Skip to main content
Normal View

Select Committee on Justice debate -
Tuesday, 29 Nov 2022

Vote 24 - Justice (Supplementary)

We have received apologies from Deputy Pa Daly. Deputy Costello is currently in the Dáil Chamber but may join us later in the meeting.

Today's meeting is to consider the Supplementary Estimates for Vote 20 - An Garda Síochána; Vote 21 - prisons; Vote 22 - the Courts Service; and Vote 24 - justice. I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, and his officials and team for attending. I am also grateful for the information and briefing materials that were provided in advance of the meeting by the Department. Before we get into the line items, I will invite the Minister of State to make an opening statement if he wishes to do so.

I thank the Chairman and committee members for making time available to consider Supplementary Estimates for the Garda and prison Votes and technical Supplementary Estimates for the courts and justice Votes. I am joined by my officials from the Department, Mr. Seamus Clifford, acting director of finance, and Mr. Aonghus O'Connor, principal officer.

A net Supplementary Estimate requirement of €78.97 million arises in respect of the Vote of An Garda Síochána for this year.

This comprises a gross expenditure requirement of €97.8 million, which is offset by a projected surplus in appropriations-in-aid receipts of €18.8 million, giving a net additional requirement of almost €79 million for the Garda Vote.

For the most part, the additional requirement is due to the impact of pay increases under the Building Momentum agreement of approximately €46 million and additional capital expenditure of some €25 million. Similar to any Supplementary Estimate, there is an element of offsetting of overspends and underspends across subheads as we approach the end of the financial year. In the region of €18 million in surplus receipts, mainly relating to additional superannuation contributions, is offsetting expenditure in other subheads, including for certain inflationary costs.

Payroll and superannuation costs account for over 80% of the Garda Vote. In the current year, an additional payroll requirement of some €40 million arises between the admin (i) and A13 Garda College subheads and €25.8 million in respect of the superannuation subhead. This is mainly due to the backdated cost to February of the pay increase under Building Momentum. There is an increased requirement in overtime expenditure of some €29.5 million compared with the original allocation of €95 million. Excluding the impact of pay increases under Building Momentum, the additional overtime cost has been offset in large part by underspends in other elements of Garda pay including due to lower levels of recruitment than expected in 2022.

The additional overtime expenditure has arisen mainly due to the investigation of organised and serious crime-related activities, high-profile fatal incidents and the return of the night-time economy post Covid restrictions. An Garda Síochána has placed particular focus on antisocial behaviour, public order, assaults and drug-related crimes. This is supported through initiatives such as Operation Citizen in Dublin city centre, with increased visible policing, particularly at key locations. It is important to note also that up to 1,000 trainee gardaí are expected to commence in the training college in five batches of 200 throughout 2023. It is planned that another recruitment competition will take place early in 2023 to ensure that the levels of intake to the Garda College can be sustained at this high level in the future.

I am particularly pleased that the Government is in a position to provide approximately €25 million in additional capital funding to An Garda Síochána in the Supplementary Estimate process. This is in addition to an unprecedented €146.5 million in the original budget for 2022. In summary, circa €6.2 million of this additional funding is in respect of building capital and refurbishment work. This includes inflation-related costs under the Government’s burden-sharing arrangement with contractors in relation to the new Garda building in Dublin 8. This state-of-the-art building has recently been handed over to An Garda Síochána by the OPW. A further €14.6 million of the additional capital is ICT-related and €4.3 million is for the Garda transport fleet. It is expected that this will provide for approximately 122 additional vehicles for the fleet throughout the country in urban and rural areas.

In this centenary year, I would like to take this opportunity to particularly thank An Garda Síochána for the outstanding work it carries out in communities the length and breadth of the country. I am especially pleased that it is possible to continue to strengthen the resources available to the organisation, particularly when it comes to underpinning and supporting its continuing reform and modernisation programme.

A net Supplementary Estimate of €11.97 million is required in 2022 in respect of the Prisons Vote. This comprises a gross expenditure requirement of €12.8 million, which is offset by a projected surplus in appropriations-in-aid of €800,000, giving a net additional requirement of just under €12 million for the Prisons Vote. The additional requirement mainly arises due to the impact of pay increases under the Building Momentum agreement and the impact of additional prisoner numbers and inflationary costs on prison services.

In total, it is expected that there will be an overrun on the payroll subhead of approximately €11.77 million. This is mainly due to the cost of pay increases of circa €7.7 million and additional hours costs of circa €4.1 million related to cover for Covid-related absences and staffing pressures linked to increased prisoner numbers and escort requirements to courts and hospitals. One of the larger areas of overspend in the non-pay current expenditure subheads across the vote relates to subhead A4, prison services, of €2.218 million for medical and catering services. These costs are directly linked to inflationary cost pressure and also the impact of increased prisoner numbers.

The additional requirements have been offset by expected current expenditure underspends in subheads such as subhead A7, compensation, of €1.025 million. There is a projected surplus in appropriations-in-aid receipts of approximately €828,000, which is mainly accounted for by additional superannuation contributions. This has also reduced the net Supplementary Estimate requirement. The prisons Vote will also have a capital carryover requirement of €3.2 million from 2022 to 2023.

I am very pleased that the major development project for Limerick Prison is almost complete, with the new accommodation for males due to become operational shortly. This will result in an additional 90 prisoner cell spaces being available, and the completion of a new stand-alone female prison in Limerick will provide modern accommodation for approximately 22 additional prisoners.

A technical Supplementary Estimate of €1,000 is required in respect of the courts Vote. There is no additional funding required for the Vote. The technical Supplementary Estimate arises mainly due to the additional costs of the Building Momentum pay increases of approximately €1.8 million and pressures in other subheads, including due to inflationary costs related to certain services. These costs are offset by underspends in other subheads and a relatively small surplus in courts fee income of approximately €1.5 million. This is largely due to a return of courts civil business to pre-Covid levels. It will also be necessary to carry forward unspent capital of €1.85 million - mainly courthouse capital works - to facilitate the completion of certain capital projects in 2023.

A technical Supplementary Estimate of €1,000 is required in respect of the Justice Vote. There is no additional funding required for the vote. The technical Supplementary Estimate is required to utilise surplus receipts to offset additional costs in the gross part of the Vote. This relates to the cost of the response to the Ukrainian crisis, estimated at circa €6 million; the cost of pay increases under Building Momentum of approximately €5.4 million; overspends in demand-led areas such as legal costs of approximately €4 million; criminal legal aid schemes at circa €7.6 million, and commissions and special inquiries at €4 million. There is also an additional capital requirement of circa €3.29 million in respect of the new Forensic Science Laboratory, mainly due to inflation-related costs under the Office of Government Procurement inflation framework, managed by the OPW on behalf of the Department.

There are offsetting underspends in a number of other subheads, with the largest element of the offset relating to the surplus immigration and visa fees of circa €24 million. The surplus has arisen due to the large increase in registration applications over 2021 and prior years across both first-time applicants and renewals as the country reopened and universities and colleges reverted to onsite learning.

In conclusion, I recommend the Supplementary Estimates to the committee and I am happy to address any questions.

Thank you. We move to questions from members. I call Deputy Carroll MacNeill.

I will start with the prisons. I do not see anything in regard to education or the schools. Is that because it is dealt with in a different Vote? Is that with the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science or is there any measure of that under the Department of Justice?

I am sorry to interrupt. Because the Deputy has started with the prisons, we will do the prisons first. However, we might do one Vote at a time.

We will do Vote 21. However, we will start with prisons as the Deputy has kicked off with prisons, and that is fine. We will take the prisons and we will then take each subhead and go through it that way. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The teachers are paid for by the Department of Education. No additional funds are required this year and that is why it is not mentioned in the Estimate. Things like the provision of copybooks and so on are provided by the Department of Justice through the Prison Service. I have been in several of the prisons in the last year and I have seen the facilities provided for educational purposes. It is provided by us but the teachers are paid for by the Department of Education.

I have had parliamentary question responses which show quite significant variation between prisons in the number of days the schools are open within the prison. I see separately that the Minister of State talks about additional costs because of greater prisoner numbers but also the significant cost of transporting people to and from court, and the effect that has on staffing rosters and the availability of staff to make sure that, for example, gyms and schools are open within prisons. We spoke with the head of the Prison Service both at the Committee of Public Accounts and at this committee about how staff were being allocated and managed to make sure those very important rehabilitative facilities were open.

Has this come up in conversations relating to preparing the Estimates?

Not in conversations on preparing the Estimates. Obviously, the allocation of staff is a matter for the Prison Service when it is assessing the needs of the different prisons and of prisoners and their particular needs. In terms of the operational matters with the Estimates, that did not come up.

There is a major capital carryover of €3.2 million. Was that expected? Was that under-profile or what is it?

I refer to the capital carryover of €3.2 million in the Prisons Vote. The Minister of State talked about the development of Limerick, which is great. I have visited the new Limerick Women's Prison. It is a positive development. It is a great building, but why was there a €3.2 million carryover when Cloverhill is under so much pressure and there is the opportunity to develop, for example, within the footprint of that facility, an additional remand wing, thereby taking pressure off other prisons in the context of remand?

I have also visited Limerick. The contrast between the existing women's prison, which to say it is not fit for purpose-----

Yes, it is appalling. It is. The new facilities are very much welcome. Limerick, as the Deputy will be aware, takes women from Cork as well. Those facilities are very welcome. The focus has been this year has been on getting that prison open. There will be a focus on other prisons into the new year. One of the reasons for the carryover has been the focus on Limerick in trying to get that across the line because there were some hold-ups as a result of Covid.

Did the Department project that carryover or is that unexpected? Why does the Department have a carryover of that size? Was it that the Department could not expedite other projects or Limerick is behind? What is the reason for that scale of carryover relative to the Department's planning?

As I say, Limerick consumed so much of the focus in the past year that it was not possible to execute a number of the other projects. The carryover was not expected. We would have hoped to have used that funding during the year. The reason for the carryover is because of an underspend but we expect within the year to be able to spend the rest of that funding.

The redevelopment of some of the other projects is really very important. The Cloverhill remand project comes to mind. It is not the Minister of State, but I would be worried if the Department was not able to progress more than one project at a time. Clearly, one can be engaged in design of one project while completing the fit-out of Limerick Prison, which is very considerably advanced and, I believe, due to open in January. Perhaps next year there might be a stronger official focus on delivering more than one project at a time.

This year, the Irish Prison Service reopened a newly refurbished training unit and place of detention as a centre for older persons in Mountjoy. This has provided an additional 96 prison spaces. That was the other project that was mainly advanced. I would expect the Department will be able to now focus on other projects and advance them as quickly as possibly.

I thank the Minister of State.

I thank the Minister of State and his staff for the presentation. In the context of the total budget overrun, the Minister of State referred to "staffing pressures linked to increased prisoner numbers and escort requirements to courts and hospitals." It is one of the primary reasons for that. Some advances were made during the lockdown in Covid in having technology to be able to have fewer of these transfers to courts for prisoners, particularly when they are for short periods. Is there an emphasis on ensuring that that technology is in place in all our prisons to make sure that is done? Is that part of the capital programme, as the Minister of State looks forward to the future, or how much distance have we to go in respect of that?

Certainly, it remains part of the capital programme to advance that as much as is feasible. Obviously, it is up to the Courts Service how they and the judges want to run the courts.

There has been, as the Deputy says, a reduction of transport as a result of the use of technology and the use of that technology will continue into the future. Nonetheless, some prisoners have to be transferred. We have seen an increase in the prisoner population. I suppose the technology has reduced the numbers but the increase in the population, in turn, has increased the numbers on the other side of it. Unfortunately, the demand on the transport remains.

The hospitals are mentioned in respect of that. I am conscious that a fair proportion of the prison population are people who have addiction problems and people who may even have mental health problems. There is a great emphasis and a concern - it has been expressed by practically all members of the committee - that prison is not the right place for many who are there. In that context, I wonder how much additional services and programmes available to get people on the right road to recovery can be put in place for people who are in prison with mental health issues and addiction issues.

That is very important. We saw only a few weeks ago the opening of the new forensic mental health hospital at Portrane. It is a state-of-the-art facility. I visited it. The fact that somebody is in prison should in no way diminish his or her entitlement to appropriate medical healthcare. The forensic mental health hospital will provide just that.

We also established in the Department of Justice the high-level mental health task force in conjunction with the Department of Health. It made recommendations and many of them now have been implemented and continue to be implemented. They are an absolute priority for the Minister. She set up the high-level task force on mental health in order to identify any gaps in the mental health services and to ensure that prisoners were getting the services that they need. They simply were not getting the services around mental health and addiction. Our aim is - we are working towards ensuring - that people in prison get the supports that they need. Going to prison is the punishment. There should not be further punishment in prison by a diminution of one's entitlement to services.

In regard to the numbers, it is certainly excellent to see the new service in Portrane open. Dundrum has been phased out. I am a little concerned as to the number of spaces that may be available. How many additional spaces are available now compared with what there were prior to the opening of Portrane, particularly for younger people and juveniles?

All 96 patients transferred from Dundrum to the National Forensic Mental Health Service Hospital in Portrane. I cannot remember the figures off the top of my head, but I will certainly get them to the Deputy. There are 170 places in total. Ten of them are for children. There are a number of intensive treatment beds in there as well. I think it is another ten. I do not have the figures, but I will certainly get them for the Deputy.

The aim is to get all of those open as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, as with all of the health services, recruitment remains a challenge but we are working towards getting all of those beds open as quickly as possible. Of course, it is a matter for the HSE. It is making every effort to do so.

I call Deputy Carroll MacNeill. Is it on the prisons?

I have a supplementary question on the prisons. Deputy Martin Kenny was speaking about addiction services. Going back to the issue of women's prisons, I refer to Dóchas. Obviously, Limerick caters for people who have much longer sentences primarily, even from Dublin. In Dóchas, there is a particular concern that the bulk of people who are there are suffering from sexual trauma, addiction, mental health issues. Deputy Martin Kenny quite rightly highlighted that in many respect.

The new justice strategy which tries to minimise short sentences, I would suggest, is particularly important for woman who are in and out of Dóchas on very short sentences with the effect that there is no real opportunity in that context to have any addiction programme, any education programme, any mental health programme or any Rape Crisis Centre support, which, I note, is such an important part of the work in Limerick. I will use this opportunity to emphasise strongly that women, if they go into prison for two months, might lose their children, might lose their home, and would see everything is gone and nothing is fixed. There is an opportunity through the justice strategy to make it clear to the Judiciary that short sentences, in particular for women, are deeply inappropriate because there is no opportunity for them to get the sort of break from the difficulties that they might benefit from otherwise.

It is a consistent comment from all of the services within the Prison Service that it is not possible to give people treatment if they are on less than a one-year prison sentence. That continues to be the situation. The impact is more severe on women.

When I travelled around the prison, one of the things I learned that was striking is that men in prison get a significant number of visitors, while women get very few, if any. Everyone told me the same thing. It stood out. This is why the facilities in, for example, Limerick Prison are so important. We must maximise the facilities where women can receive visitors, and especially from their children and immediate family. The loneliness hits women much harder in the context of a lack of visitors. There is no question about this.

They have no money either. People do not leave money for the tuckshop either. I have spoken with the governor of Limerick Prison. I am also a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, and I do not ever want us to have a situation where we are criticising the governor for getting different types of products into the prison, whether period products, shampoo or different things like that, to just make the situation a little bit more comfortable. The discretionary spending available to be able to provide women with what they need is crucially important, recognising that families might come in and leave €50 for a man and nothing at all for a woman. It is not just the Minister of State and I saying this. This is what we are hearing from every quarter in this regard.

Yes. It was something I was very conscious of when this aspect was raised with me when I visited the prisons. I know it was the same for the Minister. All I can say at this point is that we are aware of it and it is something that is very much being looked at.

I thank the Minister of State.

Following on from that last exchange, regarding prisoners purchasing items in prisons, and Deputy Carroll MacNeill mentioned the tuckshop and various products the prisoners may wish to buy, it was reported that there was an issue in some prisons whereby the families of prisoners could not lodge money for them to be held on account or in a credit system. Some prisoners may not have bank accounts, economic literacy or, in some cases, any literacy whatsoever. I also understand that a credit system operates in at least one prison, and perhaps more, where people can lodge money and have it recorded on someone's ledger. Some prisons, however, do not. Is the Minister of State in a position to comment on this aspect?

My understanding is that this system was revamped during Covid-19. It should be possible for most prisoners now to be able to do that, but I will get more detail on this subject for the Chair. This information is not in the Estimates but I will get more detail in this regard.

I thank the Minister of State. That concludes our discussion of the Vote on prisons. We will take Vote 20 - An Garda Síochána next. We will go around the table for any questions the members may have, and then we will do the same for each subhead. I call Deputy Carroll MacNeill.

The Minister of State made some strong announcements that I very much support concerning the expansion of the Garda youth diversion programme and the consultation regarding 18- to 24-year-olds. He secured an additional €6 million or €7 million for Garda youth diversion projects. Some of that funding came from last year as well, but it looks to me like there is a budget of approximately €30 million. Is this additional? Will the Minister of State set out some detail in this regard? Forgive me if I am asking an inappropriate question, but it seems to me this funding would be within the Garda Vote. I do not see it referred to in the Minister of State's statement, although it may be elsewhere, if he could point me to it. I ask the Minister of State to address these additional funds that have been received.

Last year, we received an additional €6.7 million for youth diversion projects.

This year, it was an additional €2.5 million. The total, therefore, is €9.2 million. This is coming off a base of approximately €14 million, so there has been a significant increase in the space of two budgets. Our priorities with the youth diversion projects, in respect of the initial funding, is to get-----

I am sorry, did the Minister of State say €14 million, €6.7 million and €2.5 million? Was that it?

No, it is €16.7 million plus €2.5 million, meaning there has been an increase of €9.2 million in the space of two budgets.

It is coming off of a base of approximately €14 million to €15 million.

That was what we were starting with. There was also some one-off funding present within the youth justice budget when I took up my portfolio concerning Greentown and some other specialised projects. This was the base the funding was coming off, so it has increased significantly. It is contained in the justice Vote rather than that for An Garda Síochána.

Regarding the strategy in this regard, the first priority is to get full national coverage. Only last week, we approved the advertisement for youth diversion projects in areas that remain to be covered, including parts of counties Mayo, Cavan and Tipperary. The name of the fourth county escapes me for the moment. We are working on full national coverage. We have also been increasing the allocation of funding to provide family support workers and early intervention workers. This concerns 8- to 11-year-olds. They do not need to be referred by the justice system but can be identified through Tusla or other agencies, as well as our own.

We have also now started the consultation around 18- to 24-year-olds. Most youth services extend to 24-year-olds. We must, of course, be careful. What will work for a 15-year-old will not necessarily work for a 22-year-old. Equally, one 20-year-old can be going on 12, in respect of mentality, while another heads up a serious crew in an organisation. We must have this extensive consultation in order to see what parts of the youth service can be extended, which parts it is appropriate to extend and those parts we should not extend. In addition, our youth workers will have to be trained differently, depending on who they are going to be dealing with.

We also have a research programme, Research Evidence into Policy, Programmes and Practice, REPPP, in the University of Limerick. This is headed up by Professor Sean Redmond. The project has won several awards. We are heading towards having a world-class youth justice service. Increasingly, we are getting international interest from other countries' youth services that are interested in seeing what we are doing, how we are doing it and why we are doing it. There is still much we can learn from others as well.

The whole purpose of these programmes is to divert people away from criminal activities. In the cases of many young people who end up on the pathway to criminal activity, the earlier it is possible to intervene, the more we can direct them away from that course. Often, a great deal of criminal activity among young people is trauma-informed. They may be coming from chaotic family backgrounds. Sometimes parents want to do their very best. We find sometimes, especially in Dublin, that the parents are good parents but they are the children of drug addicts themselves and may not have been taught the skills they need to undertake appropriate parenting. This is where the family support aspect comes in. Other times, unfortunately, the family can be the source of the criminal motivation and activities as well.

We are trying to approach the entire youth justice situation with appropriate interventions. The vast majority of young people react well to interventions. Having travelled around the country and met so many young people involved with the youth diversion programmes, I have seen so many young people who have gone through the system and progressed onwards. A young woman in Bandon, for example, in her mid-20s, has graduated from University College Cork, UCC, and is now a social worker. She told me straight out that if she had not been in a youth diversion project she would have gone down the same path as her friends and God knows where she would have ended up. The record is there on the ground, therefore. REPPP in the University of Limerick is putting together the empirical evidence to support this as well. These types of projects and the youth justice system are learning from each other.

As I said, there is still much we can learn and do better, but youth justice is certainly heading in the right direction. The Minister has also been a great supporter of this endeavour within the Department.

I agree with everything the Minister of State said. I am sorry for having raised a subject, Garda youth diversion projects, covered in the justice Vote, but I presume that juvenile liaison officers come under the Garda Vote. Let us continue.

One of the gaps or points of concern in this area is that the Garda Youth Diversion Bureau in Harcourt Square makes the decisions as to whether to prosecute young people or to put them on the youth diversion programme. In this regard, one of the concerns I have had for many years is that when a referral is made, whether it is for a welfare referral, an anger management course, a sexual therapy course or whatever else, is I do not see the capacity in that office to audit such decisions and ensure that such actions were undertaken by Tusla. It is a quasi-judicial office in Harcourt Square that makes these decisions to prosecute young people and, as the Minister of State said, send them into the criminal justice system, with all the effects we know that has or does not have. If a decision is made to not prosecution because someone is going to be put on a course to allow them to, for example, manage whatever sexual feelings, in the case of sexual assault or in the context of a welfare referral, then there is a big gap if that office does not have the capacity to audit whether those referrals have actually taken place. I note that, to my knowledge, it remains the case that nobody from Tusla is situated in that office. This is something the section 44 committee has been highlighting for many years. I refer to overseeing the implementation of the effectiveness of the Garda youth diversion programme. I also note that the annual reports of the monitoring committee have not been published since 2019. I do not understand why that is, because they used to be published pretty efficiently.

I will have to see why those reports are not being published. My understanding is that they come through via An Garda Síochána, as opposed to the youth diversion projects themselves. The Department just-----

They come through the Garda Síochána to the Minister's office and the Department, and then they are published.

I will have to inquire about why that is the case. I do not have any information to hand.

I note 92 trainee gardaí started in Templemore yesterday, which is welcome. There were difficulties with recruitment this year and there is underspending on that, which the Minister of State has accounted for. There are many different reasons for that to look at in the future. What is the plan for recruitment for next year to make sure we do not have that underspend? We do not welcome the underspend in any way, since we want to see gardaí being trained.

Absolutely. Earlier this year, the recruitment call was successful, with more than 11,000 expressions of interest. The first intake started yesterday, with 92 trainees. We expect to take in 200 every eight weeks, beginning in February 2023, to bring a total of 1,000 people into An Garda Síochána through the current recruitment process. The recruitment process has been successful in the sense we will get 1,000 gardaí from it. There have been delays in getting the first group into Templemore. That has mostly been a result of Covid. It has been a matter of getting the training machine up and going again once it had closed down. We have it going again and fully set up now and the momentum is there to keep trainees coming in. We are confident we will hit the 1,000 mark by the end of next year, although some will still be in training, with those who start next December still not qualifying for a period after that.

We will start a new recruitment process early next year. We have completed the last process. It was not perfect. We will look at where we can streamline and speed up the recruitment process. Applicants like to see momentum too. If they are waiting around, they might find alternative careers and pathways, which is natural for younger people too. We will look at how we can do that. There are certainly lessons we can take from the recruitment process.

I thank the Minister of State. It looks like there is a 33% increase in the overtime budget, having accounted for the underspend on recruitment, which is in the Minister of State's notes. It is an extraordinary additional spend on overtime. I note the significant reasons for that, including the investigation of organised and serious crime, which remains a significant concern for An Garda Síochána and a risk to its members. Does the Minister of State want to elaborate on that in greater detail? It is a concern for me, the committee and the Minister of State.

As the Deputy knows, the public raised a number of concerns last year about antisocial behaviour. There were significant successes relating to organised crime, including both drugs and criminals themselves. Much extra work was put into those types of programmes and into Operation Citizen, which tries to increase Garda visibility. We have seen challenges such as the incidents in Ballyfermot and Cherry Orchard too. That all leads to increases in Garda overtime. The lack of recruitment has resulted in reliance on the existing force rather than having extra gardaí on the ground who can take up the additional work as required. We expect and hope, with additional gardaí coming on stream next year, that there will not be as much reliance on overtime. To a certain degree, unfortunately, An Garda Síochána is a demand-led service. If particular issues arise in a year that we have not anticipated, we will ensure the Garda deploy its resources first and then we will come in to deal with the overtime in the Estimates if needed.

I will go back to the issue of recruitment and retention. It is probably the biggest issue we have at the moment. While it is welcome that 92 gardaí started yesterday, this year, the number has fallen far short of expectations. It is a disappointment, including for the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy McEntee, that we have been unable to meet targets. I acknowledge the budget put the finance for recruitment in place. Going back to my colleague's question, there does not seem to be an alternative strategy to ensure we get these new recruits into training and out the other side. While I understand 11,000 people expressed interest, when they got the email about taking it further, there was a large drop-off. I think very few responded positively and wanted to go further. There was an issue, which I spoke to the Garda Commissioner about, wherein 30% of those who went further failed the fitness test, which is one of the first hurdles. That is quite alarming.

How will we get over this problem? If people are not interested in joining An Garda Síochána in the first place, it will be very difficult to get to the stage where we can get numbers out the other side. I know there has been a tradition in Ireland, as there has been in many countries, where people within families join the Garda. Sometimes, it is multigenerational and sons and daughters of gardaí join, but that seems to have ended. I spoke to a retired garda recently. He told me that few of his colleagues would encourage their children to go into An Garda Síochána. We have an issue. It has long been a middle-class profession and that has ended. We need a strategy of looking elsewhere to find people to join the service. Additional effort needs to be made among communities that have traditionally had suspicions about An Garda Síochána. There is an opportunity to do this, since every problem is an opportunity. This is certainly an opportunity in this context.

Many of our migrant communities, including people from eastern Europe and other countries, have been here for many years and there is an opportunity with those communities. If people in any sector of society do not see it, then they will never be it. There needs to be an emphasis on that. I am disappointed there does not seem to be a strategy other than putting out a call and hoping for a better response next time. A more sustained strategy is needed to try to deliver. Has the Minister of State thought about that? Has the Government any ambition relating to recruitment?

In the last Garda recruitment process, we got more than 11,000 applications, which showed significant interest by the public in becoming members of An Garda Síochána. The initial application was significantly simplified and could be more described as an expression of interest rather than a complicated application. That was partly to expand interest so that people who would not normally apply might express interest and take it a little further. That was part of the thinking behind making the initial application easier. We knew it would attract a greater cohort who might not follow through but we could maybe have more diverse applications. The Garda Síochána has been working hard to increase interest in joining An Garda Síochána among people from different ethnic backgrounds, the Traveller community and other communities to get them interested. That will be reflected in the initial group of 92 and those coming in next year. We will have to wait to see that. I am conscious there should be diversity.

The Deputy is right that joining the Garda traditionally ran in families. I was talking about this with one of my officials earlier. Some families have had many members of An Garda Síochána as members. I looked at my family tree, all the way to third and fourth cousins, and could only find one garda. I think the nature of policing has changed from that tradition. It is still community-based and we want to retain that but we need to find those people who are suited to the role and who understand the community element while also understanding how policing has changed. I agree we need diversity. We and An Garda Síochána are working hard on that. I think it will be reflected among the graduates from Templemore in the coming months and years.

The Deputy is right. It is something we have to work very hard at.

Once the new recruitment begins next year, we are looking to reinvigorate the Garda Reserve as well. That would allow some people who might not want to go straight into An Garda Síochána or might not be coming from a traditional background for An Garda Síochána to see if it is something they are interested in. There has been increased civilianisation to free up gardaí to work on the front line. Some of those who work as civilians may apply to join An Garda Síochána too. That is something we may see. It allows them to see gardaí working without being a front line Garda worker. More progress needs to be made. There is no question about that. I agree with the Deputy's sentiment. It is something we are working very hard on.

Retention is another serious problem. The numbers resigning quite early in their career is also a huge problem. I understand some who have technical expertise and who are trained, particularly in areas such as cybercrime, are often recruited by some of the major tech companies. It is a competitive world and that is the reality, but are efforts being made to ensure work-life balance can be improved? This is getting away from the Estimates, but I know the recent Garda rota proposal has caused huge problems. There needs to be reflection on all of that. It is not just about finding new people to join the Garda service but also ensuring we can keep them once they are there.

Obviously, retention is very important. The level of resignations has increased slightly but they are still quite low and I suspect they are quite low by international comparison. However, any increase is something we have to monitor. People resign from any organisation for all sorts of reasons. We work very hard to retain. Operations in terms of rostering are a matter for the Commissioner who has a very difficult job to ensure there is work-life balance while taking into account the critical role of An Garda Síochána in security and protecting communities. He has to find the balance between ensuring members of An Garda Síochána have a work-life balance and ensuring there are gardaí where and when they are needed to protect the community. It is up to the Commissioner to strike that balance. We are very conscious of that. As the Deputy points out, there is a very tight labour market. Increased specialisation, especially with the funding for specialist units such as cybercrime, means gardaí are developing very high skills that are in high demand. Unfortunately, the private sector can offer those members far higher wages than the public sector could ever offer. I would always say the public sector, if you stay there, is a job for life with a pension. The private sector, in the good times, can look very tempting and very promising-----

Elon Musk comes to mind.

Yes. When it goes wrong, it can go badly wrong. I would certainly encourage anyone to stay in An Garda Síochána. It is a life well lived.

I know legislation is coming on body cameras - bodycams - and increased equipment around all that. Something I have wondered about, and there was some media about it at the weekend, is how most Garda patrol cars do not have dashcams, yet whenever an incident happens, the first thing the Garda asks for is for the public to come forward with their dashcams. I do not think it needs legislation or anything. It seems very peculiar. I would have expected that dashcams would be in place in Garda vehicles. It is an issue that should be dealt with urgently.

The roll-out of any type of equipment is a matter for the Commissioner. As the fleet is renewed year on year, the new cars often have more specialised equipment. The legislation on bodycams is working its way through. The general data protection regulation, GDPR, means it requires specialised legislation to set out clearly how and when they can be used because these gardaí will be walking down the street, their camera maybe on, and it will be clearly marked when they are on, but they will potentially capture much more than simply the incident in front of them. We must ensure the recordings are recorded correctly for the right purposes and stored and used in the correct manner. Their roll-out would be a matter for the Commissioner, who has indicated he wants to do a pilot project before doing a mass roll-out to see how the theory works in the real world. Yes, they are used in other countries and have been for a considerable time, but we have our own unique culture, Constitution and legislation. We have to ensure they are being used correctly. We do not want a situation in a few years where someone takes a challenge in the courts and it turns out the bodycams were being used in the wrong manner, even on a technical point. It is very important we get this right.

Are all the issues about CCTV cleared up? We had a lot of problems with that in different areas around the country. Are there still a few problems?

There have been challenges. CCTV was originally for An Garda Síochána to detect crime. The challenge was often for local authorities using them for environmental crimes that were being committed, how they were being monitored and whether they were using them within the terms of the scheme. That is probably a good example of the importance of ensuring we have robust legislation that is wide enough to tackle the issue but not challengeable.

I am thinking of one that is being looked at but I am not certain about it and do not want to get into the realm of speculation. We are updating the Garda use of CCTV.

I will start by returning to where Deputy Carroll MacNeill started on the youth justice service. Some of the agencies I have spoken to locally are feeling very optimistic and are very grateful not only for extra workers but new workers for outreach, family support and being able to broaden and deepen their connection with the communities they are trying to support. That positive development has to be acknowledged.

Deputy Kenny stole my thunder by asking about retention so I will leave that. I am concerned that we see new initiatives such as Operation Citizen and increased policing on transport, if short of a dedicated transport police, but without extra recruitment we are simply moving around inadequate resources. If we are putting extra gardaí on O'Connell Street, where are they coming from? If those posts are not being backfilled, then what are the gaps? That is a headache for the Commissioner and it will be a bigger headache if we cannot ensure those recruits are in place. However, recruitment has been covered sufficiently. I welcome the idea that we will try to appeal more to non-traditional communities and have more diversity in background.

On equipment, I am very glad we are not here seeking Supplementary Estimates for weapons and to arm and equip gardaí in that regard. The less said about that the better.

I will pick up on one thing that has not been mentioned, namely, the 122 additional vehicles for the fleet. I would ask about extra bikes. That is not me coming from a traditional Green perspective. I have spoken to gardaí who say that the two-week bike-training course is the most intense they have ever done in An Garda Síochána. You have to be able to fall off the bike at speed without hurting yourself, jump off the bike and tackle an assailant at speed, use the bike as a shield or a weapon or use a bike with other gardaí in crowd control. When policing an urban environment, it is a quicker way to get around. When policing an urban environment, you are very much part of it instead of being hidden in a cage, like the police car can be.

It is a massive addition, especially in terms of urban policing.

How many of the additional vehicles, of which there will be approximately 122, will be electric vehicles, EVs? I have seen gardaí patrolling in EVs. All parts of society, including the Garda, have to contribute to decarbonisation, . No concerns have been expressed to me by members of the Garda regarding the EVs they are driving.

Before the Minister of State responds, I wish to concur with the Deputy's point in respect of the bike training course. I have heard the same feedback from Garda members with whom I am friendly, particularly in the context of the role of bicycle usage and training in community policing. Deputy Costello makes a good point about gardaí on bike patrols being part of the urban environment rather than being in a box outside it. I have heard that point from members of the force. I support his point in that regard.

As regards bike patrols, I have received the same direct feedback from members of An Garda Síochána in terms of the intensity of the course. I also received feedback, particularly when I was out in Cherry Orchard, from members of the community who praised the bike patrols due to the increased visibility of members of An Garda Síochána on such patrols, who are able to engage with the community but also able to cover far more ground. They seem to have been very successful. The gardaí themselves like them. The superintendent was full of praise for them as well. They seem to be a very positive development. An additional 100 bicycles will be procured before the end of the year and I expect more to be procured next year.

As regards EVs or hybrid vehicles, on 9 November 2022 there were 3,300 vehicles attached to the Garda fleet, of which 181, or 5.5%, were electric or hybrid. A further four EVs and three plug-in hybrid EVs are on order for the fleet and delivery is expected in November or December 2022. There are 51 charge points installed at 18 locations throughout the Garda network and An Garda Síochána is currently identifying Garda stations that have suitable electrical supply capacity for installation of EV charging points. When suitable locations are identified, the Office of Public Works, OPW, will prioritise them. I do not have a breakdown of the additional vehicles to be purchased but the experience has been that the number of EVs and hybrids has been increasing year on year. We also need more charging points to be rolled out for An Garda Síochána in order that those vehicles can be charged. It is clearly something we need to do, however.

I have a few questions before we move on to the next head. My remarks will mirror some of what has been said to an extent. I, too, have a question on retention and recruitment. Deputy Martin Kenny and I recently attended a meeting of the National Bus and Rail Union at which there were representatives of the Garda Representative Association, GRA, and the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors, AGSI, on the panel. I was delighted to see funding provided in the budget for the recruitment of 1,000 additional gardaí. That is very positive and welcome. It is great that the commitment is there from the office of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Michael McGrath, to support that, with great strides being made. The point made by the representative associations, however, is that it is one thing to launch or announce a recruitment drive but it is more difficult to do it - to get people in and keep them there.

I welcome the remarks in respect of greater diversity of the police force. It makes sense to have more diversity because the police are always part of the community they police and serve. That is certainly positive. The Minister of State already addressed the point and other Deputies came in with different points on it as well.

An issue that may affect longer-serving members of the Garda more than others is the introduction of a new rota system. I understand it is causing ripples within the organisation as it does not suit certain members. I am not sure whether it is the younger members or the older ones who are affected. There will always be industrial relations issues and other issues that permeate through.

When can we expect to see those 1,000 new gardaí on the streets, in Garda cars or on bikes? Can that be done within one year or two years? How long does it take for that to kick in?

On Garda recruitment, trainee members of An Garda Síochána start in Templemore and spend 34 weeks there, followed by a placement of 70 weeks at a Garda station. It is 104 weeks in total or, in effect, two years. It is known as probation. It can be extended by the Commissioner in particular circumstances if needed. One will see those members of the Garda on the streets, albeit as probationer members of the Garda Síochána, 34 weeks after each intake. That is where we are at in that regard.

How many come in with each intake? What is the class size?

It is 200. It was 92 yesterday for the first class intake of this recruitment process but it will be 200 for every intake thereafter.

There will be five batches of 200 to make up the 1,000 gardaí.

Okay. That will take approximately 18 months, or a little longer, to go through the system.

They are attested after 34 weeks but then they do 70 weeks in-station probation, during which time they are out on the beat and so on.

Very good. I thank the Minister of State. I am not sure whether it is an issue of resources, equipment, training or all of the above, but the Minister of State referred to attacks on members of the force while on duty, such as those in Ballyfermot and Cherry Orchard and a few others we heard about during summer and in recent months. It was suggested in the media at the time of those incidents that there were many probationer gardaí in particular stations and units, which is a challenge. The Garda is in a tough situation as it is and if the balance is tipped toward less experienced members of the force being clustered in one area, that will be a difficulty. This may go back to the issue of recruitment or retention.

Another point made was that in some instances gardaí were driving Garda vehicles but they were not sufficiently qualified to utilise them in an advanced way. For example, they were constrained to the speed limit and could not turn on the flashing blue lights or the siren. In effect, they had one hand tied behind their backs in the sense that they were trying to deal with emerging incidents, and were actually coming under attack themselves in some cases, but lacked the powers they should enjoy as members of law enforcement, possibly because of their probationer status. I know that was mentioned in some of the commentary at the time. To an extent, it comes back to the Estimates in the context of whether they have the equipment, training, support and resources to support them in the field. If not, what do we need to do to address that?

Obviously not every garda has or needs to have blue light training and other advanced Garda training. In-service training is carried out at Templemore. It is supported for An Garda Síochána. The Garda Commissioner certainly aims to have as much in-service training done as possible to upskill all members of An Garda Síochána in whatever area they may be specialising. Unfortunately, Templemore was closed for a significant period during Covid. It has it now been reopened, the recruitment is happening and I expect there will be additional in-service training to ensure the relevant members of An Garda Síochána have the training they need to carry out their individual roles.

I thank the Minister of State. What about the point about whether there is a greater concentration of probationer members of the force in certain areas? That may give rise to difficulty in more challenging districts.

We will always have a significant number of probationer officers as these new trainees are rolled out from Templemore. The distribution of An Garda Síochána remains a matter for the Garda Commissioner based on operational security reasons. That remains a matter for the Commissioner. The Department of Justice and the Ministers have no role in that regard. That is the current position.

Thank you. That concludes the discussion on Vote 20 - An Garda Síochána. We will move on to Vote 22 - Courts Service. This is a technical Vote.

A small point is that there is a complete lack of judges. We do very poorly on international comparisons. We should be here talking about Supplementary Estimates to massively increase the number of judges. That is what we need. Ms Justice Mary Irvine was looking for 15 extra judges. Mr. Justice David Barniville, who is now President of the High Court, has echoed that. It is not just the High Court; significantly more judges are also needed in the Circuit Court and the District Court.

There is a wider issue on access to justice but I will save it for the discussion on legal aid.

The McManus review is being carried out to assess the number of additional judges we need in the District Court, Circuit Court, High Court and Court of Appeal. In addition, last week an amendment was tabled to the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill on freeing up Court of Appeal judges. As the legislation is written at present there must always be a panel of three judges no matter how straightforward the application may be. I hope this amendment will free up some of their capacity. There is recognition that we need additional judges. We have to ensure we are putting the right number of judges at the right level and dealing with the right volume of cases. There also needs to be an element of reform in how the courts operate to ensure there are effective efficiencies in the system. We have seen the advent of technology that has certainly helped in a number of areas. Once the McManus review is published, we will have a greater handle on the number of additional judges we need.

To be fair, the Bar has embraced remote hearings and hybrid hearings, as have the vast majority of judges. These efficiencies are definitely there and welcome.

They are and this has been acknowledged.

I reiterate Deputy Costello's comment on the number of judges. In many places throughout the country, the Circuit Court and District Court have long lists. Much of this is down to the fact there are not enough judges to be able to deal with the lists. It is as simple as this. While I appreciate the Minister of State has said a review is ongoing and will report on the exact number we need, any cursory look at the lists throughout the country will tell us we have a problem that we need to resolve. A sense of urgency needs to be brought to it.

Reform and new technology have been mentioned. At the most recent Question Time, I asked about the fact that very few High Court cases take place in Limerick. A member of the Judiciary took issue with me for suggesting it was because the judges are not prepared to travel and pointed back the other way. This is fine. There is a problem if the Courts Service is not making courts and facilities available. In many cases, these facilities are new and very fine elaborate buildings with multiple courtrooms in place but we find only two or three of them are used a week. This needs to be dealt with. I appreciate the wrap on the knuckles I got from the Judiciary and that is fine and appropriate. If I got it wrong in respect of where the blame lies, I certainly did not get it wrong that there is an issue that needs to be dealt with urgently. It is not only Limerick. It is similar in other places but not as severe. Often we look to get more staff but there are efficiencies that can be brought to bear also that do not put an extra burden on the State. It would be welcome if they could happen with urgency.

I can certainly say as a former member of the Leinster Bar and the south-eastern circuit that judges travelling outside of Dublin is an important part of our Courts Service. It links our population with what the courts do and they are not simply something up in Dublin. The vast majority of judges traditionally have welcomed the opportunity to travel. Obviously the arrangement of the courts sittings are a matter for the Courts Service and not a matter for the Department of Justice directly. It is something that has to be maintained.

I want to follow on with question on the number of judges. The Minister of State mentioned the McManus report. This matter was raised at the committee last week. As Deputy Costello noted, it is not just with regard to High Court judges although obviously this is very important. The volume of cases that can be managed is a function of how many judges are available. We have an opportunity after Brexit, which we have been speaking about in the committee and elsewhere, to attract high-quality litigation and to be a centre for commercial disputes. We could be an attractive location for many reasons. These are the same reasons that underpin our economic success in other areas. This involves having courts available that are efficient and ready to go. This comes back to the number of judges.

Last week we touched on the issue in the District Court. Some are already overloaded, as is the case in my area of Naas. The Bill we considered last week extended GDPR cases to the District Court and the changes in the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, PIAB, mean that many of its cases will go to the District Court. Previously they would have been heard in the Circuit Court or a higher court. This will provide an additional strain and workload for the lower courts. There is talk about childcare cases being heard in the Circuit Court, which will place further pressures on it. It is at every level and not just the High Court although it is very important. There will be pressures at every level of the system. I am not overly familiar with the McManus report. Will it address all aspects of judicial resourcing? What is it doing? What exactly is being looked at?

It address all levels of the Courts Service and the number of judges needed at various levels throughout the country. Any appointment of a judge comes with the additional resources that are required, whether it be researchers or offices. It is not simply a case of appointing a judge and nothing else. Significant resources go with judges. The report of the judicial planning workgroup, or the McManus report, will be due very soon. It will be given to the Minister for Justice. It will address all of the working situations regarding the number of judges we need. It will be benchmarked against international standards, which will be very important.

I am eager to speak on the next heading as I am due to speak at another committee meeting.

One item remains under this heading. Senator Murphy expressed an interest in the courthouse in Roscommon. I am not sure whether the Minister of State is in a position to provide information. If not perhaps a note can be sent to the committee afterwards.

With regard to Roscommon courthouse, the Courts Service has commenced the process of identifying and acquiring suitable sites for the projects to be completed over the period of the national development plan. Additional space on the historic Roscommon courthouse site has already been acquired from the local authority to facilitate the future expansion and refurbishment of the courthouse. The priority project for the period up to 2025 is the proposed new family law complex on Hammond Lane. The timing of the delivery of remaining projects will depend on the availability of funding over the timeframe of the national development plan. Due to the poor condition of the historic courthouse in Roscommon, the Courts Service has had no option but to source alternative accommodation until such time as the refurbishment project is completed. The Courts Service recognises the local importance of having courts sitting in the town. With this in mind, temporary premises have been sourced at Racecourse Road and fit-out will be completed in early December 2022. The temporary premises will be capable of hosting multiple-defendant jury trials, which at present cannot be accommodated in the historic courthouse. I do not have a timeline for the refurbishment of the existing courthouse but it is in the national development plan. An alternative in Roscommon town has been sourced and resolved and will be operational next month.

I thank the Minister of State. I am sure Senator Murphy and Roscommon will be very happy to hear this news. On this note, I do not know whether it is appropriate to ask about Naas courthouse. It is something we touched on when discussing the Estimates in previous years.

I will get the Chair a formal update from the Department on Naas. I do not have one to hand.

I thank the Minister of State. We will now move to the justice Vote.

I have several items to ask about in this regard. There is a drop of €303,000 in the provision for the Parole Board. Is there a reason for this? What are the particular circumstances that occurred? I also want to ask about free legal aid.

Many of the private practitioners who engage in the free legal aid service do not get the level of remuneration that they think they deserve. Perhaps Deputy Costello is in a hurry and wants to ask a question.

No, I am all right.

The scheme has not been reviewed in a long time. What is the Minister of State's view and is there a plan to do so?

I completely agree with Deputy Kenny. I may have discussed this issue before. The legal aid practitioners or practitioners who benefit from the legal aid scheme may be the only profession left, outside of the FEMPI cuts, that have not yet been restored back to a 2008 to 2010 timeframe. That is a long time to wait, particularly considering the current inflationary climate. I support what Deputy Kenny has said and make the same point.

Does the Chairman's comment concern criminal legal aid or the family legal aid board?

My question concerns criminal legal aid. I think that family legal aid is a little bit better but could do with some improvement as well.

On criminal legal aid, unfortunately that is a matter for the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. I mean that remuneration is not dealt with by the Department of Justice.

What is the Minister of State's view?

I had a view when I was practising but not as a Minister of State.

On the parole board and the underspend, it has taken a little bit longer to get that statutory board up and running in terms of recruitment. That is the only reason. The delay in recruitment has resulted in an underspend in pay.

I wish to make similar points. The Chief Justice, who has been a strong advocate for access to justice, has made the point that access is not just about courtrooms and judges; there are plenty of other things that block people's ability to access justice. A recent report by the Department of Justice report, for which I could not find a date, mentioned per capita spending on legal aid as follows: €73 in Northern Ireland; €33 in Scotland; €38 in England and Wales; and €18.40 in Ireland. Even when one takes into account the cuts in these things money is a huge issue in terms of accessing justice. Access is ultimately about someone getting their fair crack of the whip when they are standing in court and having their right to legal representation if they are accused of a crime and standing in front of the State.

I echo the concerns expressed about civil legal aid. There is a need for a huge expansion in the budget for civil legal aid. I also think that the recent Zalewski case will kick holes in doors in terms of legal aid. We need to act on this issue now instead of having the Government's hand forced by the court and being bounced into something. In the Zalewski case the Chief Justice talked about how justice administered in quasi-judicial bodies could not fall below the level of justice administered in courts. We have seen various changes come to the Workplace Relations Commission to ensure that happens but one of the central tenets of the administration of justice is representation, and having access to a well paid and experienced advocate. The Minister of State, in his statement, alluded to the fact that the criminal legal aid budget has increased due to increasing numbers and complexity. I contend that civil legal aid will face a higher complexity. I mean that we are going to be pulling legal representation into areas where we have not done so before and if we say no - that this is outside the remit of legal aid in terms of the way civil legal aid is set up - all it takes is the right plaintiff and the right test case for the door to be kicked open. I believe that the Chief Justice's comments on the Zalewski case make it very clear that the case will be the battering ram to open up civil legal aid.

The nub of the matter is fairness and the administration of justice. We need to address the FEMPI cuts, invest more in criminal legal aid and broaden civil legal aid so that there is width and depth.in terms of civil legal aid reform.

Does the Deputy mean the WRC case?

As I have said, there have been significant increases in the budget for criminal legal aid but that does not address the individual pay of representatives, which is a matter for the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. That Department is responsible for all issues around pay.

A review of civil legal aid is under way in terms of how it works and what qualifies for aid. Obviously there are other areas where one can get civil aid supports. A review is being carried out. I agree that it is a long time since civil legal aid has been reviewed. The review will be very important as it will help us to see where it goes in future. Traditionally, legal aid has mostly been for family law and it has been quite challenging to get civil legal aid beyond family law. We look forward to the review and seeing where we go with it from there.

I thank the Chair and the committee for indulging my need to leave to attend the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth.

On victims of crime, including sexual crime and domestic abuse, I notice that funding has increased. Does that include the delivery of domestic violence refuges, under the Department of Justice, as it has a role?

The day-to-day cost of running domestic refuges is under the remit of Tusla, and that is where they remain at the moment but it will come under the remit of the Department of Justice. The capital funding is under the remit of the Department with responsibility for housing but that too will transfer to the Department of Justice.

Last Friday, we turned a sod at the site for the Wexford Women's Refuge, which was attended by both the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Minister for Justice. It was a very positive day with a significant increase in the number of spaces although representing, unfortunately, some very serious issues. We have a plan now to provide refuges across the country.

Is there a timeframe for when the work of providing capital and running costs will be moved to the Department Justice?

As the Deputy will know, we are establishing a new agency to co-ordinate all of the supports around refuges and supports for domestic violence. The agency is expected to be fully up and running in 2024. The services will be transferred to the agency, which will be under the auspices of the Department of Justice.

That is one of the issues. The services are the responsibility of everybody and nobody, which has been the problem up to now. I welcome the new agency but expected greater urgency than putting it out until 2024, although I am sure there are valid reasons for doing so.

Yes, legislation is needed. In the meantime, we have the third national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. The Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, working with the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and with Tusla ensures that the strategy continues to be rolled out while we await the State agency to be established and then the agency will take over the co-ordination.

I have mentioned the Wexford Women's Refuge and turning a sod at the site. That project happened because of the dedication of a number of volunteers in County Wexford. We cannot simply leave it to volunteers to be able to have the wherewithal to come together to establish refuges. Other counties need refuges and we need to support those counties to establish refuges so that there is one in every county and more, if necessary. The strategy sets out how to deliver refuges and the Minister, Deputy McEntee, is very much and very strongly showing leadership in that area until we get the agency established.

Very good.

I wish to raise an issue that was mentioned under the Garda Vote.

The youth diversion programme falls under the justice Vote. I had a case a number of years ago when a teenage girl was the victim of a serious sexual assault. There was more than one perpetrator, one of whom ended up in a youth diversion programme. The victim and the family were greatly distraught that this happened. Perhaps there were good reasons for it but it struck me that other than a member of An Garda Síochána calling to the house and explaining that this had happened, that was the end of it for the victim. When I saw the heading "Victims of crime, including sexual crimes" it spoke to me and I thought of that particular case. In situations like that there needs to be greater follow-up, or some protocol in place to ensure that the victim of crime is looked after. In this case the young women was really traumatised by what happened and was retraumatised, in her hearing of it, that the people involved were not going to get anything other than being let off the hook. I accept that youth diversion is about making sure people do not get into a worse situation, but in such cases of very violent incidents or incidents of a sexual nature, there needs to be an emphasis on ensuring the victims are looked after properly. When I saw the heading I wanted to use this opportunity to enforce the point with the Minister of State, and to see if anything can be done in respect of that. This happened a number of years ago. Perhaps things have improved since; if they have, that is welcome. In my experience, they are very slow to improve in these issues. The evolution of restorative justice has been one of the means of dealing with matters like that. Perhaps there is a role it can play. I would welcome if the budget could also increase to ensure it could be used in instances like that. This young woman and her family were devastated by what happened, in their minds.

Absolutely. The Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, and I believe in the victim-first approach to all of our strategies and policies, and in ensuring the victim is at the centre of everything we do. I agree with Deputy Kenny that restorative justice is something we need to develop further. It is a priority for the Department. We are trying for it to become a natural part of our youth diversion projects. It does not need a specific policy; we are aiming for it to eventually become part of what we do. Obviously, the victim has to be a willing participant in restorative justice, which is absolutely critical. Where we have the offender understanding and confronting the nature of the damage they are doing, it can be the most powerful influence on the offender to ensure he or she does not repeat. Often, some offenders just do not comprehend or understand the consequences of what they are doing or what they have done, or they may feel that what they have done is simply a normal part of life. It is about them understanding it is not normal to do that. I am a great believer in restorative justice. I attended an international conference on it last year. I see that it is very much used in a lot of countries in Scandinavia and in eastern Europe. I would like to see a lot more use of restorative justice. All of the participants must be willing to participate in it. It can be very powerful experience to see what restorative justice at work. It can even work in very serious crimes. It is critical that the three elements of restorative justice are all there: community, victim and offender, and in particular that the victim is there. I have spoken on this issue with Dr. Sean Redmond in the University of Limerick about how to develop protocols around restorative justice. It is something that we understand conceptually but in practice it can mean different things to different people and how they apply it. It can be applied differently in different countries. I certainly hear Deputy Kenny on that one.

That concludes our engagement on the Supplementary Estimates. I ask Deputies to remain at the meeting because we have a small bit of other business to deal with. I thank the Minister of State and his team for being with us today.

I thank the Chairman, the members and the committee staff.

Top
Share