Vol. 396 No. 3
32 Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Justice the role he has in ensuring that there are long-term detention places available for both male and female juveniles after they have been through the judicial system for which he has responsibility.
The institutions for young offenders operated by my Department cater for male young offenders aged 16 years and over and female offenders aged 17 years and over. In addition young offenders aged 15 and 16 may be committed to prison in accordance with the provisions of sections 97 and 102 of the Children Act, 1908.
While it would not be appropriate for me to go into detail on the circumstances of an individual case, it is, I feel, understandable, in view of concerns which have been widely expressed, that Deputies would expect that I should comment generally on the subject of detention facilities for young girls coming before the courts, where the court considers that a girl should be securely detained, though not in prison.
Many of the comments reportedly made on this subject in recent days have focused on the issue that no secure unit is available for young girls similar to that provided by the Department of Education for young boys at Trinity House.
The lack of this facility was considered by the Interdepartmental Group on the Administration of Justice and their report, which I expect will be submitted to Government in the coming week, makes a recommendation that such a facility should be made available as soon as possible. I can announce here and now that the Government, in advance of consideration of the full report, have given approval for the provision, as a matter of urgency, of a special centre for 20-25 girls which will (a) take up to eight girls for remand and assessment; (b) provide long-stay accommodation for 12 girls and (c) contain a small number of places, not more than five, for secure use if and as needed.
Acquisition of the necessary site and planning work will commence immediately and building will be put in hand at the earliest possible date.
The point may of course be made that this issue has been around for some time and has been the subject of detailed consideration by various groups in the past. That is certainly true. However, I am not sure that it would be in any way helpful, now, if I were to proceed to outline what has been said by these groups on the subject of departmental responsibility. I consider it best that I simply acknowledge that the matter of departmental responsibility clearly must be settled once and for all and that this should be done without delay; the process of doing so is well under way.
It is only fair, however, that I should point out that where differences of opinion exist on the subject of departmental responsibility, these differences are not, as some have suggested, simply a matter of buck-passing. There are genuine differences of opinion among the many professional, administrative, social and care agencies who have responsibility in this area as to whether provision for children who find themselves in difficulty with the law should be made within an educational, health, or law and order setting. Nor is it simply a matter of interpreting existing legal provisions on the subject — these provisions are not exactly clear-cut and different interpretations are possible. In my view, the core issue is what type of setting best meets the needs of the difficult child in each particular set of circumstances and the understandable concerns of the community in general about such children. Facilities are necessary to cater for a wide variety of different cases and, as I have said, steps have now been taken to fill a very long existing deficiency in the system.
With regard to the need for interim arrangements to deal with the particular case which has been the subject of publicity, the position is that the resolution of that case is now a matter for the court and the assessment as to what interim arrangements will provide a basis for its satisfactory resolution is obviously a matter for that court. Discussions are taking place between officials of my Department, Health and Education as to what options may be open and the intention is that the health board representative will advise the court, without delay, as to what arrangements are possible.
A Cheann Comhairle, I had a Private Notice Question in relation to an individual case. Your office advised me to take it with this matter and it was disallowed on the grounds of urgency.
In view of that, I would ask the Minister, in relation to the 15 year old girl who has been remanded on ten occasions to Dún Laoghaire District Court, what arrangements will now be made to find a suitable place, other than bed and breakfast facilities for this girl? In view of the fact that it will take some time before the new centre of which the Minister speaks is put in place, will the Minister arrange as a matter of urgency, in view of the statements of the District Justice for particular provisions to be put in place for this girl? Will the Minister now admit that this matter has been grossly mishandled by being shuffled between three different Departments? Will the Minister now tell us which Department are taking responsibility for the care of such girls who are under 16 years of age?
The Kennedy report proposed the establishment as far back as 1969 of a centre such as I have announced here today. I want to reiterate what has been done. On each occasion that this unfortunate girl has been before the court the District Justice referred to the need for a special centre. There will be a centre for between 20 and 25 girls. It will take up to eight girls on remand for assessment, provide long stay accommodation for 12 girls and contain a small number of places, not more than five, for secure use when needed.
As far as the particular case is concerned the intention is that the health board representative will attend the court on Thursday next and will advise as to what arrangements are possible at that stage. As to which of the agencies or Departments are responsible, there can be many views. It is not just a buck-passing exercise as the Deputy seems to suggest. There are many points of view among those professionals dealing with disturbed children as to whether they should be catered for by the educational, health or law and order areas. The important thing, however, is to come to grips with the situation and that is what the Government are doing. The whole area of responsibility has to and will be decided as a matter of urgency.
There were Private Notice Questions down for my Department. I want to ask the Minister two questions arising out of his reply to the supplementary. The first is in relation to departmental responsibility. It seems that if this individual girl had a health problem and was in hospital it would clearly be a matter for the health authorities. Likewise if she had an educational difficulty and was in breach of educational codes it would be a matter for the educational authority. Would the Minister not agree, therefore, as she has been before a court ten times now, that the matter is clearly one for the Department of Justice? If the Minister accepts that, could he indicate to the House what the response will be next week of the official from the health authority in court to the predicament of the court in relation to the custodial location of this person?
So far as responsibility is concerned, I do not want to go into this matter because it would not benefit this child or advance this situation one iota. Enough has been said about it already. The situation we have to come to grips with is the obligation to care for this child and to see that society meets its obligation to this child and to others in the future. That will be handled by the professionals who are the health workers. The health board representative will be in the court on Thursday and will at that stage, we hope, be able to meet the requirements of the court. It is, however, strictly a matter for the court at the end of the day as to whether it is satisfied. On the question of who is responsible, I do not want to go into that. The important thing is to see that this child and other children in similar circumstances are looked after.
In order to get this tied down, I tabled three Private Notice Questions to each of the Ministers who have been passing this matter among themselves for the last while. I am happy that at least Deputy Owen's question was reached. How long does the Minister anticipate it will take to provide this unit? Is he building a unit from the ground up? Has he any indication where it will be sited? Will it be in Dublin or, like Loughan House, as far removed from the community as possible? Could the Minister advise the House as to the interim arrangements for the young person at the centre of all of this while this unit is being built? Would the Minister agree with me that while there are different professional views about how to address young people in difficult situations the common thread running right through back to the Kennedy report of two decades ago is the need for a secure unit where containment will allow for whatever other needs there are to be professionally addressed, and that it is time to get off the fence?
The Deputy will welcome the announcement I have made today that such a secure unit is to be built as a matter of urgency. The unit will be in Finglas. It will be a brand new unit.
How long will it take?
It is a matter of urgency and will be developed as soon as possible.
Are we talking about months or years?
Let us hear the Minister out.
The Deputy knows as well as I do. The important thing is that after many generations of talking about it something is being done and we are to have a unit now.
In regard to the individual case, as I said in the reply, discussions are taking place between officials of my own Department, Health and Education as to what options may be open. The intention is that in relation to this young girl, the health board representative will advise the court on Thursday as to what arrangements are possible, and I do not want to anticipate what they will do.
Will the Minister specify what arrangements will be available for that person at the end of this week in anticipation of an order of the court? Will appropriate and adequate facilities be available to house the individual? More generally, in view of the fact that the special inter-departmental committee are going to report next week as the Minister stated, does he accept that it is of paramount importance in the context of public confidence in the Government? Having regard to the fact that he and the Ministers for Education and Health are reported as denying responsibility in this matter, when can we expect an unambiguous statement of clarification as to whose direct responsibility this is?
I asked for brevity.
As I said, the important thing is that we sort out and resolve this situation in a proper manner for this child, and the health board representatives will advise the court on Thursday as to the arrangements that will be arrived at.
The Deputy referred to the inter-departmental group and they were referred to in the court and elsewhere. It has been inferred that this inter-departmental group in the administration of justice, who were established last October and have been operating under the aegis of my Department, have some direct responsibility for this case. I want to clarify the position in this regard. The group in question were set up to meet concerns about the prevalence of crime and vandalism and their impact in particular on older people and on tourists. The group are representative of all the agencies concerned with the administration of justice, the Garda, the courts, the prison service, the Attorney General's Office and the Departments of Education and Health, in view of their responsibilities in relation to juvenile offenders. The task given to the group was to examine the efficiency of the structures and procedures of each of these agencies and the way these related to each other, with a view to producing a more effective and streamlined response to the concern I have referred to. The group were given no role in relation to individual cases such as the one in question here today, nor have they a role in relieving any of the agencies represented of responsibilities which already rested with them. It is not correct, therefore, to conclude that this group were given responsibility in relation to the present case, or, indeed, other similar cases, which they failed to discharge.
Who is taking responsibility?
I am still not satisfied in relation to this.
A final question.
Will the Minister give a specific assurance to the House that we will not have the practice as heretofore that this girl will be referred to Northern Ireland on Thursday? Will he also give an assurance that proper residential care will be provided and she will not be referred to a bed and breakfast?
Referral to Northern Ireland will not take place. As to the options generally that are open, I do not want to anticipate at this stage what will be arrived at by the officials of the three Departments, but I can assure the Deputy that the health board representative will advise the court on Thursday without delay as to what arrangements are possible for this child. It is in all our interests and the interest of society generally that this case be resolved.
