Thomas P. Broughan
Question:69 Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the steps he intends to take to deal with the culture of overtime in Irish prisons; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14995/01]
Written Answers. - Prisons Service.
Tom Enright
Question:92 Mr. Enright asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he proposes taking to reduce expenditure incurred by the State in prison officers working overtime; and the staff reforms that are proposed to ensure proper staffing in prisons. [15054/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 69 and 92 together.
The high level of overtime working in the Prisons Service and the associated costs have been problems for many years. Last year, £38 million was spent on overtime, which is more than half of the basic pay bill of prison staff, excluding allowances. The underlying reasons for this level of additional attendance, which is necessary for the day to day operation of the prisons and to carry out essential escorts of prisoners, do not lend themselves to short-term solutions. The factors involved are complex. Staffing levels and arrangements are the product of operational circumstances which have been in place over many years against a background, at times, of very considerable tension and difficulty.
This issue was addressed, not for the first time, in the report of the prison service cost review group, which was published in 1997. As a means of addressing the overtime situation in a strategic way, the report recommended the establishment of a dedicated staffing and operations review team, SORT, to assess the man hours required to deliver agreed regime activities and services, and recommend associated systems of staff attendance and deployment practices.
That team has now completed its work and produced reports on all prisons and places of detention as well as a global report. This global report provides a summary of the team's observations, conclusions and recommendations. Its bottom line is that, given the implementation of the various infrastructural and staffing changes recommended, there are enough staff in the service to run the prisons without the present dependence on overtime.
The next phase of this project – Strategic Effectiveness Programme, STEP – moving the Irish Prison Service forward – started in March last. It entails a joint working party – a change implementation team – which comprises four POA officers and four management representatives who will examine how the revised tasks identified in these reports might be undertaken without the need for overtime working. It will also examine the changes which would need to be made to the management and organisational structure in the prisons. The officers' conditions of service and issues such as the categorisation of prisoners will also be considered. The group have been set a 12 month time scale for their work. This is an ambitious but realistic timescale which reflects the size of the task, the range of change which will be involved and the urgency of the situation in so far as escalating costs are concerned.
This change process that we are now embarking on will, of course, involve changes to work practices. The development of partnership structures at local level will be an urgent priority so that a vision of the future of the service which is shared by both management and staff can be developed.
It will, of course, take some time to prepare and implement the fundamental changes that will be involved. The time span for designing and negotiating the blueprint envisages an outline blueprint available in early summer 2001, progress review in autumn 2001, and a completed blueprint available in late spring 2002.
When the technical aspects of the discussions are concluded, a negotiation team would then concentrate on the methods of implementation and the issues that would arise from a staff perspective. These negotiations will take place under the conciliation and arbitration scheme. The nature of the implementation and roll out phase throughout the entire prison service which would follow will have to be determined but given the scale of what is being proposed, there will have to be phasing and benefits for staff would have to be linked to this phasing.
This situation is not unique to this country. Similar overtime cultures developed in neighbouring jurisdictions in recent times and were tackled in a strategic way similar to the process now being undertaken by the Irish Prisons Service.
I am assured by the Director General of the Prisons Service, on behalf of the prisons interim board, both of whom I appointed in mid-1999, that this careful well-planned methodology now being put in place for addressing the problem in a way that is rational has every prospect of addressing the issues once and for all. This rational, carefully planned approach to correcting the situation clearly has merit over the hasty approach, which the passage of years has shown not to have worked. I have emphasised to the prisons service the priority I attach to addressing this issue.