Vol. 1067 No. 3
122. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice when he expects the heads to be prepared for the criminal justice (disregard of certain convictions related to consensual sexual activity) Bill to be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24879/25]
This question relates to the promise of a disregard of historical sexual offences that was promised by the previous Government. It is on foot of recommendations from the working group that looked at legislation to address the historical sexual offence of homosexuality, which was outlawed up to 33 years ago. What progress is happening at this stage?
I thank the Deputy for his question. I am very aware of his long-standing interest and commitment in respect of this issue. I regret that there is a series of legislative priorities within my Department's remit at present. Departmental staff are working on 31 Bills. Officials in the Department, along with their counterparts in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, continue to work on this Bill, and all the other legislation, as promptly as possible. It may not be satisfactory from the Deputy's point of view that I cannot give him a definitive timeline for when the heads of Bill will be published, but it is still very much a clear commitment of this Government, as referenced in the programme for Government, to address the historical wrongs that were done to people who were criminalised under these laws.
I am committed to publishing the relevant heads of Bill in due course. As the Deputy will know, these Victorian-era laws criminalised consensual sexual activity between men until those laws were repealed in 1993. He mentioned that in 2021, a working group was formed to examine the disregard of such convictions. The group met 11 times during its tenure. In late 2022, the Department held a public consultation on key issues related to the development of a scheme to disregard relevant convictions. That consultation process received nearly 150 submissions from wide groups of societal interests throughout the country. Their deliberations were invaluable and helped shape the final recommendations from the group. A summary report of this extensive consultation has since been published.
Then Minister, Deputy McEntee, published the group’s final report in 2023. It contains 95 recommendations. I am committed to translating these recommendations into heads of Bill. I will do so as promptly as I can, but I have to be frank with the Deputy in saying there are so many different competing interests that I would have to take people off another Bill to expedite this Bill in order to get it done as promptly as possible.
I am disappointed with the answer. I understand there are delays and competing interests in the Department of Justice in particular, given the wait. However, the urgency of this is similar to other issues, such as thalidomide, when we are dealing with people who are affected by wrongdoing by the State. The longer it is delayed, the less effect it will have in the end because there will be fewer people who have suffered an injustice and, in this case, a heinous violation of their human rights for many decades. The effect will be gone. It was great that decriminalisation came about in 1993 because of the actions of those within the community, including former Senator, David Norris. We need to remember the work he carried out, and that of many others, to get people to understand the wrongs the State was involved in. I urge prioritisation of this legislation, given that people are getting older.
What I will do, although I have not discussed this with the Department, is give consideration to some short mechanism to put some provision in a miscellaneous provisions Bill that would deal with disregarding convictions that were imposed in these types of cases. In respect of the post office scandal in the UK, general legislation was introduced very promptly within a statutory scheme, which stated that for anyone convicted of these offences, those convictions would be disregarded. I will give some consideration as to whether that is possible. However, the Deputy will be aware that this is a complex issue. If we go back and start appraising and assessing many of the convictions from the fifties and sixties individually - to be frank, I am not aware of the number of convictions but for the type of convictions I am aware of - that would probably be problematic. I will see if there is any general statutory provision that could be introduced in a miscellaneous provisions Bill stating that for anyone convicted of an offence, that offence would be disregarded. However, that could be complicated.
I understand. The campaigning groups, some of which the Minister has probably met over the years, also understand the difficulty with a case-by-case review. The generalised approach is one where a certificate of disregard could be issued. The conviction would not be fully expunged because that has to be done case by case. The general disregard approach was what most people expected and thought that recommendation would be given.
The Minister said he was not aware of the number of cases. I am not either but, for instance, in the town of Tullow alone, there were eight cases from 1969 to 1970. Research has been done on that which is online. Kieran Rose has sent me a copy, which I can forward. That is just one example. Some of those affected were teenagers who may still be alive. They might have been affected, as were their families and everybody around them. It still has an effect today. That is why there is an urgency.
I commend Kieran Rose on the excellent work he has done in this area. He has been in contact with me frequently as well. I would appreciate getting a copy of that research.
We are trying to revisit an injustice that was done to people in a different era. It is commendable that there is agreement in the House that this should be done. What we are discussing is the most appropriate statutory mechanism to do that. The more complex we make it, the more lengthy it will be. I will look to see if any straightforward, simple legislative solution could be introduced. It may require people to apply. Alternatively, we could just apply it across the board, even posthumously to persons convicted of such offences. I will discuss it in the Department. Again, I thank the Deputy for raising the issue.
123. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Justice for the up to date position on the roll-out nationally of distinct family law courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24868/25]
What action is the Department taking to reduce the application and appeals timeframe for international protection? Will the Minister make a statement on the matter, particularly in view of the fact that there has been a substantial increase in the number of applications in 2024, when there were 18,651 in total? What action is the Department taking to expedite the appeals process and to deal with applications overall?
I thank the Deputy for his question. He specifically focused on the appeals tribunal but it is important to consider the position at first instance because that will really be the driver of the work for the appeals tribunal.
The process of hearing and determining appeals at first instance has speeded up very significantly, even in the past year. In 2024, the IPO delivered more than 14,000 decisions at first instance by comparison with 8,500 in 2023. Already in 2025, or in the first third of the year, the office has delivered nearly 7,000 decisions. If it keeps going at that rate, we should get to between 20,000 and 21,000 decisions at first instance this year.
Many of these decisions, although not all, are appealed to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal, IPAT. Let me give the up-to-date position. As of 2 May of this year, the appeals tribunal had 12,613 appeals on hand. When we consider the number of appeals it has completed to date in 2025, we see it has completed only 1,583. The Deputy will see we are getting on top of the number of decisions on applications at first instance, but regrettably that is not happening at the appeal stage of the process. However, we are resourcing the system much more and trying to get more tribunal members in to determine the appeals. It is recognised that we are going to be able to improve and increase the tribunal’s decision-making capacity.
We believe IPAT’s decision-making capacity will increase further this year, with a target of concluding more than 5,500 appeals by the year’s end, assuming the anticipated new members can be got on board quickly and trained and become effective.
As the Minister outlined, there are 12,600 appeals on hand, but there was a substantial increase in the number of applicants in 2023, when the figure was 13,277. In 2024, the figure was 18,651. In the first three months of this year, there were 3,021. This means an average of 1,000 per month, which is 12,000 per year.
We must consider how we can expedite the whole appeals process, deal with it more efficiently and get decisions made. This obviously means numbers because the sum of the applications for both 2023 and 2024 is 30,000 in real terms. This has to be dealt with really quickly because if the appeals are not dealt with in a timely manner, we will have further difficulties with accommodation and the deportation of those who are not here legally. I ask that every effort be made to improve the appeals process, appoint the additional staff to deal with the appeals and have timely delivery of decisions.
The Deputy is correct that in trying to get a handle on, and gain control of, the appeals process, we also need to try to reduce the number of people coming to Ireland seeking asylum. We need to recognise that of the cases processed this year at first instance, more than 80% have been rejected. Regrettably, too many people are coming to Ireland claiming asylum who are not entitled to it.
I accept what the Deputy said about the appeals process: it needs to be expedited. We can expedite it through the recruitment of more tribunal members, and that is something we are doing. We are also going to change the process by which an oral hearing can be available in an appeal. At present, one is entitled to an oral hearing having already had an oral hearing at first instance. There is an oral hearing at first instance and there is an oral appeal. The general scheme of the international protection Bill, which I published earlier this month, will provide that only in exceptional circumstances would one be entitled to an oral hearing in the appeals process. That will expedite the process.
I accept what the Minister is saying. Both of us, coming from a legal background, will know we also have to be careful not only about the issue of constitutional rights but also about the fear regarding judicial review. Once an applicant enters a judicial review process, we have a difficulty. It is extremely important that we get the appeals process correct but it is also important that we have an efficient and effective appeals process that operates in a timely manner. I am really concerned about the numbers from 2023 and 2024. What numbers of appeals are pending since 2021, 2022 and 2023? Is there a breakdown of the figures for appeals still in the processing stage? That there are still appeals at stage means there are people here for more than four years who may not be legally entitled to be here.
As I indicated previously, the number of appeals on hand for the appeals tribunal is in the region of 12,000. I cannot give a breakdown of the years from which they originate.
With regard to judicial review, there is a trend whereby people get a decision in the first instance and then appeal, and when they are rejected on appeal, they proceed to a judicial review. We also need to examine the judicial review system. A judicial review should not act as a stay upon an order that has been made by the appeals tribunal. We seem to just accept it as standard procedure that if a judicial review is initiated, the effect of the decision of the appeals tribunal is suspended. It should not be. I am going to examine this in the context of introducing legislation to deal with civil legal reform in the area of judicial reviews.
With regard to the oral hearings, there is no absolute right to an oral hearing at appeal stage. People have an oral hearing at first instance, and that is absolutely entrenched; however, just because someone has an oral hearing at first instance does not mean he or she is entitled to go through a full re-hearing at the appeal stage. We will, however, ensure that the appeals tribunal will in all instances have a record of what is said at oral hearings in the first instance.
Could I get a breakdown of the timeframe regarding the 12,600?
I call Deputy Moynihan.
124. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Justice for the up-to-date position on the roll-out nationally of distinct family law courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24875/25]
Ar an gcéad dul síos, déanaim comhbhrón le muintir an Gharda Kevin Flatley, a maraíodh go tubaisteach fad is a bhí sé ag freastal ar a phobail.
The need for more suitable family courts has been well recognised. The Family Courts Act 2024 was a significant milestone in bringing about a much more appropriate system. Can the Minister outline the planned roll-out and implementation of the new family courts?
I, too, express my sincere sympathies and condolences to the family of Garda Kevin Flatley on the truly horrific circumstances of his passing. I attended Henry Street Garda station in Limerick earlier on this week to sign the book of condolences and spoke to the Garda chief subsequently to convey our feelings and thoughts to his colleague and the Garda community up and down the country.
I thank the Deputy for his question. The Department is leading an ambitious programme of reform outlined in the first family justice strategy, which sets out a vision for a system refocused on the needs and rights of children, who are central to many family justice matters. The implementation of more than 50 actions across nine goals contained in the strategy will lay the foundation for this reformed system. One will assist families to resolve their family justice issues in as straightforward a manner as possible.
The Family Courts Act 2024, which was passed in both Houses of the Oireachtas last November, is a key component of the strategy. The legislation provides for the establishment of family court divisions within the existing court structures: a family high court, a family circuit court, and a family district court. Judges who have specialist training or experience in dealing with family law matters will be assigned to the family courts divisions on a full-time basis.
Importantly, the Act contains a set of guiding principles for the family court system, making the best interests of the child a primary consideration in the conduct of all family law proceedings, operating in an efficient and user-friendly manner and encouraging active case management by the courts.
As committed to in the programme for Government, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, intends to publish an implementation plan for a new family court system by the end of January 2026. He has established an implementation team within the Department which is currently concluding a period of initial stakeholder engagement. This has included an interactive workshop at the recent Family Justice Development Forum, which provided an opportunity to gain further insight into the perspectives of a broad range of family justice stakeholders on the development of an implementation plan.
Alongside this work, preparations are in train for the construction of a purpose-built family law court complex on Hammond Lane, in Dublin.
The Family Courts Act 2024 represents a radical change or overhaul of the system, possibly the biggest in over a century. I understand it will not be an instant, overnight change being implemented, but it would be a reasonable expectation that there would be a planned roll-out and a pathway to do this. I heard the Minister of State say that the Minister plans to publish on that by next January. Have the necessary commencement orders been made at this point? Also, as regards the people who will operate these new courts, will training be provided for courts staff and judges, and would the Minister of State see them as being dedicated to the family law service or shared back and forth with the existing system?
As regards judicial resourcing, the Judicial Planning Working Group was established in 2021 in line with the previous programme for Government and submitted its report in February 2023. This led to the appointment of 24 additional judges in 2023 and Government approval for the appointment of an additional 20 judges in October 2024. The Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, intends to request the Judicial Appointments Commission to initiate the selection processes for these judges later this year. Taken together, these two sets of appointments represent an increase of approximately 25% in the number of judges in Ireland.
As regards the specialisation, which the Deputy queried, the Family Courts Act provides for the new positions of principal judges of the family high court, the family circuit court and the family district court to be created as specific assignments. The principal judge of each of the family court divisions will manage the business of each of those divisions.
Clearly, it will take time to get all that up and running. In the meantime, there will be people still looking to use the current family law courts system. Is it planned to make improvements to the existing system while the new courts are being established? Also, have the necessary commencement orders for the new Act been made?
I will revert to the Deputy on the commencements.
Our intention is to ensure that the new family law courts are sufficiently funded. The Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, is very conscious of the need to resource the new family law courts system and we are committed to ensuring that it is properly funded to deliver meaningful reform. In budget 2025, the Department of Justice allocated an additional €11 million to the Courts Service, €3 million of which is earmarked for the children's court advocate project, which will support children in their journeys through private family law proceedings and provide information ensuring that their voice is heard.
I wish to ask a supplementary question to Deputy Moynihan's question. It is in respect of an issue that has arisen for many domestic violence survivors who are having difficulty in accessing civil legal aid, those who perhaps want to take out a barring order against an abuser. They have a civil legal aid certificate but are not able to secure representation because, quite frankly, solicitors will not work under the terms that are in place. People who work in this area tell me there is a particular problem, an anomaly, whereby somebody who is in that position has to go to three separate solicitors and get refusals before they can go back to the Legal Aid Board. Anecdotally at least, people simply give up and go back to the situation they were in. Does the Minister plan to revise or review the fees that are in place, perhaps creating an additional payment for additional court appearances? Quite simply, the issue needs to be addressed.
The Deputy is right about the issue he has raised. It is something I and the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and indeed the Department, are aware of. It is my understanding that a submission is being made to the Department on that and it will be given due consideration. We do recognise it absolutely as a serious issue.
125. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Justice for an update on the review taking place of family reunification policy, and whether this review will examine the difference in treatment between migrant workers who hold a critical skills permit and those who hold a general skills permit; when this review will be complete; if legislative change will be brought forward on foot of it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24873/25]
Today is International Day of Families. On this day last year, migrant workers - women and men contributing to our economy and our society - protested outside the Minister's Department. They did so because, under the current law, certain categories of migrant workers require both a 12-month wait and an onerous income threshold in order for their family members to come join them here in Ireland. Will this unfair and short-sighted policy change?
I thank the Deputy for the question. As he is aware, the Department's policy document for non-EEA family reunification was last amended in 2016. It is under review. The policy document sets out the conditions for a family member to be reunited. 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 on this.
I fully understand that some people moving to Ireland to live and work would wish to have their family join them. I acknowledge that there are different criteria between the employment permit types. The issues to be examined as part of family reunification are complex. I understand that some may find the difference in criteria between the employment permit types difficult to understand, but I assure the Deputy that the primary focus is to ensure that a sponsor is in a secure position and able to demonstrate a clear capacity to provide for family members before approving applications for family members to join them here.
This review has been going on for a very long time, and people need clarity and need to see a sensible evolution of the Department's policy. We should remind ourselves that these are hard-working people caring for our elderly and sick, driving our buses and building our homes. At the end of a hard day, they cannot come home to their husband or wife or kids in the same way the Minister of State and I can. For years their lives end up being on hold. As well as being unfair, I would argue that this policy is short-sighted. If we allowed rapid family reunification for workers, we would be more likely to gain additional workers in some of these critical areas, we would give them the best chance of living independently with two incomes and we would not be imposing that painful, unending divide between family.
Will the Minister of State give us an indication as to when he believes this review will be published, and will it contain recommendations for change?
The review is ongoing. Without prejudging anything, I believe it will conclude soon. I am anxious, like the Deputy, to be able to come forward with that information from the review. I take on board the points he has made, but it is important to emphasise again the central point that, in terms of successful family reunification and a range of complex issues involved in it, there must be a provision for people to be able to support family members who are joining them here.
I am glad the Minister of State is indicating the review will come soon.
As regards the ability to support a family, we are talking about people in full-time, stable employment at a salary level that is set by the State.
This population already contributes significantly - millions of euro - to the Exchequer every year in tax. There is clear evidence of their ability to support themselves. That will be enhanced if a second family member arrives and the law has been changed to put them in a position where they can take up work and continue to better support their family. The current system treats critical skills permit holders such as engineers and software developers better than general skills employment permit holders such as people working in care homes and nursing homes, chefs and drivers. I do not see any difference in the value they provide to our economy. I do not see why we should continue to treat them in a different way.
It is important to acknowledge the incredible contribution of so many migrant workers in our country in many of the jobs on which we rely in health service areas, a wide range of public services and in the private sector. People come here, work and make an incredible contribution, which we acknowledge. However, we also acknowledge, without prejudging the outcome of the review, the importance of making sure we have a sustainable system for family reunification. Part of that sustainable system is the importance of someone joining them being supported and having criteria and standards in place. The review will published and I hope I can come back to the Deputy with additional information.
126. Deputy Séamus McGrath asked the Minister for Justice the number of new class intakes that will enter Templemore this year; the expected overall number of students to enter Templemore in 2025; and the number of recruits in 2023 and 2024. [24765/25]
I thank Deputy McGrath for this important question. I commend him on asking it because in order to achieve what we want to in the criminal justice system, we need an appropriate number of members of An Garda Síochána in the force. The Deputy asked a question about Templemore, which I will answer presently. He has also consistently and effectively campaigned to get more gardaí on the street in Cork city and county. I thank him for organising a recent trip to Togher Garda station, which was very instructive and useful to me as Minister for Justice.
On getting more gardaí on the street, we need to ensure we get more of them into Templemore. After I was appointed, a recruitment competition started for An Garda Síochána. It was the fourth such competition in recent years. I was pleased with the outcome, which resulted in expressions of interest from 6,700 individuals. I have also received assurances from the Garda Commissioner that a further competition will be held later this year to maintain the strong pipeline of recruits An Garda Síochána is currently managing. It is important that we capture the 6,700 who expressed interest previously and those who express interest again subsequently this year and get them through the process quickly. Part of how we are seeking to achieve that is speeding up the vetting and interview processes. We are trying to get more gardaí recruited as quickly as possible. I was also very pleased that in March this year, more than 200 trainees started in Templemore. That was the first time more than 200 started since before Covid-19. It is a good indicator. Three more groups will enter this year in June, August, and November. Work is ongoing by An Garda Síochána and publicjobs.ie in progressing offers to candidates for the June intake. Also in March was the first attestation where approximately 150 gardaí were attested. I appreciate we need more attested and on the streets.
I appreciate the Minister's commitment to this issue. The programme for Government sets out an ambitious target in relation to the recruitment of gardaí. I know the Minister is committed to increasing the visibility of gardaí on our streets. One can see in Dublin that there has been an improvement in that respect but we need to see it across the country. The Minister visited Cork recently, which I welcomed. He took on board what he was told in Cork regarding the number of gardaí. It is important that we get a fair share of the allocation of gardaí when there are new graduates from Templemore. Unfortunately, only last weekend, there was a serious incident in Cork city where a woman was violently assaulted in broad daylight in the city centre. That highlights the need for strong visibility of gardaí on the streets. I ask the Minister to ensure he keeps as much pressure on as possible to get a high number of gardaí into Templemore so we can get them out on our streets.
It is commendable that every Deputy in this House wants to see more gardaí in their constituency. I agree that there has been a noticeable increase in the visibility of gardaí in Dublin city in recent months. It has been commented upon. It has had a positive impact because individuals feel a greater sense of security and safety when they see members of An Garda Síochána in the vicinity. I am committed to ensuring increased visibility not just in Dublin but also in other cities and towns. I am aware of the issue in Cork. We need more gardaí on the streets in Cork. I assure the Deputy I will seek to achieve that. When it comes to determining where gardaí go after they have been attested in Templemore, it is an operational decision by the Commissioner. It would be inappropriate for me to start directing him as to where they go. Commissioners live in the real world. They know what the Irish public wants as expressed through their representatives. It is clear from the Deputy that he wants to see more gardaí on the streets in Cork.
It is to be welcomed that there were more than 6,000 expressions of interest in joining An Garda Síochána, as are the moves by the Minister to speed up the recruitment process in the interview process and so on. It needs to be curtailed as much as possible to fast-track the delivery of extra gardaí on our streets. I also welcome that three more classes will enter Templemore this year. A lot of good work is being done. It is important that visibility on the streets is increased and that we fulfil our commitment in the programme for Government to recruit additional gardaí. It is what the public and businesses in city and urban areas want. I thank the Minister for his work. I urge him to ensure this proceeds as quickly as possible.
Our thoughts are with the family, friends and colleagues of Garda Kevin Flatley as we deal with issues in relation to the number of gardaí. It is clear that despite the high-profile recruitment process, there has been no significant increase in the number of gardaí who will be trained. The current Garda Commissioner dismissed the claim by the Government that 1,000 would be trained this year, pointing out that the maximum that could be trained is 800. The Minister vocally endorsed the recruitment campaign earlier this year. Is it fair to say it is not down to a lack of applications - 6,700 or so - but a lack of capacity to train more gardaí? What are the Government's plans to ensure more than 800 gardaí can be trained a year? We are all aware of the retention issue. Has there been an analysis or any moves to ensure as many gardaí as possible are maintained?
On the lack of capacity, each year, there can be four or five intakes into Templemore. It can take more than 200, probably up to 225 or so per intake. If there are five intakes a year, we will hit 1,000 a year if we get the stream of individuals coming through. The Deputy is right that capacity is tight. At present, the problem is not capacity in Templemore. The number coming through can be accommodated and we need to increase it. If Templemore is not able to accommodate the number coming through, my Department is looking at other training locations. Templemore will always be the primary training location for An Garda Síochána. In the short term, it will probably be the only one but if extra capacity is required elsewhere, the Department and I are open to considering it.
127. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Justice to provide an update on the number of gardaí who have resigned from the force in each of the past three years, broken down by rank; if his Department has conducted any analysis into the reasons behind the increase in resignations; if it is intended to introduce specific retention initiatives, to stem attrition and retain experienced members of An Garda Síochána; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24596/25]
On 26 February 2024, the Minister wrote about the potential for 6,400 gardaí to leave the force over the next three years. What are the plans to address the retention of gardaí? What is the number of gardaí leaving the force? What will the Minister to do address that?
I had a look at the statistics on the number of gardaí leaving the force. This year and last year, we are talking about between 1% and 2% leaving. Based on the calculations we have seen to the end of March, we are probably looking at somewhere in the region of 140 gardaí resigning from the force this year and with around 14,000 on the force. That is around 1%, which is extremely low. If one looks at the corresponding figures in the UK, we see that approximately 10% resign from the police force there.
I do not want to lose any gardaí, especially when, as is currently the case, numbers are tight. We want to get numbers up to 15,000, so we cannot be in a position where gardaí are resigning. We need to ensure that we try to retain as many of them as possible. Unfortunately, and this is a compliment to An Garda Síochána, gardaí are highly employable individuals. People want to hire members of An Garda Síochána because they come with great discipline and training and are very employable in the private sector. That is why it is very important that I try to ensure the terms and conditions of offer within the public sector are as good and as attractive as possible.
Resignations are not as big an issue as I thought previously, but it is something that we need to keep a close eye on. The United States, New Zealand and Canada have all reported an increase in resignations from their police forces that are in excess of the rates that have been seen in An Garda Síochána. We need to get the recruitment numbers up because we are always going to have people who decide they want to try a different career. At present, I am trying encourage people to leave other careers and join An Garda Síochána, so we must recognise that it may work the other way as well.
I appreciate that 1% or 2% does not seem particularly high, but Garda numbers are particularly low. The Commissioner has talked about getting the numbers up to 18,000, but the 1% or 2% leaving is not being matched by people coming in. There is also the potential for 6,400 gardaí to retire in the next three years, which is incredible. Gardaí are leaving the force for a multitude of reasons but we only have anecdotal evidence of that. We have senior gardaí going into the Civil Service and rank-and-file gardaí going into the Prison Service, but we do not know why they are leaving. If we could capture that evidence, it would be very helpful.
That is a valid point. There was some feedback from departure interviews as to why gardaí were leaving. My recollection is that 47% or 48% just got a better offer in the private sector. Regarding the Commissioner's figure of 18,000, we need to take into account that there are many civilians working within An Garda Síochána. They are not gardaí but they do work that was done by members of the force previously. We have approximately 3,500 civilians within the force at present and approximately 14,200 gardaí. Collectively, along with reserves numbering around 300, we will get up to 18,000. It is a demanding challenge to get more people to join. All I can do, and all Members can do, is try to encourage people to join. It is a very fulfilling and exiting job. It is different to most jobs that people get to do. We live in a society where many jobs are very sedentary in nature. Being a garda is an exciting, active job. I encourage people to consider it.
It is an exciting job but the demands are incredible and the pay, in many instances, does not provide the capacity to afford to live in the cities that gardaí are asked to police. People are leaving. While the figure in this regard is only 1% or 2%, the force is still understaffed. An intensive campaign to recruit gardaí needs to do more than tell people it is an exciting job when they are dreading the bills coming in every week. I know the Minister recognises that.
We need more of a plan. We had a recruitment process and many people expressed an interest and filled out applications but that does not seem to have translated into gardaí coming out at the end. I encourage the Minister to try to understand better why people are leaving the force. There is space for more retention officers on the force in order that when people are considering leaving, they can outline their concerns, whether emotional or financial, to a particular individual. We need to be innovative in terms of how we seek to keep gardaí on the force.
We can talk about statistics, but the reality is that there have been 55 retirements and 31 resignations from An Garda Síochána in the past two months alone. We know that 1,640 gardaí will be eligible to retire over the next five years. The Minister spoke about some more recent work, but we know that prior to the commencement of exit interviews within An Garda Síochána, the GRA carried out its own research in 2023 with existing members. It found that members felt burnt out and stressed, were weighed down by administration, lacked the resources to be effective and were critical of the standard of training they received throughout their time in An Garda Síochána. The Minister has alluded to what some of the more recent research has found. Does he agree that the Dáil needs to be furnished with that research? We all need to have a handle on why some members of An Garda Síochána have left or feel they have no choice but to leave.
Will the Minister review the system whereby his Department refuses parliamentary questions relating to the work of An Garda Síochána and cites the Act that was passed just last year for doing so? This House needs to hold the Minister and his agencies to account. We cannot do that if the Department is refusing to engage. I ask the Minister to revise the current position.
I am obviously very accountable to the House, as I should be. Any information that my Department can provide will be provided. I will look into the issue the Deputy raises about getting further information from An Garda Síochána. Sometimes that just takes a bit of time but I have no difficulty with being accountable in this House for what gardaí do.
There is nothing we can do about retirements although we did manage to change the age from 60 to 62. Sometimes I grant extensions to 63 or 64. In fact, invariably if I am asked, I will extend a garda's term of service because we want to keep people in the force. I have the say that the explanations that are provided indicate to me that we should be keeping people within the force because of the expertise they have.
Resignations are a different matter. We are always going to have resignations. In terms of the reasons for resignations, I will go back and have a look at some of the post-resignation or departure interviews but most of them, from my recollection, were standard reasons. As I said to Deputy Gannon, many of them were because gardaí got different offers in the private sector. Obviously, terms and conditions are important. What I cannot do, however, because I would be thrown out of Government if I did, is start agreeing separate terms with An Garda Síochána outside of the public service pay agreements that apply.
129. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Minister for Justice his plans to increase funding for and expand youth diversion programmes in County Meath and more generally; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23598/25]
On behalf of my colleague Deputy Darren O'Rourke, I wish to ask about youth diversion programmes which offer huge benefits. They are aimed at preventing young people from becoming involved in the criminal justice system and at promoting positive development. These programmes can lead to reduced recidivism and can help young people to make a positive contribution to society. What plans does the Minister have to increase funding and expand youth diversion programmes in County Meath?
I assure the Deputy that the Government is committed to improving outcomes for young people at risk of a life of criminality through investment in youth justice services. Our commitment is clearly outlined by our youth justice strategy. A top priority of the strategy is the expansion and deepening of the services offered to young people by youth diversion projects. These projects are community-based, multi-agency crime prevention initiatives which seek to divert young people who have become involved in crime or antisocial behaviour and to support wider preventative work within the community and with families at risk. They are funded by our Department under the youth justice strategy and run by community-based organisations. On average, the projects engage with about 4,000 young people across the State in any one year.
Funding for youth diversion projects and other youth justice measures has increased substantially in recent years, doubling from €18 million in 2020 to a total allocation of just over €36 million in budget 2025.
This is supporting an increase in the availability of youth diversion project services in the evenings and at the weekends when many young people need these services. It will facilitate an increase in supports for families, interventions for disadvantaged young people and early interventions for eight- to 11-year-olds who may be at increased risk of becoming engaged in criminal activity.
There are 93 YDPs available throughout the State and a further two have been established and are due to be up and running in north Tipperary and east Clare later this year.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit. The question related to Meath, so I wanted to focus on youth diversion in the Ashbourne area. The area has seen a significant increase in population and I welcome the recent funds that were allocated from the community safety fund for Ashbourne. This is money that was seized by CAB and put back into communities to help them build resilience to crime. This is something my party campaigned for for a long time. The service in Ashbourne is helping approximately 30 young people and is in the process of moving into a new building that will then run a full youth service in Ashbourne. From speaking to my colleague, Deputy O'Rourke, I know this is something that is very positive and welcomed by the community. Has the Minister got an update on the programme in Ashbourne? Does he know when the new youth facility will open? Will the Government look at a multi-annual funding model for these programmes so that they can strategically plan for the future?
I mentioned there were two new projects being stood up in east Clare and north Tipperary. That confirms we have full national coverage for youth diversion projects. Of the 93 projects, three operate in County Meath. Of the three Meath programmes, the ones in Navan and Duleek in south-east Meath are operated by Foróige and the SMART Project in Trim is operated by the Crann Support Group. In total, these projects will benefit from funding of approximately €1.4 million in 2025. This represents an increase of over €800,000 from the year 2022.
I have a table here where the Garda has outlined to us the number of annual referrals made to its youth diversion programme in the Meath-Westmeath Garda division for the past five years. I will furnish the Deputy with those in due course.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit. I want to touch on the community safety fund again. This is money from organised crime that was seized by CAB and is meant to be invested in the communities most impacted by crime. These communities are in need of resources to strengthen their resilience against criminal activity. It is no coincidence that the majority of money seized by CAB originates in areas of high disadvantage. It is crucial that these areas get the support they need.
I have met several front-line services in my role as party spokesperson on youth justice and community safety and they have concerns about the criteria. Yesterday, for example, Deputy Carthy and I met the Inner City Organisations Network, ICON. It received community safety funding to conduct research into how organised criminals were trafficking young people into criminality. It applied for the second part of this funding to expand the research but was denied. Will there be a review into the community safety fund to ensure it is fit for purpose and agile enough to meet the challenges of emerging trends in the youth just area?
The community safety fund is currently open for applications and is funded by the proceeds of crime seized by CAB. As the Deputy correctly said, the idea is to make available those proceeds to communities that have been impacted by crime.
I will revert to the Deputy on his specific query, as I am not in a position to give him an answer about it now.
131. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for Justice if he will outline any engagement there has been between his Department and any other agency on the preparation of the establishment of the community safety partnerships; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23475/25]
I ask the Minister about the establishment of the community safety partnerships. There is much in this we welcome, including the involvement of the Garda, the local authorities, the HSE and other stakeholders. However, there are questions about the membership, especially about which elected representatives will be on it and how they will operate. Local authorities have issues with who can be the chairs. The biggest issue is the timeline. If the Minister has any proposal to make changes, what are they and how does he propose they will happen? Could we not even have the possibility of the JPC operating in the interim?
I thank the Deputy. If he will permit me, I will return briefly to something Deputies Carthy and Gannon raised. They talked about exit interviews from An Garda Síochána. What I should have mentioned in my answer was that exit interviews were done in 2024 and the main reason gardaí left was referred to as "family circumstances", namely, gardaí found it difficult to maintain their careers as Garda members while also managing family life.
I thank Deputy Ó Murchú for his question about community safety partnerships. As a former member of a local authority, he will know JPCs were an invaluable way for elected representatives to get information from An Garda Síochána. The purpose of the new scheme of community safety partnerships is to ensure that continues, but that it is broadened with the presence of other statutory agencies. I hope to sign regulations providing for the rules and mechanisms for these community safety partnerships in the very near future. I do not want to give the Deputy a specific date. I am hoping to do it very soon, but it will be done in the very near future. I have also signed into law the order required for the purpose of establishing the steering group that will be necessary to evaluate these new community partnerships. They will be an invaluable addition. They will enable individuals who are local representatives of the community to talk to gardaí and agencies like the HSE, Tusla and Cuan in order to ensure there is a proper discussion of the important information that needs to be communicated in respect of a local community.
As for the chair, the role is pivotal to the partnerships achieving their full potential. In advance of the commencement of the Act and in order to be well prepared, my Department has invited local authorities to select suitable chairs through an expression of interest process. I am committed to ensuring the local community safety partnerships are effective and robust from the outset. Over the course of preparing the necessary regulations to establish the partnerships, it became clear they would have to elect a chair from within their membership. I will set out more detail about that in due course, but it is an important part of the accountability of local government.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. The main thing is that "very soon" needs to be very soon. We need to see these up and running and I will put the question back in the short term because of the anomaly that JPCs, which did great work, are not in existence now. Would it be possible to have them in the short term?
Is the Minister proposing any changes to community safety partnerships? There are certain things we would all like to see in terms of ensuring there are sufficient elected representatives and others on the partnerships. I also accept we need to have something that is fit for purpose from an operational point of view.
We all spoke about the loss of Garda Kevin Flatley. We had a garda in Dundalk on routine patrol who was injured in the last while and we know of the huge issues there are with crime. Great strides have been made with organised crime recently in my constituency but we need to do a lot more. It is necessary we have a fit-for-purpose means of engagement with the other statutory agencies along with the Garda, because sometimes the Garda ends up carrying the can for the HSE and others.
The Deputy makes a very valid point. The whole logic behind establishing the LCSPs was to ensure we broadened it out so that it was not just a member of An Garda Síochána who was having to answer questions related to the HSE or other statutory agencies. As any member of a local authority will know, when it comes to responding to issues that arise in our community, it is very seldom the case there is just one statutory entity of which we can say it has responsibility and it will deal with it. In the area of criminal justice, we know from the many examples we have all received that it can be the Garda in the first instance, but there may also be an issue in respect of housing, the HSE or Tusla. The whole purpose behind the new statutory scheme for local community safety partnerships is so it is broadened out to include them.
I recognise the importance of elected representatives and we must ensure they remain central to the new partnerships. However, there is broader and different experience that will be included.
When the regulations are signed by me, which will be done very shortly, I think the Deputy will be pleased with them. If he is not, I have no doubt I will hear from him.
132. Deputy Emer Currie asked the Minister for Justice for an update on the roll-out of local community safety partnerships in Dublin West; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24783/25]
I too am raising the local community safety partnerships. I believe they have the potential to truly impact community safety if they are implemented in a way that brings the right and relevant local stakeholders around the table and supports specific strategies for specific areas. Too big, and we will not address local problems; too small and it becomes hard to manage. When will see the local community safety partnerships up and running in Dublin West?
As the Minister said, the community safety partnerships were to be restructured to replace the JPCs. They were much promised by the Minister's predecessor, Deputy McEntee, and much lauded. It is very worrying to hear the Minister still has not signed off on these community safety partnerships. There is a vacuum. The JPC is vital in holding the Garda to account. Can the Minister enact this legislation? At the moment there are different approaches in different local authorities. Dublin City Council is continuing with the JPC structures but south Dublin has not had any JPC meeting since last May. I call on the Minister to act with urgency and sign off this legislation as soon as possible.
We need this legislation signed off as early as possible. There are questions about the membership, including membership of TDs and other stakeholders. We need to ensure we have something that is fit for purpose. I request that what Deputy Ward said be followed through on. There must be some consistency. In Louth, it has been a considerable period since we have had joint policing committee meetings. When the Minister has his work done, we need to see that. It needs to be resolved as soon as possible.
I thank the Deputies. In fairness, the 2024 Act was just commenced last month. Under section 114 of that Act, there is an obligation on me to make regulations in respect of the establishment of local community safety partnerships. I assure Deputies that officials in my Department are finalising those regulations. I will use a term I used previously; I believe I will be able to sign them very shortly. I certainly believe they will be signed and in place before we next have questions to the Minister for Justice. I also think they will be very effective in seeking to achieve what is set out in the legislation, namely to have a broader representation within the partnerships so the issues affecting local communities, not just in respect of policing but also in community safety, can be dealt with in one forum within the local authority. I will ask Deputies to consider to the regulations when they see them in the near future. I am sure we will have an opportunity to discuss them again.
