Vol. 659 No. 1
57 Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress with the development of the newly proposed national detention facility for children and teenagers at the Oberstown campus; when it is expected that this facility will be operational; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27171/08]
In March 2008, the Government approved the development of new national children detention facilities on the Oberstown campus in Lusk, County Dublin. The Government decision was informed by the report of the expert group on children detention schools, which is available on the Irish Youth Justice Service, IYJS, website. The development will increase the accommodation capacity in the detention school system from 77 places to 167 places. There are already three detention schools on the site. The effect of the proposed development will involve the demolition of some existing buildings on-site and the retention of others, but will consist mainly of newly constructed facilities.
The development will be carried out on a phased basis. The first phase, which is scheduled to be completed in 2012, will provide 80 places to accommodate 16 to 17 year old boys to remove this age group from St. Patrick's Institution and to facilitate the transfer of boys from the existing Oberstown boys school, which is scheduled for demolition. The second phase, which is envisaged for completion in 2014, will entail the demolition of the existing Oberstown boys school and the long-term unit of Oberstown girls school, as well as a number of other buildings. This phase will also involve the construction of facilities for 57 young people. Some of the existing buildings, such as Trinity House school, will be retained, providing a total of 167 places when both stages of the project are completed. While it is anticipated that this will supply adequate detention places to meet demands up to 2031, further assessment of the number of places required will be carried out before phase 1 is completed.
On 12 May, a project manager to oversee the development of the new facility was appointed from within the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. On 27 June 2008, a notice inviting tenders from interested parties to provide a full team to design the new facilities was published through the e-Tenders website. This notice was also placed in the Official Journal of the European Union in line with EU procurement rules. The closing date for receipt of tenders is Friday, 8 August 2008. It is anticipated, subject to thorough evaluation of the tenders received and the identification of a suitable company, to award the contract in the latter part of this year with a view to having the design process completed in the early part of 2009.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
The design team will be required to advise on architectural, construction and engineering matters, to deliver high quality designs and to manage the construction of modern, state-of-the-art facilities. The design team will include, but is not limited to, expertise in architecture, construction project management, planning, health and safety, fire safety, cost estimation and control, engineering and building services.
The project will be overseen by the Irish Youth Justice Service, an executive office in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which has responsibility for a wide range of youth justice matters, including the children detention schools. In preparing the request for tenders, the IYJS undertook an extensive consultation exercise with a wide range of key stakeholders. In particular, the IYJS consulted with the relevant non-governmental organisations and representatives of the staff of the schools. In addition, opinions were sought from the Department of Education and Science and the local VEC in respect of facilities for education and training. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child also informed the process. As children will be the primary users of the facilities, children currently detained in the existing detention schools and the 16 to 17 year old boys held in St. Patrick's Institution were also asked for their opinions.
Regarding commercial sensitivity issues, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is not in a position to indicate the projected indicative cost of the development. However, he can confirm that the cost involved will be met from national development plan-Exchequer sources.
I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I also welcome the progress made in respect of juvenile justice in latter years. The concerns regarding the proposed housing of juveniles in Thornton Hall are well founded. As a minimum, the proposed facilities should be delivered ahead of the Thornton Hall development. Given that the land is owned by the State and given its history, there should be no problem with planning permission.
That the Minister of State's intention is to have juveniles housed in Thornton Hall is deeply concerning to children's rights groups and others. In light of the economic climate, will he give a commitment to the effect that the holding of juveniles in Thornton Hall will not become a permanent fixture?
The facility in Thornton Hall is intended to be a temporary one. The Deputy's concerns are not misplaced and we do not want the provision to be permanent. I assure him that during detention in such temporary accommodation, children's basic rights will be maintained, they will be provided with first class education facilities via the local VEC and they will be separated from all adult prisoners. The basic rights of anyone being held in custody will be guaranteed. It is the Department's strong intention that the measure will be temporary.
Recently, Ms Emily Logan, the Ombudsman for Children, announced that she was against the proposed transfer of the Finglas Child and Adolescent Centre to the facility in question. Children's rights groups are also opposed to it. I lend my voice to their concerns, as the facility should be kept in Finglas. It is the only facility that provides psychological assessments to children referred by the courts. What are the Minister of State's opinions in this regard?
The facility in Finglas is the assessment centre for young people. Bringing all the services to one site will achieve a degree of efficiency. While the Finglas centre will continue in the meantime, the Deputy is correct in that we are considering its long-term future and whether bringing it to the Oberstown campus would be more efficient.
I am sure the Minister of State will acknowledge that the problems of juvenile crime and vandalism are worsening, particularly in some communities. When the Children Act 2001 was enacted, it was welcomed as ground-breaking in that it contained specific provisions to make parents responsible and to prevent abdication of their responsibilities in respect of their children in certain circumstances. Why, seven years after the law's enactment, has the provision in question not been used?
The administration of justice is exclusively the duty of the courts and it would be inappropriate for any Minister to advise the courts on how to carry out sentencing in individual cases. The specific provision to which the Deputy referred, which places obligations on parents in regard to offences committed by their children, was not commenced until July 2007. Certain changes had to be made to District Court rules subsequent to that. These measures were not put into law for no reason and it is clearly our intention that they be implemented. However, we also must acknowledge that the majority of children who come before the Children's Court do so against a background of chaotic family life. In such cases, the District Court judge is informed by Garda liaison officers and probation officers as to the most appropriate way of dealing with them. Attempting to place attachment orders on the parents may not be the most appropriate solution. However, I take the Deputy's point that these measures should be implemented. They were included for a reason.
I am not inviting the Minister of State to comment on sentencing policy, but parts of the Children Act have been incrementally invoked since 2001. These provisions are a matter of public policy and were bruited in this House as part of the response to juvenile vandalism, anti-social behaviour and general miscreancy. Why, seven year later, have they not been invoked?
Does the Minister of State agree it is unacceptable that legislation which was passed in 2001 should take six or seven years to be commenced by ministerial order? Does he accept that this makes a mockery of the rules of this House?
Will the new campus at Oberstown be largely modelled on the Woodlands juvenile justice centre in Bangor, County Down? What types of facilities will be provided there? Can the Minister of State provide a projected opening date and will he indicate whether this proposal is immune from the budgetary cuts expected to be announced today?
Following from the point made by Deputy Joe Carey, is the Minister aware that the placing of 16 and 17 year olds in Thornton Hall, should that occur after its construction, could result in the State being in violation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child? Children must not be placed in what is designed as an adult facility.
On the first matter, the provisions of the Children Act ascribing responsibility to parents for crimes committed by their children arise out of the District Court finding regarding wilful neglect on the part of parents. I am sure no Member is a cheerleader for putting parents in that position. State services generally try to avoid a scenario in accordance with the District Court conclusion in this regard. It is something that will be rarely done. As I said to Deputy Rabbitte, that measure was not commenced until July 2007. I do not agree this makes a mockery of the House——
It makes a mockery of the Government's public relations exercise in 2001.
The Children Act is a superb legislative measure which has served us well in the short time it has been in force.
The anticipated opening date of the first phase of the Oberstown facility is 2012, at which time it is hoped the transfer of inmates from St. Patrick's Institution will take place. I cannot comment on any possible impact on this project as a result of potential budgetary changes. However, the opening of the Oberstown facility is a high priority for my Department. I am assured that if accommodation is to be provided in Thornton Hall as a temporary measure, it will be entirely separate. I have absolutely no doubt that such a separated facility will meet our obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
58 Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when it is intended to publish the report of the casino regulation committee, which was submitted to the Government in April 2007; if it is intended to proceed with the plan to establish an informal committee of Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas to consider the report and related matters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27030/08]
121 Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the proliferation of casinos in recent years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27159/08]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 58 and 121 together.
I refer the Deputy to my answer to Question No. 53, given earlier today. As I indicated, progress in this area can best be achieved through cross-party consensus. I acknowledged that there are widely diverging views on the subject, not only between different parties but within the parties. My aim is to ensure that gaming activities are carried out within a responsible framework which recognises the reality of these activities and the changed environment in which they now take place, including on the Internet, and which also ensures they are properly and responsibly managed, particularly in respect of those who may experience problems as a result of their participation in gaming activities.
My proposal was to proceed on the basis of agreement to establish a cross-party committee and to publish the report of the casino committee, Regulating Gaming in Ireland, within the framework of that committee. However, due to the delay in establishing the cross-party committee, I have decided to go ahead with the publication of the casino regulation committee report imminently in advance of the establishment of the informal cross-party committee. I will welcome all observations on the report.
As it is still my intention to proceed with the establishment of the committee, the invitation to the Labour Party for a representative to participate in the committee remains open. This approach presents an opportunity to Oireachtas Members to contribute, at the important policy formulation stage, to the future architecture of gaming in Ireland. I remain of the view that it is the best way forward.
The Minister offers the view that this is such a complex issue that it requires an all-party committee. He put forward the same view in regard to statutory rape. I do not know whether he regards these two issues as more complex than the economy or whether he also intends to involve the Opposition in the financial management of the State.
Other than the casino sector, which is currently unregulated, what are the Minister's priorities in terms of regulation? When does he intend to put in place the proposed informal committee of the House?
I intend to publish the casino regulation committee's report in the coming days. The committee considered a broad range of issues other than simply casinos. It strongly recommends that gaming and betting should be treated as two completely separate types of gambling activities — for example, it makes recommendations in regard to where each can take place.
These are complex issues. This excellent report deserves further analysis not only by the Government but also by the Oireachtas. It points to the need for a regulatory authority, based in the Department, to oversee gaming and casinos. It also refers to the incredibly addictive nature of fixed odds betting terminals, which have become a prominent feature in the United Kingdom. The report also refers to the issue of Internet gambling but it comes to no conclusions. These issues can only be dealt with through a comprehensive examination which includes a mechanism whereby the public can make its views known, whether in support of or in opposition to the proposals.
The Minister acknowledges that the international literature indicates that fixed odds betting terminals are woefully addictive, especially in the case of young working class youths. In light of this and having regard to the difficulties we experienced 20 years ago, which resulted in local authorities exercising their power to exclude slot machines, is the Minister agreeable to publishing the casino regulation committee's report with a commitment that the all-party committee will not have to consider the question of allowing for the introduction of fixed odds betting terminals in the State?
I have given my views on this issue. The casino regulation committee has recommended that it be examined. The report was reasonably restricted in terms of the type of consultation that took place. It looked at international practice as well as some of the research that was done previously in the State. We now have an opportunity to allow people to give their views. From what I have read concerning these terminals, I would be hesitant about allowing them to be available anywhere in the country because they are the modern, sophisticated equivalent of one-armed bandits. The report refers to the issue of Internet betting, which is far more complex. This report draws on a range of issues, including where betting is taking place. That raises issues about taking legal action concerning how the Internet is operated. Internet betting is targeted in this report.
In the context of this urgent problem, which requires public discussion and consideration by Members of the Oireachtas, can the Minister explain why this report has been suppressed by the Government for a year? Can he explain why it was not published a long time ago? Would the Minister agree that gambling, and particularly Internet betting, is ravaging the lives of many young people in their teens and 20s? Has the Government given any consideration as to what policy, if any, it might put in place to tackle that issue?
When this report became available, it was the Government's view that a cross-party committee should be established. The Deputy's party was asked for its views and, in fact, it was suggested that a Fine Gael Member should be the committee chairman. The reason for the delay was that we could not get all party agreement.
The Minister is looking for a fall guy to take decisions he is incapable of making.
Deputy Rabbitte made the reasonable point that it may be better to publish the report now and they can then make a judgment on their obvious reluctance to participate in the committee without seeing the report. I accept that point.
Does the Minister have any view on any aspect of the report?
Please allow the Minister to reply.
This report needs detailed consideration by the Oireachtas, which by and large over the years has not addressed the issue properly.
The Minister has not considered it either and he is afraid to do so.
The last piece of major legislation was in 1956, the year after I was born.
The Minister is playing political games with this issue, as he is with the referendum.
We now have an opportunity to consider this issue broadly, given the fact that the report targets modern accessibility of the Internet by these new fob keys, as they are called.
The Government has had the report for a year. Does it have any view on it?
Perhaps I am missing something here. We are dealing with an issue which the Minister states is of some importance. He quotes from a report in his possession that no Members of this House or any members of the public have seen, yet he expects people to engage, at his invitation, in some informal group to discuss the matter. It is at least a discourtesy to Members of the House to selectively quote extracts from a report that nobody else has seen. The only reason we cannot see it is because he will not let us do so. I ask the Minister to publish the document tomorrow. He should provide each Member of the House with a copy of the document before matters are progressed any further. If the Minister accedes to my request, which is eminently reasonable, he might explain what he means by an informal committee. What terms of reference does he have in mind?
As I said, I will be publishing the report within the next few days. I can publish it tomorrow. I do not see any problem in that respect. As regards the informal committee, it is a cross-party committee. The discussions about it predated me becoming Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I understand that my predecessor had discussions with Deputy Seán Barrett and other Members on the formulation of such a committee. My predecessor believed it would be the right way to proceed on important policy formulation, thus giving the Opposition an opportunity to participate. The Government side of the House is not saying it has all the knowledge on it. The last time a piece of major legislation was brought forward in this area was in 1956.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
