Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 13 Mar 2012

Vol. 759 No. 1

Other Questions

Proposed Legislation

65. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will bring forward legislation to create a civil court of appeal in view of the backlog of civil cases in the superior courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13904/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

The working group on a court of appeal recommended in 2008 that a court of appeal be established by way of constitutional amendment. While the Court of Criminal Appeal has existed under legislation since 1961, the group strongly recommended a combined appellate court, encompassing both criminal and civil cases, should be established under the Constitution. There is a commitment in the programme for Government to establish a court of appeal and the group's recommendations are being examined in that context. The current Chief Justice, Mrs. Justice Denham, chaired the working group and I note and welcome her recent comments on this subject. It is my intention to bring forward recommendations to the Government in this regard as soon as possible.

The Deputy will appreciate that in the current economic climate I have an obligation to ensure an approach to implementation which will minimise the net additional costs, having regard to the economic and financial benefit of a more timely conclusion of litigation. The objective is to bring forward a more streamlined and less costly solution rather than the simple provision of another judicial layer. It is my intention to finalise examination of the detail and to progress the matter at the earliest opportunity.

A decision remains to be taken by the Government as to when such a referendum will take place in the context of other referenda. However, I do not anticipate the holding of a referendum on a court of appeal will arise before 2013, not least because more public engagement and debate will be essential and two referenda are already scheduled for this year.

Regarding Supreme Court delays, as the Deputy will be aware, the allocation of court business is a matter for the Judiciary. I understand, however, that the Chief Justice has taken a number of measures to address the waiting time for appeals in the Supreme Court, which currently stands at 36 months for ordinary cases. I am informed that the list is under constant review and actively managed by the Chief Justice to prioritise those appeals that necessitate expedited hearings. The court has on occasion sat in two Benches to deal with cost-related appeals as well as short appeals. The Deputy will appreciate a careful balance is needed between time allocated to court sittings compared with producing judgments and I am advised that a recent review of the reserved judgments list is also proving effective.

The Government moved quickly to fill the vacancies arising from recent retirements from the Supreme Court and the nominees will be formally appointed by the President later this week. It should also be noted that sanction has recently been granted by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform for four new judicial fellow posts attached to the Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeal, who will provide list management and research functions in order to speed up the courts' throughput further.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I thank the Minister. I welcome the nomination of Mr. Justice Frank Clarke and Mr. Justice John MacMenamin, two fine servants of the State who will bring great experience to the Supreme Court. I wish them well.

What is the timeline? We will not have a referendum in 2012, but does the Minister wish to take steps, for example, public consultation or public discussion, during 2012 with a view towards preparing the ground for a referendum on this issue in 2013?

Regarding delays in the courts system generally, if the Minister has the information with him, how many judges retired at the end of February? What plans are in place to replace those retirees?

Deputy Alan Shatter

Today, the Government made decisions regarding appointments to the Circuit and District Courts. There were seven vacancies based on retirements and the untimely death of a member of the District Court some months ago. There were seven appointments made today to the Circuit Court to fill all vacancies therein. There were five appointments made today to fill five vacancies in the District Court. One of those appointed to the Circuit Court today was promoted from the District Court, Judge David Riordan, who was sitting in the Cork District Court. As a result of his appointment, there are three further vacancies to be filled in the District Court. There have to be formal assignments of the newly appointed District Court judges so as to facilitate legislatively the appointments to fill the three vacancies. I anticipate that those vacancies will be filled within the next two to three weeks. The new judges have to be sworn in and formally assigned. For technical reasons, we can then make the three appointments. Clearly, we cannot make the appointment to replace District Court Judge Riordan until he is in the Circuit Court. We are trying to ensure that we appoint the remaining three at the same time within the next two to three weeks.

Garda Operations

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

66Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the budget allocation for the Garda Mounted Unit for the year 2012. [13912/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

I apologise. Occasionally, the humour of something gets to me. I did not realise that Deputy Ó Cuív had a particular interest in the Garda mounted unit. I congratulate Deputy Calleary on nominating this question on his behalf. I have a vision of Deputy Ó Cuív riding into the twilight carrying a piece of turf on his shoulder.

The allocation of Garda financial resources, including for the Garda mounted unit, is a matter for the Garda Commissioner. I am advised by the Garda authorities that the total anticipated expenditure on the unit, including the cost of salaries, is approximately €1.2 million in 2012. I hope that Deputy Ó Cuív is happy with that.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I assure the Minister that Deputy Ó Cuív will not be riding into the twilight any time soon. I received information at the weekend to which the Minister may not at present be able to respond. The mounted police unit is used to promote the Garda and its activities, as well as provide security duties. In the past several weeks, the Garda has begun to issue bills for providing policing. I am aware of one town which has been issued a bill for €2,000 for the provision of policing for its St. Patrick's Day parade. I have no difficulty with the Garda charging for commercial events such as concerts but is it a new policy to issue bills for community events and celebrations? The mounted unit has done a successful job in recent years in attending shows all over the country to promote the Garda. Will these activities also be subject to a levy?

Deputy Alan Shatter

As the Deputy will be aware, many of the services the Defence Forces and the Garda provided in years gone by did not involve policing matters. They were not required for security or investigative reasons. The services were often provided at the request of communities in circumstances where the State was not in major financial difficulty. In respect of certain events where communities request the presence of members of the armed forces with a vehicle or gardaí to engage in something for decorative reasons but not to do with security, charges are now being levied to cover the expense of attending the events and the salary implications of those events. Where these are matters that I would describe as decorative as opposed to pertaining to everyday policing duties, it is for communities to decide the extent to which they wish to pay for those engagements.

Unfortunately, at times when resources are scarce - the Deputy would criticise me if matters were otherwise - we have to ensure the funding we have received is used by the Garda for important operational reasons.

It is important that the Garda engages with local communities. Careful consideration is given to these matters and the Garda will engage with certain events that do not give rise to expenses and may involve young people. The Garda role might be of a supportive nature in the context of dealing with juveniles or people in communities in which there are troubles and difficulties.

I do not have up-to-date information with regard to the specific event the Deputy mentioned but I will certainly find out the background and communicate with him on it.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

Who sets the rate? Is it left to each individual division or chief superintendent to decide or is it set by Garda headquarters?

Deputy Alan Shatter

As I do not want to mislead the House or the Deputy, I will revert to the Deputy on the question. I assume it is something that is determined at the higher levels of An Garda Síochána with regard to the particular event that arises. I will communicate with the Deputy on the matter. I do not want to give him an inaccurate reply.

Proposed Legislation

Billy Kelleher

Question:

67Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans for enacting legislation allowing for same sex marriage within the term of this Government. [13898/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

Legislation providing for same-sex marriage cannot be enacted without an amendment to the Constitution following a "Yes" vote in a referendum on the matter. This is something of which I have no doubt the Deputy is aware because it was for this very reason that my predecessor, Dermot Ahern, introduced legislation to provide for civil partnership. In this regard, the programme for Government includes a commitment to establish a constitutional convention to consider constitutional reform on a number of issues, including provision for same-sex marriage.

The Government has recently approved the establishment of the convention and has agreed in principle to arrangements for its structure, operation and topics to be considered. The Taoiseach is consulting on these matters with the leaders of the Opposition parties at present.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I am aware of the barriers that exist in the Constitution. Everybody agrees that the civil partnership legislation introduced by the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Dermot Ahern, was ground-breaking.

It appears the convention will deal with a substantial number of justice issues. Has the Minister been given extra resources to deal with the pressure this will place on the Department, which is already under considerable pressure in terms of legislation to deal with the demands of the convention? Second, what is the Minister's understanding of the timescale of the convention? I know the Taoiseach is consulting at present and that he has taken control of the convention within his Department. Has he given the Minister any idea when such issues can be addressed? Third, if the convention agrees or recommends a proposal in regard to same-sex marriage, how long will the process then take? Will there be a referendum in 2013 or 2014 or has that been decided yet?

Deputy Alan Shatter

As the Deputy rightly said, the arrangements relating to the convention are being dealt with through the Office of the Taoiseach. When we discussed these matters last in Cabinet, the decision was made that there would be a consultative process with the Opposition leaders. I am not up to date on where that stands at present.

I presume the issues the Deputy has raised will form part of the consultative process. There is the issue of the appointment of individual members to the convention, the engagement of the general public with it and the topics to be addressed. The subject matter of the Deputy's question is one of the topics to be addressed. I cannot pre-empt what the outcome or the recommendations of the convention will be on this or any other issue. If I was to do that or to prejudge it, there would be little point in having the convention.

The idea is to have a facility for a number of issues to be discussed openly and for submissions to be made. As I understand it, if need be, the convention would want to hold some form of oral hearings. When it publishes its report, that report will obviously be a matter to be considered by Government. Should there then be issues on which the Government determines there should be a referendum, clearly it will be a matter for the Government to decide in regard to a date and the likely constitutional amendment. However, on neither this nor any other issue to go to the convention is it appropriate that I pre-empt what the outcome of the discussion may be of those who participate in it.

Asylum Support Services

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Question:

68Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he intends to conduct a value for money review of expenditure on direct provision accommodation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13848/12]

Martin Ferris

Question:

69Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will carry out an audit of policy of direct provision and dispersal to ensure it meets human rights standards in Irish law and in international human rights treaties that Ireland has ratified. [13854/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

I propose to take Questions Nos. 68 and 69 together.

I am satisfied that the system of direct provision system and dispersal, which was established in 1999, is in compliance with human rights obligations placed on the State by domestic and international law. I do not believe an audit as suggested in the question is warranted.

Over the years, the direct provision system has been open to scrutiny by many international bodies. Centres have been visited by various UN bodies, including the UNHCR, the Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner and, in recent weeks, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe. Further, as Members know, on 6 October 2011 in Geneva, I appeared before the UN Human Rights Committee in connection with its scrutiny of Ireland under the universal periodic review, UPR, process. No recommendation was made in regard to the direct provision system in the committee's subsequent UPR report on Ireland.

All accommodation centres under contract to the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of my Department are obliged to ensure that their premises comply with and operate in accordance with all relevant statutory requirements of local authorities in regard to planning, building, by-laws, bedroom capacity, food, food hygiene, water supply, sewage disposal, fire precautions and general safety. The system of direct provision and dispersal is one of the central features of the State's asylum system. I am satisfied that the treatment of asylum seekers in this country is at least on a par with any other country and that the direct provision system delivers a high standard of service and value for money to the taxpayer through co-ordinated service delivery to asylum seekers.

A comprehensive review on the operation of the asylum seeker accommodation programme was carried out, and the subsequent report, "Value for Money and Policy Review - Asylum Seeker Accommodation Programme", was published in May 2010. The report considered the following alternatives to the existing direct provision structures: allow asylum seekers to claim social welfare and rent supplement; provide self-catering accommodation; and local authority housing. The review found that these options would be significantly more expensive than direct provision and concluded that using direct provision has proven to be the correct choice in providing for the accommodation needs of asylum seekers. The report is available on the RIA's website, www.ria.gov.ie, and on my Department’s website, www.justice.ie. Copies are also available in the Oireachtas Library.

The report found that the primary objective of providing accommodation and ancillary services to asylum seekers has been met since the inception of the direct provision system but went on to make a number of recommendations for greater efficiency. These recommendations included a reduction of operational spare capacity from 15% to less than 10%, the introduction of a mix of "contracts for capacity" and "contracts for availability and occupancy", as well as a "more open" tendering system.

The RIA has reported to me that it has made considerable progress on reducing operational spare capacity in line with the recommendations in the value for money report and, currently, the overall occupancy rate is 89.06%. In the area of the contracts mix, the RIA reports that it is systematically implementing this recommendation when contracts arise and where it is appropriate to do so. Currently, eight out of the 38 existing centres operate on more flexible contracts that achieve the objective of the recommendation.

The RIA is currently in the final stages of an open EU tender competition for the management of the seven State-owned RIA accommodation centres in the county. When this is completed, work will begin on the preparation of a "more open" tender competition for the commercially-owned and operated centres in the RIA portfolio.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

The first question deals with the value for money review on expenditure. There are approximately 39 accommodation centres State-wide and we are dealing with close to 5,500 people. It is my understanding that the Reception and Integration Agency does not actually lease the premises but instead leases services, such as accommodation, housekeeping and facilities. The Minister has said in the past that it is not the interests of the taxpayer that details of individual contracts are made known to the public because individuals may be in future negotiations with the RIA in regard to provision centres. Nonetheless, we need to know whether we are getting value for money and we do not know that.

We need to examine this issue given the whole system has come in for a lot of criticism. The Minister himself said it is not the ideal system to deal with asylum seekers and that it would be considered in the context of the upcoming immigration Bill, which I welcome.

On the other issue concerning the centres, the Minister referred to the UNHCR, which has expressed concern around the effects of long stays within these centres. The figures available suggest that 40% of current residents have lived in such centres for three or more years. The effect this has on the individual was summed up in a paper produced by the European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland, which states:

This system directly creates poverty and social exclusion as well as isolation and widespread depression and mental illness. The explicit exclusion of asylum seekers from integration policies stores up social problems for the future. Many people who receive refugee status or leave to remain in Ireland have been de-skilled and have become socially isolated, wasting a potential resource of new skills, ideas and energy which could be available to the Irish economy and society.

It is clear that the whole system of direct provision must be examined and we must address it.

Deputy Alan Shatter

The Deputy and I agree that the current system does not work well in the sense that when someone seeks to be granted political asylum, an initial decision is made as part of an appellate system which people are entitled to appeal. Then a series of further applications can be made. This draws out something that should produce a decision within a six month period. However, in most cases it can go on for many years not only because of the facility to appeal the initial decision, but because of the facility to make a series of further applications to seek permission to remain in the State.

The Deputy stated that people are in direct provision for too long and I agree. It is a product of legislation which has developed piecemeal over the years and which has not ensured that all relevant decisions on an individual who seeks to remain in the State can be made on the initial application with one appellate system. Instead, myriad approaches can be taken. Those in direct provision chose to take these approaches. In circumstances in which an application is made for asylum and where it is not granted and where the refusal is upheld on appeal, an individual is free to leave the State and go elsewhere. There are several individuals who properly and correctly apply for political asylum and are allowed to remain here. Others use other formats to seek permission to remain and they are allowed to remain as well. However, there are a substantial number of people who seek political asylum and who at the end of the process have no basis to remain in Ireland or are not allowed to remain in Ireland and in respect of whom a request is made to leave and for whom a deportation order must be made. The system at the moment does not work efficiently.

This is why we need the new legislation which will be dealt with as I informed the Deputy when we met at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. I hope to publish a new Bill rather than table 300 amendments to the old Bill. I hope we will finally get to progress this in the autumn. It will result in decisions being made more quickly and it will result in people in direct provision remaining there for a far shorter period. However, as things stand direct provision is economically the most efficient way of dealing with matters for the State.

The experience of the State in years gone by when it purchased premises to provide accommodation for asylum seekers has involved the creation of all sorts of difficulties. Expense was incurred and on occasion certain premises could not be utilised for the purpose for which they were acquired. There were difficulties in the planning process. Objections were lodged by local communities. In the context of where our legislation stands at present, the current system is the least worst alternative. In the context of some of the reviews undertaken, direct provision works as well as it could given the background difficulties that remain to be addressed and given the need for the State to ensure that expenditure is kept within reasonable limits.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

Is it fair to say from the Minister's response that he is in favour of a different system and this is something he will examine in light of the upcoming immigration Bill? The Minister may not have the figures before him and if not, I understand. What is the average time for processing applications? If the Minister does not have this information, I would appreciate it if he would forward it to me.

Deputy Alan Shatter

I do not have the answer to that. The Deputy should remember that in the context of processing applications the duration people stay in direct provision and the difficulties they experience are not solely the issue of the legislation. An extraordinary number of applications are made by way of judicial review to the High Court when applications are turned down. Then, rather than my Department engaging in a decision making process or those dealing with asylum applications dealing with these cases, the matter falls into the courts. By the time they wind their way from the High Court to the Supreme Court, judicial review applications can add three years on to a process. A range of issues arise. I hope that by ensuring we have more-----

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

Humane?

Deputy Alan Shatter

-----comprehensive legislation which allows decisions to be made on all aspects of the issues that arise and that by developing a single decision making process matters will be dealt with more speedily. If this becomes the case, people will not be in direct provision for as long.

An interesting issue arises once the new legislation is enacted in respect of whether there should be some timeframe within which certain steps must be taken by the State and, if not, whether people may live in circumstances other than direct provision. The State is not in a position to fund expensive accommodation for those seeking to remain here who have arrived here without appropriate visas and who are making claims for asylum or claims that they should be given leave to remain here. The State is not in a position to spend an open-ended pot of money on providing alternative accommodation for individuals.

Even after the enactment of new legislation direct provision will be with us, but I hope that we will have more efficient systems to ensure that applicants have their cases progressed a great deal more speedily and that the provisions will substantially delimit the circumstances in which it is appropriate to take judicial review applications with the resultant expense to the State of cases of applicants being dealt with through a court system.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Question:

70Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will introduce guidelines for his Department to ensure that when they are making a decision to relocate a person in direct provision accommodation, they will take account of their physical or mental health, cultural, religious backgrounds and the potential for conflict within another centre because of their ethnicity. [13856/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

The Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of my Department is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers in accordance with the Government policy of direct provision and dispersal. RIA currently provides accommodation to approximately 5,300 persons throughout 38 accommodation centres.

When asylum seekers make their initial asylum applications, they are referred to RIA for accommodation within the direct provision system. First, they are temporarily accommodated in a reception centre in Dublin where they are offered medical screening and linked in with community welfare services. Access is also provided to GPs, public health nurses and psychological services. After two weeks, these asylum seekers are scheduled for dispersal to accommodation centres throughout the country, subject to clearance by the HSE health centre in the reception centre. If there are particular health concerns, a person may be retained for a period at the reception centre or may be dispersed to specified accommodation centres with access to particular health services. Even after dispersal further health needs may present and RIA's internal administrative health unit and the local health services will review any particular health need. The RIA has access to an independent medical referee to assist in the assessment of particular health needs in such cases.

The RIA will always consult management in accommodation centres who have knowledge of local services and their resident profile in respect of religious, cultural and ethnic backgrounds. This feeds in to decisions on where an individual asylum seeker will be sent. Generally, persons of similar ethnic background are accommodated together within a centre. Centres also provide facilities such as places of worship and will assist residents in linking with religious, cultural and ethnic groups and communities near their accommodation centre.

Accommodation placement is a logistical operation for RIA and each case is considered individually. The RIA works to match asylum seekers to suitable accommodation in respect of family profile and aspects such as access to school places, health, social and community services and accommodation availability. Nevertheless, the system must operate within the inevitable constraint that RIA can only accommodate persons in centres where suitable vacancies exist. Where an asylum seeker wishes to transfer from one centre to another, they can write to RIA stating the grounds for requesting a transfer. RIA must manage the accommodation portfolio as a whole, taking into account the needs of those already in accommodation, the needs of newly arrived persons and the needs arising from changes of circumstance, such as newborn babies, health issues, etc.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

In that regard, will the Minister look again at the EU directive on minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers - it may be directive 2039 - which deals with many of the issues he has just outlined? It also deals with an issue raised in the previous question, that if the State does not make a decision within a certain timeframe, certain steps will be taken to deal with that. Many of the issues are dealt with in the directive and I urge the Minister and the Department to look at it again because we have not opted into it yet.

Deputy Alan Shatter

I am always happy to look at anything that may contribute to how we should properly deal with these matters within the resources I have available to me and to ensure that people are treated correctly and properly and that if difficulties arise, be they health or other difficulties, they are fully and properly addressed.

Residency Permits

Seán Crowe

Question:

71Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will ensure protection for migrant women from domestic violence by introducing formal immigration rules for the granting of independent residence permits; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13863/12]

David Stanton

Question:

82Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he has given any consideration to allowing for the granting of independent residence permits to migrant women whose residency entitlement is dependent on their husbands or partners and who are forced to leave their husbands or partners as a result of domestic violence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13945/12]

Deputy Alan Shatter

I propose to take Questions Nos. 71 and 82 together.

The Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, INIS, of my Department operates a flexible, pragmatic and humane approach to the status of non-EEA nationals, both men and women, who are in situations of domestic violence. Any person in such a situation can approach the INIS directly or through An Garda Síochána or a non-governmental organisation and their case will be examined with sensitivity. All cases are addressed on an individual basis and independent status is granted where the known circumstances of the case warrant it. In considering the circumstances of each such application every effort is made to ensure that the most appropriate permission stamp is granted consistent with overall public policy and the requirement to ensure that the integrity of the immigration system is upheld.

I am advised that very few non-EEA nationals who have experienced domestic violence have applied to my Department for independent status. There have been no more than a dozen such permissions granted. I would point out that not every victim of domestic violence will require a new residence permission. It is possible that a victim might be resident with their own independent status. However, where applications were made and the persons concerned were able to substantiate their claim with appropriate reports, an immigration status was granted which allowed them to access the labour force and to apply for State aid where required.

An Garda Síochána and non-governmental organisations working in the immigration area and those who offer services to victims of domestic violence are fully aware of the process and have acknowledged that the INIS will deal sensitively with domestic violence issues. I am satisfied that this system addresses the immigration requirements of non-EEA nationals who find themselves in such a terrible situation.

The primary concern for victims of domestic violence, whether they are Irish citizens or foreign nationals, is their physical safety. This concern is a primary focus of Cosc, the national office for the prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

I recognise there is some flexibility. However, one of the issues - I am sure Deputy Stanton, as Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, will support this - is that people are unaware of the criteria on which decisions are based with regard to this flexibility. The Minister spoke about the low numbers who requested independent status. One of the reasons the numbers are so low is that people do not know this service is available. I have spoken to a number of groups who find it difficult to get a grasp of the criteria and the guidelines which apply in circumstances such as these. This is something the Minister should look at again.

Deputy David Stanton

Is the Minister aware of recent changes in the UK legislation to deal with this issue? Is he prepared to investigate and look into those changes with a view to bringing forward similar changes here?

Deputy Alan Shatter

I am very anxious to ensure that if any individuals are a victim of domestic violence or are threatened with domestic violence, they will know this flexibility exists and that appropriate arrangements can be made. I have no difficulty with looking at the legislation mentioned by Deputy Stanton. If a person in the State, whether a citizen or here on a visa, is a victim of domestic violence, the domestic violence legislation that exists here can be used to seek a protection order, a safety order or a barring order against the spouse or cohabitee who engages in or threatens violence or who threatens the safety or welfare of your children. I have heard it suggested that this legislation is confined to citizens of the State, but it is not. It is legislation that can be utilised by any victim of domestic violence to seek protection. Where someone is a victim of domestic violence and has obtained a protection, a safety or a barring order from the courts, this is clear evidence to provide to the INIS, if that person requires a separate visa facility, as it establishes clearly the person has been victimised in the way described and would be of great assistance in addressing the issue. However, it is not essential to have a court order in these circumstances as each case will be dealt with individually. In so far as there are communication deficiencies in that regard and in so far as there is any doubt on the issue, I will ensure it is made known and will discuss that matter with the officials in my Department.