Vol. 814 No. 3
1. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of personal insolvency practitioners, PIPs; the ethical guidelines laid down by the service for PIPs; the payment procedures for PIPs who have been appointed by the Insolvency Service of Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39932/13]
I am advised by the Insolvency Service of Ireland, ISI, that as at 23 September 2013, there are 47 personal insolvency practitioners, or PIPs, authorised as well as eight Money Advice & Budgeting Service companies, representing 28 individuals, authorised to act as approved intermediaries. I understand the ISI is processing a large number of practitioner applications and the number of authorised PIPs and approved intermediaries is expected to increase in the coming weeks.
Practitioners are expected to meet a number of standards, including fitness and probity. The fitness and probity requirements are set out in the Personal Insolvency Act 2012 (Authorisation and Supervision of Personal Insolvency Practitioners) Regulations 2013, SI 209 of 2013. These regulations set out the qualification criteria, authorisation requirements and regulatory standards which must be met for an individual to be authorised by the ISI to carry on the practice of a PIP.
The ISI charges an application fee of €1,500 for persons wishing to become authorised as such practitioners. In so far as practitioner fees associated with the development of debt settlement arrangements and personal insolvency arrangements are concerned, the ISI does not prescribe practitioner fees. These fees will be negotiated with an individual debtor by the personal insolvency practitioner in advance of a case proceeding, and will be deducted from the amount of money an individual creditor is calculated as having available to pay his or her creditors during the term of the arrangement.
I thank the Minister for his response. The first issue is that of cost. Will the Minister and his Department keep the cost of these operators under scrutiny? An Irish Independent survey indicated that the PIPs might charge anything from €5,000 to €20,000 to families suffering severe financial difficulties during the five to seven year period of their debt. We hope this regime will be successful, in the interests of the many hard-pressed families it is to serve. However, it got off to a somewhat shaky start earlier this month. We heard one PIP claiming that hospital consultants and solicitors, for example, would need bigger houses than other individuals. What sort of criteria has the Minister in place to ensure the performance of these professionals is monitored and reflects the type of model the Minister and his Department put before the House when this legislation was introduced?
In the first place, the Personal Insolvency Service has a regulatory function in respect of personal insolvency practitioners and I expect it to carry out that regulatory function properly. As to the Deputy's question, I do not wish to talk about individuals in this House as that is not appropriate. However, there is nothing in the legislation which suggests or provides for any different treatment of individuals in financial difficulties who require the service of a PIP in regard to the nature of the professions in which they may be engaged or the work they undertake. I found the matter that was reported in the newspapers somewhat extraordinary because what was said was completely at variance with the express provisions of the legislation.
I thank the Minister.
There is, of course, an obligation on personal insolvency practitioners to perform their duties in accordance with the legislation, deal with debtors in a manner that accords with the legislation and engage with creditors in a manner that is appropriate to the legislation. There is important provision in the legislation, given the very nature of the personal insolvency arrangement, to seek where appropriate to protect an individual's home where that home is appropriate to his or her needs. There is no suggestion, nor could there be in any circumstances, nor do I believe creditors would countenance it, that some individuals should get special treatment by virtue of the nature of the profession in which they are engaged.
I appreciate the points the Minister has made but there continues to be some concern about the pricing arrangements in place. One hears reports, albeit anecdotal at this stage, that some PIPs are requiring upfront payment and that there is a vast variation in the charges applying. Will the Minister put a system in place to monitor this type of operation? He indicated to us that 47 PIPs are operational. Is the Minister satisfied there is an even enough distribution of these personnel? Has he or his Department identified the optimum number of such practitioners for the system to work effectively?
It is a matter for the insolvency agency to license PIPs or individuals who are qualified to perform their functions as PIPs. There are very specific provisions in the legislation in regard to the fitness and probity requirements for PIPs. SI 209 of 2013 contains several provisions regarding fitness and probity of PIPs and states:
A personal insolvency practitioner shall be free from any undue influence, undue guidance or undue control of or by any other person which could prevent or hinder in any material respect the performance of his or her functions ... A personal insolvency practitioner [must] demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Insolvency [agency] that he or she ... is sufficiently competent, proficient and independent to undertake the role of a personal insolvency practitioner ... has the qualifications, skills, competence and capacity appropriate to the role ... has a clear ... understanding of the relevant legal, regulatory and financial environment applicable to the role ... has the organisational and financial competence, capacity and resources to undertake the role.
In the context of the financial issue raised by the Deputy, I wish to draw two matters to his attention and will try to do so with speed. The first is that a PIP "must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Insolvency [agency] that his or her ability to act as a [PIP] under the Act is not adversely affected to a material degree where the [PIP] is, or has been, in any jurisdiction ... issued a warning, censure, suspension, reprimand or other administrative or judicial sanction". A PIP is required to "manage his or her financial affairs relating to his or her practice as a personal insolvency practitioner in a sound and prudent manner".
The issue the Deputy raised about charges is one about which we had a great deal of discussion during the course of the legislation.
Personal insolvency practitioners will not be able to charge what might be described as inappropriate or outlandish fees. When a proposal is made by a PIP on behalf of a debtor to creditors with a view to resolving an individual's debt difficulties by the conclusion of a debt settlement arrangement or a personal insolvency arrangement, as the fees payable to the PIP will in essence come out of the pot that is there to meet the indebtedness to the creditors, the creditors will effectively be able to reject a fee proposed if they feel it is inappropriate. There is an inbuilt control in that respect and I am sure if any complaints or difficulties arise over the initial 12 months of the operation of the legislation, they will be brought to the attention of the insolvency agency.
2. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans for the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, and the Garda Commissioner to meet with him to discuss GSOC's publicly aired serious concerns. [40057/13]
The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission was established under the Garda Síochána Act 2005 to provide independent oversight of complaints made against members of the Garda Síochána. It has a hugely important role in ensuring public confidence in the Garda Síochána is safeguarded.
The 2005 Act also provides for protocols on the sharing of information between the Garda Síochána and the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. Protocols were agreed in 2007 and set down time limits for the provision of information by the Garda Síochána to the ombudsman commission. The ombudsman commission, however, raised concerns regarding delays in concluding its investigations, in particular delays in receiving requested information from the Garda Síochána.
In response to these concerns, I convened a meeting with the Garda Commissioner and the chairperson of the ombudsman commission on 23 July. The aim of the meeting was to explore how best to ensure the highest level of practical co-operation between the Garda Síochána and the ombudsman commission in what can be complex and difficult investigations into alleged Garda misconduct. I am very pleased, therefore, to see that the Garda Commissioner and the chairperson of the ombudsman commission have signed new protocols providing for enhanced co-operation between the two organisations. The protocols are available on the website of the ombudsman commission. These new protocols will support the ombudsman commission in carrying out investigations in the most effective and timely manner possible, to the benefit of both complainants and members of the Garda Síochána alike. They also reflect the commitment of the Garda Commissioner to the full co-operation of the Garda Síochána in these investigations.
To facilitate early engagement for any emerging issues, I have established a committee chaired by a senior official in my Department, with senior representatives from the ombudsman commission and the Garda Síochána, to act as a forum where any such issues can be identified and appropriately addressed. I hope this will ensure there will be no further difficulties and that any previous issues that arose should not distract from the substantive work of the Garda Síochána and its successes. In this context, I refer to the latest official recorded crime figures from the CSO which cover the 12 month period to the end of the second quarter in 2013 and which show reductions in 12 out of the 14 categories. The total reduction is in excess of 20,000 offences, or 8% overall, and this builds on reductions recorded in the previous figures from the CSO. The overall picture presented in the latest CSO statistics show that, despite the budgetary constraints with which we are dealing, the Garda Síochána continues to deliver a first class policing service to the people of this country.
There are some welcome developments in the Minister's reply. Whenever the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commissioners came before the Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions, not only did they talk about a protocol and exchanging information, but the gardaí were actually querying why the information sought was relevant. That was absolutely shocking. Can we imagine a garda investigating a crime being asked by the person being investigated why his questions were relevant? Would the force be happy about that? It is good that we have had some progress and I commend the Minister on pulling that together. Public confidence had to be restored in the ability of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission to investigate quickly and efficiently complaints that had been brought to it.
There is a wider issue. At that time, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission published a series of recommendations following its special investigation and a report was sent to the Minister about five months ago. I would like to know what has happened to the recommendations in respect of the process for handling informants and the retention of contemporaneous notes, which are issues we should have learned from following the Morris tribunal.
The Deputy is asking a completely separate question. Of course it is important that the recommendations made by the ombudsman commission are implemented. In advance of the meeting that took place between the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and Garda Síochána, I wrote to the Garda Commissioner to respond to me about areas of concern, and he did that. Work began on this before the meeting on 23 July. Very substantial engagements were undertaken between the Garda side and the ombudsman commission side to resolve once and for all the difficulties that existed. It is crucial that when an issue arises for investigation by the ombudsman commission, it is able to perform its statutory duties in that respect and that the Garda Síochána complies with its statutory obligations.
I thought it was important also that there would be transparency to the new protocols put in place. I welcome that the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission has put them on its website, and I believe it is the intention of the Garda Síochána to do the same. These protocols were finally signed off last Monday. I cannot refer to them in detail in reply to the question, but I can tell the Deputy that the protocols are substantial and address all the areas of difficulty that had been detailed in both the annual report of the ombudsman commission and in some of its more specific reports it published in recent months.
With respect to the Minister, it is not a separate question. I asked whether the two sides met to address the concerns that were raised. The concerns raised also relate to the recommendations that have been made arising from that special report. I commend the Minister on taking the initiative as it was essential. Do the protocols which he mentioned deal with the recommendations made in respect of the handling of informants and the retention of contemporaneous notes?
It is my understanding that all of the issues raised by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission in respect of dealing with informants and the retention of contemporaneous notes are addressed. Indeed, they were addressed some time ago. The reports of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission on some of these matters deal with events which took place a number of years ago. I am advised that the issues relating to informants are fully addressed. The recent particular issue that arose was in respect of the ongoing difficulties, as alleged by the Commission, with regard to the receipt of information and co-operation from the Garda side in dealing with inquiries that were made. I hope the very comprehensive new protocols that have been put in place will put that issue to bed. There is now in place a very clear roadmap that has been agreed between both sides to ensure no confusion or difficulty can arise in the future. The arrangement I put in place seeks to ensure that if any difficulty emerges unexpectedly, it is dealt with immediately. There is a basis for it being resolved in order that it does not prove to be a continuous source of concern.
3. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the institutions that have drug-free units currently operating; the number of spaces in each drug-free unit; the number of prisoners currently in each drug-free unit; the number of vacancies in each drug-free unit; the type of treatment and programmes available to those in addiction in prison; the number entering prison drug-free that leave addicted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39935/13]
I must warn the Deputy that as substantial work has been done in this area, I have a very long reply that I was anxious to receive. There is no chance the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will let me get to the end of it, so the Deputy will receive in written form what I have not been able to read out.
There are currently drug-free units operational in six closed prisons: Mountjoy, the Dóchas Centre, Wheatfield, Cloverhill, Limerick and Cork. There is an aggregate total of 472 spaces in these units, which currently house 421 prisoners, with 43 spaces currently available. The majority of units operate at or close to their capacity and prisoners are only accommodated in such units when they meet the strict criteria which apply, including evidence of drug-free status.
The breakdown of these aggregate figures is as follows. Mountjoy male prison has 34 spaces, with 34 prisoners currently in the unit and no spaces.
The Dóchas Centre has 60 spaces, with 44 prisoners currently in the unit and 16 spaces available. Wheatfield Prison has 267 spaces, with 242 prisoners currently occupying the unit and 16 spaces available. Cloverhill Prison has 52 spaces, with 53 prisoners currently in the unit and no spaces. Limerick Prison has 45 spaces, with 45 prisoners currently in the unit and no spaces. Cork Prison has 14 spaces, with three prisoners currently in the unit and 11 spaces available. This unit was only recently established and opened. I expect that there will be more prisoners using the unit in the coming weeks and days.
The Deputy may be aware that as part of the Irish Prison Service Strategic Plan 2012-2015, drug-free units are to be established in all closed prisons with the exception of Arbour Hill Prison. The Irish Prison Service anticipates that the establishment of these units will be completed by the end of 2013. The Deputy may wish to note that in addition to the spaces available in the drug-free unit in Mountjoy male prison, there are up to 54 places available in the drug treatment programmes provided in the prison.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The Prison Service has no information to suggest that there are prisoners who enter prison drug free who leave addicted. However, the Prison Service continues to provide a comprehensive range of drug treatment services tiered to meet the needs of the prison population. At present, any person entering prison giving a history of opioid use and testing positive is offered a medically assisted symptomatic detoxification if clinically indicated. Patients can, as part of the assessment process, discuss with health care staff other treatment options. Drug rehabilitation programmes for prisoners involve a significant multidimensional input by a diverse range of general and specialist services provided by the Prison Service and visiting statutory and non-statutory organisations. Prisoners who on committal are engaged in an opioid substitution programme in the community will have their substitution treatment continued while in custody. Methadone substitution treatment is available in ten of the 14 prisons, accommodating more than 80% of the prison population.
Drug treatment pharmacist services are available in Mountjoy, Dóchas, Midlands and Portlaoise prisons. Pharmacists are responsible for all aspects of drug treatment, mainly methadone - dispensing, administration, recording, ordering, storage, etc. - in those prisons, thus ensuring that drug treatment is provided on an equivalent basis to that available in the community while meeting all legal and professional requirements in those particular prisons. The HSE provides consultant-led inreach addiction services to Cloverhill and Wheatfield prisons. Merchants Quay Ireland provides a national addiction counselling service for prisoners with drug and alcohol problems in prisons and places of detention where prisoners require such a service, with the exception of Arbour Hill Prison.
Mountjoy Prison currently has two addiction nurses assigned. A clinical addiction team comprising the primary care addiction specialist general practitioner, addiction nurses, chief nurse officers, Merchants Quay Ireland personnel and addiction pharmacists provides a comprehensive overview of addiction services, which has resulted in a more streamlined service, better assessment and through-care outcomes. These programmes seek to reduce the demand for drugs within the prison system through education, treatment and rehabilitation services for drug-addicted prisoners.
In line with action No. 43 of the national drug strategy, the Prison Service ensures the seamless transition of prisoners established on drug treatment into community drug treatment settings as agreed in the protocol developed with the HSE. If the prisoner is on a community programme prior to committal to prison, the maintenance programme is continued during the prison term. Prior to a patient being commenced on methadone maintenance in prison, a drug treatment place in the community must be secured to ensure continuation of treatment upon release.
The Prison Service has conducted a review of its existing drug treatment programmes and proposals have been developed to reorient and extend the treatment options. Recent trends across prisons indicate a significant number of prisoners self-detoxing from methadone and a marked reduction in the average dose of methadone.
The proposals that have been introduced by the Prison Service on foot of this review include the establishment of a therapeutic detoxification and rehabilitation treatment programme, DRTP, with the allocation of seven additional places from March 2013. The DRTP will also operate in the medical unit of Mountjoy Prison and will be in addition to the existing drug treatment programme, DTP, which has nine places. Circa 50 beds in the medical unit, Mountjoy Prison, have been dedicated exclusively for drug treatment programmes, DTP, including the introduction of an eight-week duration in a DTP, a six-week duration DRTP, a maximum six-month duration slow detoxification programme and a maximum six-month duration stabilisation programme.
The training unit has been designated as suitable for prisoners on methadone maintenance treatment. Loughan House and Shelton Abbey will be designated as facilities for the treatment of prisoners seeking to return to a drug-free lifestyle.
The proposals set out have provided an increased number of options for prisoners who demonstrate a commitment to addressing their substance misuse. Progression from these programmes will include access to drug-free units, open prisons and ultimately the community return scheme, subject to normal operational considerations. The Deputy will note that the Prison Service is adding to the range of programmes, support services and through-care options for prisoners demonstrating a commitment to addressing their substance misuse.
I will wait to get the additional information. When considering this matter, I arrived at three categories, the first being those who are in prison, are drug free and want to stay so. The drug-free unit is a way forward in this regard. I received that answer from the Minister previously. How far advanced is the plan? The Minister mentioned that there would be drug-free units in all prisons by the end of the year, but is he confident about that? There is overcapacity in some prisons.
The quick answer is "Yes".
The second group are those in addiction who want to go into recovery. From people who work with such prisoners, addiction services, etc., my understanding is that they are advising prisoners to keep taking low dosages of methadone, as the services for those who want to come off drugs are minimal. If we wish to work with people who want to come off drugs, more services must be provided. Anyone who works with those in addiction must work with them where they are. If a prisoner who is in addiction wants to start the recovery process, it must start at that point.
The Irish Prison Service is providing a comprehensive range of drug treatment services, not just the units that I described. These are designed to meet the needs of the prison population as a whole. At present, any person entering prison giving a history of opioid use and testing positive is offered a medically assisted symptomatic detoxification if clinically indicated. Patients can, as part of the assessment process, discuss with health care staff other treatment options. Drug rehabilitation programmes for prisoners involve a significant multidimensional input by a diverse range of general and specialist services provided both by the Prison Service and visiting statutory and non-statutory organisations. Prisoners who on committal are engaged in an opioid substitution programme in the community will have their substitution treatment continued while in custody. Methadone substitution treatment is available in ten of the 14 prisons, accommodating over 80% of the prison population.
Drug treatment pharmacist services are available in Mountjoy, Dóchas, Midlands and Portlaoise prisons. Pharmacists are responsible for all aspects of drug treatment, mainly methadone - dispensing, administration, recording, ordering, storage, etc. - in those prisons, thus ensuring that drug treatment is provided on an equivalent basis to that available in the community. The HSE provides consultant-led inreach addiction services to both Cloverhill and Wheatfield prisons. Merchants Quay Ireland provides a national addiction counselling service for prisoners with drug and alcohol problems in prisons and places of detention where prisoners require such a service. There is a whole range of services available to prisoners who have drug addiction issues.
If all of those measures were in place, those who visited and who worked with them in prison would not supply me with the statistic that there is one counsellor for 550 prisoners in addiction in a single prison. The Minister's reply does not correlate with reality.
The third category are those who are in addiction but who are not at a place yet to start their recovery programmes. What is the status of harm reduction interventions and the needle exchange programme in prisons?
To be brief, when the Deputy sees the written reply that she will get, she will see that I have covered all of the issues she is raising. If there is an issue that I have not adequately addressed, I am very happy to engage with the Deputy. She may write to me about the matter or table another question. If she would like a briefing from the head of the Prison Service, I would have no difficulty in arranging that for her. This is an issue that I take very seriously. There is very substantial reform and change being implemented within our prison system to do everything possible to tackle the issue of addiction - both drug and alcohol addiction - and to try to ensure, in so far as we can, that we have a comprehensive range of available services.
4. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the date on which recruitment for the Garda will open; the number of gardaí that will be recruited; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39933/13]
I seem not to have switched off my telephone. Perhaps the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will give me a moment of extra time just to deal with that.
Injury time.
I thought that I had switched it off.
As the Deputy is aware, I have secured the approval of my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, for a recruitment competition for the Garda Síochána. There are a number of procedural issues that need to be finalised prior to the formal commencement of that competition and these are expected to conclude in the coming weeks.
The competition will be run by the Public Appointments Service, PAS, on behalf of the Garda Commissioner. An announcement will be issued as soon as recruitment starts, both on its website and directly to those who have registered an expression of interest in joining the Garda Síochána. Persons who would like to join An Garda Síochána and have not yet registered their interest in doing so may sign up on the PAS website, www.publicjobs.ie.
The first students are expected to enter the Garda College in Templemore, County Tipperary, in mid-2014. These recruits will complete the new Garda training programme before they are attested as sworn gardaí and assigned to stations to complete their training. The number of recruits to be drawn down from this new competition will be determined taking a number of factors into account, including the current and projected strength of the force, the projected retirement rate and, of course, the availability of resources.
I believe it is important for an organisation such as the Garda Síochána, particularly given the physical demands of policing, to have some regular intakes of new recruits even on a modest scale, and I was therefore very pleased to obtain the sanction of my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, for this recruitment competition.
While we welcome the announcement of a recruitment campaign, this is perhaps the third time that reference has been made to it. It was delayed previously due to the Haddington Road agreement. Surely the Minister knows how many personnel it is intended to be recruited.
On a related matter, what has the Minister concluded is the minimum number of gardaí required? The Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan, has alluded to a figure of 13,000. Is this the figure from which the Minister is working? Does he share the Commissioner's view that numbers should not be allowed to reduce to below 13,000?
The simple answer is that I share the Commissioner's view. The number in the Garda force as of today, based on retirements to date this year, is 13,190. I do not know how many further retirements we will have before the end of this year. From recollection, and I think I am right in this, the number of members of the force we had at the end of December 2012 was 13,430. If I am ten out in the number, I presume that the Deputy will not shoot me, but I think that it was 13,430. Based on the agreement that his party entered into in November-December 2010 with the troika, the Garda was to be reduced by 31 December 2012 to 13,350. I managed to maintain and provide for 80 more gardaí at the end of that year than his party intended to be in An Garda Síochána.
In the context of the numbers to be recruited, there is a series of factors that will impact on that.
We obviously need to get some insight as to how many retirements there are by the end of this year. That will give us some indication of where we are, but that matter has yet to be finalised. There is a substantive administrative job to be done in the context of the recruitment process. An advertisement has been issued and in the region of 30,000 individuals have expressed an interest in joining An Garda Síochána. I am pleased therefore that we will be recruiting next year. In the Fianna Fáil Party's plans or financial figures, announced in 2010, no provision was made for any Garda recruitment between 2010 and 2015. I am pleased that I am in the current position. The numbers issue will be further addressed later this year.
I will resist becoming involved in what our plans were because the Minister is now responsible for implementing his plans. I welcome the fact that, perhaps for the first time, he has committed himself to a minimum number of 13,000 members in the Garda Síochána. That certainly is welcome but it poses a problem for the Minister, for us and more importantly for the public. In the interim - between the admission of these people to the Garda training college and their eventual qualification to function as full-time gardaí - what plans does the Minister have to bridge the gap and ensure that the numbers are maintained at 13,000 and that they will not fall below that? The Garda Commissioner has made it clear that in order to provide basic levels of Garda service, the figure of 13,000 is an absolute requirement.
Gardaí do a great deal more than providing a basic level of service. In the context of the current numbers in An Garda Síochána, they are providing an efficient and effective service which includes not just crime investigation but also crime prevention. If that was not the case we would not have seen a drop of over 20,000 in the number of offences that were recorded as being committed in the preceding 12 months. Rather than playing political games with Garda numbers in this House, it would be refreshing for the Deputy to acknowledge the substantial successes of the Garda Síochána, as well as the success of the more targeted approach that has been adopted in the past two or three years. Smart policing, which has been derided by the Opposition, has also brought about successes. It involves using intelligence proactively not only for crime investigation but also for crime prevention.
Will the Minister give us a smart answer on the numbers?
The Minister's time is up.
It is that type of smart policing that has successfully resulted in the region of 6,500 individuals intent on, or engaged in, burglary being arrested. In the region of 3,500 charges have been brought against individuals. I pay tribute to the work of An Garda Síochána and we should not forget that we currently have in excess of 1,200 members of the Garda reserve. In addition we have 2,000 civilians employed in An Garda Síochána who ensure that well trained members of the force, who in the past were unnecessarily engaged in administrative duties, are now available to engage in crime prevention and detection.
The Minister has not answered the question.
I was just going to call the Deputy, who has a minute left. Please stick to the time.
I am happy to pay tribute to the gardaí and we all recognise their successes. However, I asked the Minister a simple question about what he was going to do to bridge the gap between when candidates enter the Garda training college and eventually graduate. I also asked about the potential difficulty of Garda numbers falling below 13,000 which is the minimum number the Garda Commissioner and the Minister have indicated is required.
Those issues will be dealt with in the context of where we are moving towards. The Deputy is labouring under an illusion as to where Garda numbers might be in 12 to 18 months time. I cannot predict with certainty where numbers may be then. It may well be that next year we will have 100 more than 13,000 or 50 fewer than 13,000. As regards overall Garda strength, however, the objective is that the strength should be at 13,000 and that we will recruit to An Garda Síochána.
The Deputy may not be aware that a new training programme is in place for new recruits. The Garda Síochána has prepared that programme but has not yet had an opportunity to use it. The new student probationer training programme will be radically different and will be restructured into three phases. Phase 1 is for 32 weeks at the Garda college at the end of which successful students will be attested, i.e. become members of the Garda Síochána with full police powers. Phase 2 is for 65 weeks based in Garda stations. Phase 3 consists of seven weeks of exam preparation, exams and assessment. The programmes will now result in the award of a Bachelor of Arts level 7 degree in police studies. This is a far more sophisticated and different approach to what was there previously. The main difference between it and the earlier programme is that it carries a greater emphasis on operational policing and focuses on real life scenarios which in turn prepare students better for the policing challenges they face.
The new programme will also instil a life-long learning philosophy for members of the Garda Síochána with a suite of mandatory and elective courses being made available. We are now in a different, more sophisticated and operationally-focused training programme.
5. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he has implemented in full, in the identified timeframe of three months, the recommendations of the Garda Síochána Professional Standards Unit into the cancellation of penalty points; if not, the reason for same; when he will publish the review he asked the Garda Síochána Inspectorate to carry out on the GSPSU report; and if he will publish the response he has received from the Garda Ombudsman to whom he forwarded both reports into the penalty points controversy for review. [40058/13]
The report of April 2013 from the Garda Síochána Professional Standards Unit looked at the processes and systems which are in place concerning the cancellation of fixed charge processing notices. The report complements the report prepared by Assistant Commissioner John O'Mahoney of his examination into the allegations of irregularities in the operation of the fixed charge processing system. These two reports recommended a number of changes aimed at ensuring that administrative procedures are correctly followed throughout the force in relation to the cancellation of fixed charge notices.
The two reports were published on my Department's website on 15 May 2013. In publishing the reports, I welcomed their recommendations for enhanced safeguards to ensure integrity in the fixed charge processing system. In addition, in order to provide even further public reassurance as to the effectiveness of these changes, and with the agreement of the Garda Commissioner, I asked the independent Garda Síochána Inspectorate to validate the proposed changes prior to implementation, including making any necessary supplementary recommendations, and to review their implementation after 18 months. The inspectorate is making progress in its work in this regard and I await its report on the matter.
The inspectorate's assessment of the recommendations made in the two Garda reports, and any further recommendations in this area which the inspectorate feels are warranted, will be put in the public domain via the inspectorate's website.
I also provided the two reports to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality for its consideration and advice on any further recommendations or procedural or legislative changes which are desirable in this area. I understand the Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions, in turn, forwarded the reports to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and that the ombudsman commission subsequently appeared before that committee on 3 July 2013.
GSOC informed the committee that it had previously decided against opening an investigation. It was conscious that the whistleblower was a serving garda and, therefore, under the Garda Act, they could not deem a complaint from him admissible. GSOC indicated to the committee that the decision was open-ended and it was reserving its position. I am somewhat surprised that Deputy Wallace does not seem to be aware of this position, as he was present at that meeting and, indeed, chaired part of the meeting himself. Neither of the reports was forwarded to the ombudsman commission by me or my Department.
There is an additional response here that is of relevance to the Deputy's question in regard to action that has been taken by the Garda Commissioner on foot of the reports. If I am allowed to give it to the Deputy by way of a supplementary reply, I will do so.
I wonder if the Minister will commit himself to incorporating the 12 recommendations of the GSPSU report, or will he stick to the seven weaker versions that he came up with himself at the time the report came out? As the Minister will be aware, the Garda Síochána Professional Standards Unit was very critical of the process.
I would like to ask the Minister about some of the issues they raised. Has the fixed charge manual, which we were told would be in place and distributed to all gardaí within three months, been put in place? Another issue was the inclusion of humanitarian grounds as a grounds for cancellation. Despite the fact that this was being used wholesale it was not provided for in the 2005 guidelines. According to the Garda Síochána Professional Standards Unit, new guidelines for use by gardaí will include the humanitarian grounds aspect.
It was recommended by the GSPSU that district officers be stripped of their ability to cancel fixed charge notices on PULSE. Does the Minister believe this is a good idea and, also, that it is important the system is centralised to ensure only people in the central authority in Thurles can cancel fixed charge notices? The GSPSU also recommended that district officers be only allowed to consider the cancellation of notices in respect of offences which occurred in their geographical area. These are important issues that must be addressed if we are to strengthen the process.
I do not disagree with the Deputy. I am advised by the Garda Commissioner that a circular with revised cancellation procedures in regard to fixed charge notices issued to all members of the Garda Síochána on 30 August last. This particular directive may be further advised on foot of any recommendations that may be received by the Garda Inspectorate.
In the context of the new procedures introduced, the cancelling authority for a fixed charge notice is a district officer or an inspector appointed to act as a district officer in the district where the alleged offence occurred and the superintendent, Dublin Metropolitan Region - Traffic, Dublin Castle, Dublin 2 with regard to offences detected by personnel attached to that unit. This authority also applies to the inspector in charge of the Fixed Charge Processing Office, FCPO, Thurles, County Tipperary and other staff attached to that office as authorised by the Chief Superintendent of the Garda National Traffic Bureau.
I must emphasise that the cancelling authority only has jurisdiction to cancel a fixed charge notice for an alleged offence which occurred in its respective district area of responsibility. The cancelling authority will no longer terminate a fixed charge notice on the local garda's PULSE systems. All decisions to cancel fixed charge notices must be immediately communicated to the central authority, which is the inspector in charge of the Fixed Charges Processing Office, who will have responsibility for terminating fixed charge notices on the FCPS.
I thank the Minister.
In addition, humanitarian grounds may be included as a discretionary reason when considering cancellation of fixed charge notices.
I must ask the Minister to conclude if Deputy Wallace is to get in again.
Special provisions have been put in place with regard to any conflict of interest that could arise concerning personnel, public figures, members of An Garda Síochána and immediate relatives of an applicant and in respect of a number of other matters of importance. Provision is also made for auditing.
The Minister is way over time.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to give all the detail in response to the Deputy's question.
I welcome that some positive action is being taken in this area. Am I correct that cancellations will now only be carried out by the central authority in Thurles? The Minister stated an audit process has been put in place, which is welcome. It is important an independent body rather than the Garda Síochána is responsible for that audit.
One of the GSPSU recommendations is that cancellation requests should be in written form and filed with supporting documentation. This provision has been in place for some time but was not being implemented. Does the Minister agree with the GSPSU recommendation that cancellation by gardaí of offences which occur outside their geographical area should not be permitted, as already provided for in the 2005 legislation? Many of these provisions are already in place but are not being implemented. It has been admitted that they are not being adhered to.
The Minister has thrown cold water on the whole process and the GPSU has highlighted that much was left to be desired in terms of the manner in which this process took place.
I did not pour cold water on anything. I merely made the point that in the context of the investigation conducted and the outcome of same some exotic decisions had been made. There were issues to be addressed and answered but some of the allegations made, such as in regard to fixed charge notices and road fatalities, were proved entirely untrue. Unfortunately, the individual who made those allegations is sticking by them without providing any evidence to substantiate them. It was important that the issues of concern were fully, properly and comprehensively addressed.
The new guidelines were circulated on 30 August last to all members of the Garda force. Detailed revised cancellation procedures, which are applicable to district officers and superintendents of the Dublin metropolitan region - traffic, state that on receipt of a cancellation request in writing - which is the manner in which these matters should and will be dealt with - the cancelling authority will apply the following revised cancellation procedures: acknowledge receipt by sending a letter to the applicant, including where the offences occurred outside his or her district; confirm the alleged offence occurred within his or her district area of responsibility; otherwise arrange for the cancellation request to be forwarded to the correct cancelling authority, with a copy of any acknowledgement letter; review and examine the cancellation request in accordance with FCPS policy and procedures; conduct stringent checks to identify if the applicant has made previous applications and scrutinise the reasons included therein; the cancelling authority must be satisfied on the basis of the evidence presented that the fixed charge notice can be cancelled for the reason set out-----
The Minister is over time and must conclude.
-----they must sign and date the certified fixed charge notice cancellation form with the decision to cancel or reject the cancellation request and include a rationale for that decision; notify the applicant in writing when the application is rejected; forward the certified fixed charge notice cancellation letters form to the FCPO for termination via e-mail at fcncancellationgarda.ie when the application is approved; and retain a hard copy of the relevant documentation in the district office for auditing purposes, including the cancellation request, the certified FCN cancellation form, signed and dated by the district officer.
The Minister must conclude.
There are now very clear and indisputable provisions set out in this regard.
We will move on now to Other Questions. I must ask Members to stick to the time limits. Clocks indicating the time allocated are available. While many Members are using the words "Finally" and "In conclusion" they do not conclude.
