a long time to come to the stage where audio-video recording equipment is to be installed in our Garda stations. The Government, as I stated, was doing that nearly a quarter of a century after Barra Ó Briain's report. The Deputy is well acquainted with the Attorney General and he and members of the Garda Síochána are well aware that throughout his career as a politician and a barrister, he has always held the force in high esteem. I do not believe there was ever an occasion when the present Attorney General gratuitously criticised either the force in general or individual members of it – of that I am quite satisfied. With regard to the delay, as Deputy Howlin describes it, in implementing a measure which the Government announced last year – he served in Government himself, which could have taken the step and did not—
Máire Geoghegan-Quinn had introduced the pilot scheme and the Minister knows that.
There are 300 interview rooms to be refurbished and fitted out, which will include ventilation, sound-proofing and so on, at approximately 150 stations. A great deal of practical work has to be done. Tenders have to be invited and vetted for the required special equipment and almost the entire membership of the Garda Síochána has to be properly trained. The Deputy appreciates that this takes time to organise. However, I am happy that progress is being made and that we are shortly to see this matter resolved after more than a quarter of a century.
As I stated, I am very pleased to have been associated with that. I cannot give the Deputy specifics in relation to the amount of money which has been expended to date but I will ensure my officials communicate that to him.
Is the Minister now accepting the view of the Attorney General that the Garda Síochána has been foot-dragging? Would he make his view on that issue clear? Could the Minister tell the House how many members of the Garda Síochána to date have been trained in the use of this equipment? Would the Minister not acknowledge that if a Government decision was made in July 1999 to commence to provide for the video recording of people being questioned in Garda stations, by now it should be up and running and it should not simply be the pilot schemes continuing in operation? Would the Minister tell the House by what date he projects video recording equipment will be installed in the number of stations referred to and be in use?
First, I anticipate that a good number of rooms should be available in the first quarter of next year. This is a progressive matter which cannot be done overnight. The Government has made provision for the equipment and is advancing with all possible speed. I do not believe that the Garda Síochána is foot-dragging on this matter and neither did I say it was.
So the Minister disagrees with the Attorney General.
My Department has been advancing this matter to the best of its ability. I have explained the context in which I understand the Attorney General spoke. I am satisfied that the Attorney General was referring to a quarter of a century of inaction on this matter.
Very critical of Máire Geoghegan-Quinn who brought in the pilot scheme. The Minister has done nothing.
It is now being put right by this Administration and I acknowledge the work of the previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the then Deputy Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, in bringing forward the pilot schemes. Deputies should not be so ungenerous in the House after a quarter of a century as not to acknowledge the contribution of the Government in this area. On what Deputy Shatter perceives to be a delay in implementing a decision, a decision was taken a decade or more ago that the Land Registry should be turned into a semi-State agency. It has not occurred yet but it will occur under this Administration if I have my way.
The Minister has been there for three and a half years and he has achieved neither.
He makes announcements and does nothing.
Does the Minister accept that his main achievement in over three years has been to make headlines rather than to achieve any action? Will he accept that it is wholly unacceptable for him to come before the House and say that not one station has been equipped since he last answered questions on this matter? That is the result. When the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in one of today's newspapers announces, within 48 hours of two gangland murders, that he has made the streets safer, we can expect very little real progress and many announcements of fictitious progress. Will the Minister accept that will be his legacy?
The Deputy has decided to attack the messenger for the message.
How many has the Minister added?
We have restored confidence in the criminal justice system. Since I came into office, we have presided over a situation where the percentage of indictable crimes committed in the State has been reduced by 21%. The number of gardaí in the force has been increased by almost 800 and the number of prison spaces has been increased by 1,200.
The Minister should answer the questions.
These are false figures put out.
The Garda Vote has been increased by 42% or some £200 million.
The man is living in cloud cuckoo land.
The Minister should not be allowed to tell untruths.
I remind Deputy Owen that these are Priority Questions and the Deputy is grossly disorderly in intervening in priority questions in the name of other Deputies.
There have been three murders in the last week.
Such headlines as there have been in relation to the reduction in crime have been precisely correct. I am not suggesting and would not suggest that everything in the garden is rosy. There is a considerable amount of work to be done. That is why the Vote for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for the year 2001 will be the highest in the history of the State. We take the fight against crime seriously. The previous Administration did not.
The Minister is filibustering.
None of the questions was answered.
He certainly put the Attorney General in his place.
