Vol. 1067 No. 3
117. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Justice if the selection competition for identifying and recommending to the Government a person for appointment as Garda Commissioner has commenced; if he expects that a new Garda Commissioner will be in place when the extension of the current Commissioner's contract ends on 1 September 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24687/25]
The selection competition for identifying and recommending to the Government a person for appointment as Garda Commissioner has been delayed as a result of the Government's failure to enact the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act. This is a crucially important position in our society and particularly in our policing services. Will the Minister give an assurance to the Dáil that a new Garda Commissioner will be in place by 1 September of this year when the current Commissioner's contract ends?
I thank the Deputy for his very important question but I think he will agree with me it fades into insignificance when we consider the terrible events of last weekend and how they affected An Garda Síochána. Like the Deputy no doubt, I want to start these questions by extending my condolences to the family, friends and colleagues of Garda Kevin Flatley who gave his life in the line of duty.
On that point and in answer to the Deputy's question, it is fair to say that a Commissioner, no matter who he or she is, can only be as good as the rank and file gardaí who serve under them. Nonetheless the Deputy's question is a valid and an important one. Section 26 of the new Act, that sets out the procedure for the appointment of a Garda Commissioner.
As the Deputy has indicated, the Commissioner, Mr. Harris, is retiring on 1 September. I have already started the process for the appointment of the new Garda Commissioner. I consulted with the relevant statutory bodies in advance of the post being advertised last Friday. As the Deputy will be aware, the closing date for applications is 29 May. After that, there will be interviews. I believe I will be in a position in mid-July to go to the Government with a proposal on the name of a person who will be appointed by the Government as Garda Commissioner. If that is achieved in July, as I expect it to be achieved, it will mean that the new Commissioner will commence his or her post from 1 September.
To answer the Deputy's question directly, we will be in a position to have a new Commissioner starting as leader of the force on 1 September next. It is an extremely important position. I know we are going to have many excellent candidates from within and without the force putting forward their names for the competition.
I thank the Minister. I join with him in expressing our condolences to the family, friends and Garda colleagues of Garda Kevin Flatley. The outpouring of grief we have seen from his local community points to the fact that Garda Flatley represented all that is good about An Garda Síochána and its membership.
Regarding the new Garda Commissioner, I agree with the Minister that the Commissioner is only as strong as his or her members. Clearly, there has been somewhat of a breakdown in trust - that is putting it as diplomatically as I can - between many Garda members and higher echelons of management. That is why the appointment of a new Commissioner must mark a new beginning and a new phase in the operational issues of An Garda Síochána that we know are there and must be addressed.
Therefore, is the Minister satisfied that there is now a prospect of somebody with no policing experience whatsoever taking over the role of Garda Commissioner? Many people are quite surprised that that is even an option. I would like the Minister to comment on that.
No, a person with no policing experience will not be appointed, or recommended by me rather, for the position of Garda Commissioner. It is also important to emphasise that we have a lot of excellent candidates within An Garda Síochána who should be putting their names forward for the position of Garda Commissioner. As it such a prestigious job at such a well-resourced and high-reputation entity within the world, I have no doubt that people from outside this country will be putting their names forward.
I want to see an active and strong competition. It is a really important role. We need an inspirational leader and somebody who recognises the important role that An Garda Síochána plays within our society. I know there were issues of some concern in respect of the standard fund threshold to persons who are within An Garda Síochána, but when you look at the package that is available, I am fairly satisfied and have a strong expectation that the full recommendations of Dr. Donal de Buitléir will be implemented by Government in due course.
That is important, and it is regrettable that we have a situation where senior gardaí are saying - if not on the record, then letting it be known - that the position is not tenable for them. Those issues must be addressed.
What the public at large wants to see is an improvement in Garda visibility in their communities. We need a clear plan for putting more gardaí, particularly community gardaí, on our streets in our communities. The Minister will know that, in March, the current Commissioner, Mr. Drew Harris, said it was simply not possible to achieve the Government's goal of having 1,000 new members attested in 2025. He said the maximum would be 800. I do not know if the Minister can give us an estimated total for this year yet, but what we do know is that Garda numbers have declined in relative terms over the past number of years, and communities have paid a price for that in terms of Garda visibility. Will the Minister ensure that when the new Garda Commissioner is in place, he or she will be provided with the resources and policy changes necessary to ensure we have the number of gardaí that are required so that the Commissioner's term can be a success?
I agree with the Deputy's position, and that of Sinn Féin, that the standard fund threshold part of the tax system needs to be changed. It is my strong expectation that that will happen.
In respect of the numbers within An Garda Síochána, as the Deputy will know from the programme for Government, we have given a commitment that we will seek to get the numbers in An Garda Síochána up by 5,000 over the course of the Government term. I have said it before; it is a challenging issue to try to get Garda numbers up but all I can do - and I would ask the Deputy and other Members of the House to do it as well - is to emphasise that, notwithstanding the danger associated with being a member of An Garda Síochána, which we tragically saw last weekend, it is a job that is worth doing. There are very many fine members of An Garda Síochána who you speak to, and they will tell you they derive great satisfaction from their jobs.
We need to get the numbers up. More importantly, we need to get the numbers we have out on the streets. We are beginning to see that. We are in a great position in Ireland where people want to see members of An Garda Síochána on the streets in their communities, and that is what I am committed to doing.
118. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Justice the total amount that was spent on IPAS accommodation in 2024; the projected spend on IPAS accommodation in 2025; the plans he has to initiate a value for money review into contracts for the provision of IPAS accommodation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24688/25]
The Minister of State knows there has been massive profiteering in the provision of accommodation for those seeking asylum. People have become millionaires overnight providing what is sometimes unsuitable accommodation in what I would call a deeply flawed system, while many communities have lost vital local amenities, including hotels. Will the Minister of State outline the total amount of public money that was spent on IPAS accommodation in 2024, what the projected spend is for this year, and what plans he has to initiate a value for money review into the contracts for the provision of IPAS accommodation?
I thank the Deputy. I wish to start by also expressing my sympathy and condolences to Garda Flatley's family, colleagues and the community. It is a very sad occasion in which we are taking these questions here today, and they put a lot of things in context.
The Government has brought significant focus to addressing a range of complex systemic pressures within our international protection system. Ireland has adopted and is now working to implement the EU pact on migration and asylum in mid-2026. As Minister of State, my goal is to ensure a robust and enforced immigration system. The system should provide efficient processing and ensure people who meet the criteria for international protection can be accepted and integrated into our society quickly. It will also ensure that anyone who does not meet the criteria is refused protection and leaves the State.
My overall strategic approach is intended to reduce the scale of the demand for accommodation. This is against a backdrop in Ireland and other EU member states where we have responded to a very sharp and sustained increase in the number of people applying for international protection from early 2022 to the end of 2024. To illustrate this, at the beginning of 2022, Ireland's international protection accommodation services sheltered approximately 7,000 people. By the end of 2024, this had expanded by almost 400% to accommodate 32,000 eligible people.
The total cost of IPAS accommodation in 2024 was just over €1 billion. This figure is still provisional pending publication of the 2024 appropriation accounts for the Department of Children, Disability and Equality, under which this service operated during that year.
The budget allocated for this service in 2025 is €1.2 billion. The costs include both State-owned and commercially provided emergency accommodation and cover accommodation, catering, utilities, transport and other essential costs.
In managing the complex range of accommodation contracts in 325 centres, there are processes in place to ensure value for money and enforce compliance. Officials in IPAS routinely inspect services and oversee the contracts, and engage with providers and regulatory bodies. Within IPAS, these changes will see the proportion of accommodation provided on State-owned sites increased with the objective of developing an accommodation system with a reduced reliance on commercial provision.
These changes, along with other steps I am taking to improve the operation of international protection, should curtail the need to constantly grow the capacity we have seen over recent years.
I have been raising the issue of profiteering within the IPAS system since I was an MEP almost a decade ago. I raised it as a member of the Committee of Public Accounts. The Minister of State said we spent €1 billion on IPAS accommodation last year. What he did not say was that most of that money was paid to private operations. He did not answer the question as to whether he agreed there was a need for a value for money audit and full scrutiny of those IPAS contracts.
There are serious questions. Do we know, for example, how many providers that are making millions of euro actually acquired the properties being used at a discount through NAMA? Do we know how many newly established companies that have no track record secured these types of contract? How do we have a situation where companies have just completely repurposed overnight? We have had a small café becoming one of the largest financial beneficiaries of IPAS contracts.
Do we know how many companies, benefiting to the tune of millions from what is a flawed system, are located or owned by corporations outside of the State? These are serious questions, and when talking about €1 billion of public money, the public has a right to answers. The Minister of State has not given clarification as to whether a review of the public expenditure accounts will be carried out. Will he do so?
It important to note that the IPAS has grown rapidly and by more than 400%. It is important to note there is extensive oversight of all aspects of accommodation, the commissioning process and all the processes that have been improved incrementally over the past three years. Regarding appraisal of providers, my Department carries out due diligence on accommodation being contracted, including checks on the providers via the Companies Registration Office to ensure compliance with CRO requirements, as well as checks on tax compliance and that providers have valid tax clearance certificates. All commercial offers are appraised by a dedicated team across a range of factors, including the site, its potential, the value for money to the State, that due diligence is done, and planning and regulatory measures. Consideration is also given to the location, locality and access to services in terms of health, wellbeing and security.
I have to dispute virtually every single thing the Minister of State has just said. I know this area has just moved into his Department. The State has paid out billions of euro with virtually no transparency. There have been increasing reports of companies with no track record at all being awarded contracts to the tunes of millions of euro. A recent report concerned a company that had been awarded a contract to provide 277 beds for IPAS applicants at Dundrum, County Tipperary. The company, which is named Utmasta Limited and was set up three months ago with one director who is based in Majorca, is set to be paid millions of euro of Irish taxpayers' money. Does that make sense to the Minister of State? Has that contract been reviewed to ascertain how this could come about? To give some reassurance, can the Minister of State point to any instance where an IPAS contract has been withdrawn or cancelled as a result of any of the checks and balances that he has outlined here today?
It is important to say that standard procedures have been developed and documented for all aspects of the process. There is full transparency from the Department in terms of providers receiving payments. Details of payments over €20,000 are published quarterly online on gov.ie.
Have any contracts been cancelled?
There is full detail and transparency within the process.
Have any been cancelled? Will the Minister of State look into the case I asked about?
119. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Justice in light of the worsening crisis of prison overcrowding, where over 350 people are reportedly sleeping on floors and prison numbers are at a record high, the steps he is taking to implement meaningful decarceration policies, including non-custodial sentencing and investment in community supports. [24597/25]
I want to align myself with the condolences expressed across the Chamber to Garda Kevin Flatley's family, colleagues and the communities he served so diligently.
In light of the worsening crisis of prison overcrowding whereby more than 350 people are reported to be sleeping on floors in prison and prison numbers are at a record high, what steps has the Minister taken to implement meaningful decarceration policies, including non-custodial sentences and investing in community-based sanction and support?
I thank Deputy Gannon for this important question. Due to the rise in our population, it is important that we increase the number of spaces within prison. The Deputy asked me about measures that would increase decarceration and I will come to that presently, but it is important to say that more prison spaces are available in light of the increasing population and the ability of the authorities to prosecute serious offences and fine people who are convicted of those offences.
I am tabling proposals that will present further options to courts other than simply incarcerating a person who has been convicted of a criminal offence. As published in the general scheme of the miscellaneous provisions Bill last week, I identified that I wanted to, and am proposing to, change the terms of the Criminal Justice (Community Service) Act 1983. Currently, a judge is required to consider a community service order if a sentence of up to one year is being considered. I am going to extend that so that when a court is considering a sentence that carries a penalty of up to two years, the court must also consider a community service order. Similarly, I am going to extend the number of hours that can be imposed by way of a community service order from 240 to 480. These measures will be of assistance.
We need to increase capacity, but these measures are not incompatible. It is not as though we can only have measures for increasing prison space without trying to consider measures that will result in decarceration. Since 2022, capacity across the prison estate has increased by more than 300 new spaces - 134 spaces were delivered in the past 12 months - and more than 100 additional spaces will be added this year. This is a priority for me.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. I welcome the increase to two years for consideration of community service. However, we can waste any time when it comes to addressing the appalling and dangerous conditions in our prison system. Hundreds of people are sleeping on floors. The number of prisoners who have died in custody in Ireland has increased by 55% in the past year, up from 20 in 2023 to 31 last year. In many cases, the conditions in our prisons are nothing short of Dickensian, in that there is overcrowding. This is a serious failing of our criminal justice infrastructure.
Of course, consequences in certain cases should result in prison sentences but that should only be a part. Right now, prisons are filled with people serving short sentences for petty, non-violent crimes. We know these sentences do little to deter future offending. They push people further into a cycle of crime.
Meeting with people who have lived experience along with legal and justice groups makes it clear to me that judges are still handing down custodial sentences in cases where alternatives exist. There appears to be a lack of awareness and support in encouraging the use of non-custodial options.
Since I have been made Minister, I have been to Cork Prison, Cloverhill Prison and I am going to another prison on Monday. I intend to visit every prison, if I am lucky enough to survive in office for a sufficient period of time. It is important that the crisis be addressed. It is being addressed. I know that, to deal with the specific issue the Deputy mentioned about mattresses on the floor, bunk beds are now being purchased and implemented. That is important.
To be frank, I am not going down the route taken in England and Wales in the past nine months where a decision was made by the UK Government in response to the overcrowding crisis that serious offenders would be released from prison at a very early stage. That is not something I am considering. It would be inappropriate to do so. Considering the efforts made by victims' groups and the money we have put into An Garda Síochána and resourcing the courts, a great deal has been invested in the administration of the criminal justice system, not just financially, but also the emotional effort put in by many complainants in cases. I am not going to undermine that system by making a decision that we should just halve the sentences of people incarcerated for serious offences.
That is an incredible job of answering a question I did not ask. No part of my question, either in written form or in my contribution, referred to the release of people in prison for serious offences. I discount even the notion of that. However, while we are talking about increased populations, why do we not conduct an audit of who exactly is in our prisons? In the majority of cases, they are there because of addiction and for all sorts of issues for which prison is not the most useful means of rehabilitation. We are all looking for the same outcome, namely, places where people who engage in crime can have consequences that suit both their crimes and the communities impacted by their crimes. What we have is a conveyor belt of people who for various reasons - usually addiction - go into our prisons, sleep on floors and continue that addiction. They then come out of prison and reoffend because prison is traumatic. We are all asking whether that is the best approach. It clearly is not working.
I know the Deputy did not suggest the issue about releasing serious offenders. As part of my response, though, I have to be able to say that because it is an issue that people can legitimately put to me.
Regarding people with addiction, the Deputy is correct. Many of the people who are given prison sentences have addiction issues and chaotic lives. However, part of the reason judges sometimes sentence individuals who have addiction issues and chaotic lives to short terms of imprisonment is because judges think individuals can get some mandatory services provided to them there. That is part of the reason judges do that. We can ask the Irish Prison Service about it.
I agree with the Deputy that we need to try to provide better services out in the community to ensure we can treat addiction levels. Part of the problem is that there is no compulsion in respect of trying to get people to attend those courses and receive treatment for addiction services if they are out in the community.
That is part of the reason decisions are made for those short-term sentences.
I will also bring forward issues relating to electronic monitoring, particularly in respect of remand prisoners, that might reduce the numbers.
120. Deputy Charles Ward asked the Minister for Justice when he will publish the review of the family reunification process that his Department recently undertook; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25027/25]
When does the Minister of State plan to publish the review the Department undertook on the family reunification process? I understand the review was completed months ago but still has not been published. I would be grateful if he could give an exact timeline as there are many people waiting on its publication.
Migrant workers make an enormous contribution to the Irish economy and society. It is a central priority for me, as Minister for State with responsibility for migration, that our immigrations laws are fair and efficient. An important part of this is having clear legal pathways for workers and their families.
My Department’s policy document for Non-EEA family reunification, which was last amended in 2016, is still under review. The policy document sets out the conditions for a sponsor to apply for a family member to be reunited with them in Ireland. In general terms, a sponsor must demonstrate their capacity to provide for their family member.
The review is examining a wide range of matters relating to applications for family reunification. Officials from my Department have consulted with a wide variety of stakeholders including relevant Departments and external organisations. While I cannot pre-empt the outcome, I can advise the Deputy it is my expectation that the next stage of the review will be brought to a conclusion soon. My officials will continue to engage with stakeholders regarding any amendments to the policy.
While I fully understand that some people moving to Ireland to live and work would wish to have their family join them, the issues to be examined as part of a family reunification application are complex. The primary focus is to ensure that a sponsor in a secure position and able to demonstrate a clear capacity to provide for family members before applications for family to join them here can be approved.
I can also advise that the first part of the review was implemented with effect from 15 May 2024. Eligible spouses and partners of people who hold general employment permits and intra-corporate transferee Irish employment permits, who have been granted family reunification, are now registered on a stamp 1G permission, rather than a stamp 3. This allows the holder to take up employment without the need to obtain a separate employment permit of their own.
Before I became a TD five months ago, I was a healthcare worker in a dementia unit. I had the privilege of working with healthcare workers from many different countries. Unfortunately, many of them are undergoing an horrific experience of being separated from their families, sometimes for years, because of the unfair family reunification system in this country. There are people who are doing essential jobs who have been recruited in Ireland because we cannot fill these jobs ourselves. These people are doing essential jobs and are part of our community. People are being denied their basic right to have their family with them because they do not earn a high enough salary because of the types of jobs the are in. Relationships are being torn apart. Everyone deserves to have their family with them when it comes to living and working in Ireland. Will the Minister of State undertake this essential work and please help these families? Will he commit to publishing this review as soon as possible and changing this unfair reunification system?
It is under review and I want to see that concluded as soon as possible and be able to come back on this. I take on board what the Deputy said but it is important that we ensure with family reunifications that financial thresholds in income are met for permit holders to be eligible to apply for their family to join and that it can be done in a proper and clear way. I take his points on board and when the review concludes I will come back to him.
I have been in touch with the Department about a healthcare worker whose family reunification application was refused because she took a brief drop in income last year due to her pregnancy. She should not be penalised for that or anything like that. It is a time when she should be able to access that family support. I ask the Minister of State to look into this woman’s appeal and to consider abolishing the income threshold for family reunification altogether.
I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge our migrant healthcare workers and all the amazing work they do in our country. They prop up our healthcare system and it is time they get the recognition they deserve.
I also ask the Department to look into a specific case of a woman and her 13-year-old daughter who faces abuses and being married off by her father should she be forced to return to South Africa. This is an emergency case. I have emailed the Minister of State the details and I ask him to look into the details if he can.
I am acutely aware that for families involved in situations like this it is very important to them and it is very important that they have information. I again refer to what I outlined in reply to the Deputy earlier, namely that it is clearly an important part that someone has sufficient income to sustain a family reunification. A review is ongoing looking at all the processes involved. I will come back to the Deputy with the information as soon as I can.
121. Deputy Paula Butterly asked the Minister for Justice if he will commit to the removal of the provision that allows counselling notes to be used in all legal proceedings in the proposed general scheme of the Criminal Law and Civil Law Bill 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25015/25]
I welcome the news that the general scheme of the criminal law and civil law Bill 2025 has now received Cabinet approval. Will the Minister commit to the removal of the provision that allows for counselling notes to be used in all legal proceedings?
I thank the Deputy for her question. One of the most difficult things I have to do as Minister for Justice, and indeed, that the House has to do, is to resolve issues around balancing conflicting constitutional rights. This is an issue where there are conflicting constitutional rights that need to be balanced but, as the Deputy indicated, that balance needs to be shifted legislatively in the near future. The balance of rights is twofold. On one hand, there is the right to privacy that people have in counselling notes when they go to a counsellor or psychologist and provide private information about their lives to that counsellor or psychologist. At first principles, we all assume that information will be kept private. On the other hand, there is the right of individuals to a fair trial if they are being prosecuted for a serious criminal offence that could result in them losing their liberty. We tried to balance these two rights in respect of the disclosure of counselling notes in 2017 in the sexual offences Act enacted then. Unfortunately, that Act did not achieve what we had wished to achieve. I want to amend section 19A of the legislation, and obviously it is up to the House as to whether that should happen, through the removal of subsection 17, which gives an entitlement to a complainant to waive their entitlement to object to the disclosure of counselling notes. I also wish, subject to advice from the Attorney General, to amend subsection 11 of section 19A by removing paragraph (a). The effect of these changes would be very beneficial. It would mean that if a person accused on an offence wanted access to counselling notes there would have to be a hearing in advance of the trial to determine whether he or she was entitled to them. The judge would have to look at them. There would not be an opportunity for a complainant to say that he or she would waive their right to objection. A judge would also only say that the notes had to be disclosed to an accused in circumstances where the judge thought a fair trial would not be possible if they were not disclosed.
I thank the Minister for that comprehensive answer. I understand fully the conflict he will face in trying to balance these rights. However, I want to point out the purpose of counselling notes. These notes are confidential. The are about helping victims on the road to recovery following a very traumatic and harrowing experience. The very idea that these notes could be exposed to the accused side, or indeed be used by the DPP to prove a case, is traumatic for them. Many counsellors, groups and victims have come to me and expressed their horror that this could continue again and again. Many have pointed out how this could impede victims coming forward. While I understand the balancing of rights is necessary to have a fair trial, I do not believe counselling notes have any place within a trial. Indeed, a recent Supreme Court judgement said there was no basis for the introduction of these notes on the basis of relevance.
I read that Supreme Court decision. One of the points mentioned by the court through Mr. Justice Collins was it was surprising that since 2017, when section 19A was enacted, there has not been a reported judgement on the hearing that should take place in respect of the challenge to counselling notes. I agree with the Deputy that it is very traumatic for someone to know that confidential counselling notes could be made available for the purpose of the defence of a criminal trial. None of us would like to see our medical records, let alone counselling notes, disclosed in a public realm.
That is why I intend to change the law. The changes that are being advocated will be of huge assistance to the individuals who say to the Deputy they are concerned about the trauma of being required to disclose counselling notes. At present, too many notes are being revealed unnecessarily. It has become a bit of a fishing expedition. That will stop. The only occasion upon which counselling notes will be disclosed, after the law is changed, will be if a court believes that if they are not disclosed, it would result in an unfair trial.
I fear I am being repetitive on this issue. However, I am very passionate about it because I am aware of the trauma it causes victims. While I understand the legislation will give power to the judge to use his or her discretion on whether to allow these documents to be accessed by any defence team, it will be very subjective. It will put the victim in the position, prior to any trial, of entering into the zone of the unknown and potentially having his or her details relived in court. That in itself could be an impediment to a victim getting justice at a trial and coming forward.
The Deputy is not being repetitive. On the intention of the proposed change, what will happen is a judge will look at a counselling note and make a decision on whether there is anything of relevance in it where, if it is not disclosed, it would result in an unfair trial. In most situations, it is highly unlikely that disclosure would then occur. However, what I cannot do, and I know some people want me to ask the Oireachtas to do this, is just have a blanket ban on disclosure of a certain category of documentation or certain type of evidence. If I did that, it would undermine the interests of victims of sexual violence more. It would mean there would be challenges to convictions. It would put a blanket ban on certain types of evidence. It has not been done previously and I have been advised by the Attorney General that it would be subject to, most likely, a successful challenge in the courts. That is something we have to be very hesitant about going down the avenue of, notwithstanding the requests of people to do so.
