Other Questions
6. Deputy Robert Dowds asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the contact that he has had with the Garda Commissioner regarding the conviction rate for white collar crime as reported in a publication (details supplied); his views on the statistics outlined in the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter [46310/12]
View answerThe conviction rate for any given category of offence relates in the first instance to the outcome of the criminal prosecution process and the Deputy will appreciate that my role does not extend to the bringing of prosecutions, or indeed to the determination of guilt, which is a matter for the courts. However, I am of course concerned to ensure that the investigation and detection of fraud and white-collar offences is as effective as it can be and that An Garda Síochána has available to it the necessary legislative and other supports to this end.
I am familiar with the particular newspaper report referred to by the Deputy. At the outset I should point out that the relevant Central Statistics Office offence category is "Fraud Offences". This category may encompass a wide range of criminal activities from elaborate corporate fraud to offences such as forgery and consumer frauds. It is also important to note in interpreting figures for detection and conviction rates that the investigation, detection and prosecution of any offence may take a number of years. This is particularly so where the crime may be complex, as is often the case in fraud offences. Accordingly, the initial conviction rate for any given year will inevitably appear lower than the eventual rate. For this reason great caution should be exercised in comparing, as the article appears to do, conviction rates for offences recorded in 2004 with those recorded in 2010.
Notwithstanding the challenges faced in the investigation of fraud and white-collar crime, I attach the highest priority to the full investigation of these offences and bringing the perpetrators of such crime to justice. The programme for Government contains a commitment that rogue bankers and all those who misappropriate or embezzle funds are properly pursued for their crimes and that the full rigours of the law will apply to them. I am briefed on an ongoing basis by the Garda Commissioner on the progress of the major white-collar crime investigations which are under way, and have been assured by the Commissioner that sufficient resources are allocated to the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation.
Within eight weeks of taking up office, I moved urgently to draft, and seek Government approval for the introduction of additional legislation.
This new legislation, the Criminal Justice Act 2011, was enacted on 2 August 2011 and provides vital assistance to the Garda Síochána in the completion of current white-collar crime investigations, as well as providing assistance to them in investigations undertaken in the future. The Commissioner is aware that any further legislative proposals he might wish to have put in place to assist in the investigation and detection of white-collar crime or of fraud offences generally will be positively considered by me.
7. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he is satisfied that his plans to nominate the Director of the new Human Rights and Equality Commission are in line with best international practice and in particular with the Belgrade Principles. [46419/12]
View answerI am entirely satisfied that all the elements of my proposals in relation to the establishment of the new Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, as set out in the general scheme published last June, are fully in accordance with the Paris Principles, which are the set of rules or standards that relate to the accreditation of national human rights institutions for UN purposes. These principles include that commissions should be free to recruit their own staff. The general scheme provides that for the future, the new commission will be free to recruit its own staff but recognises that we are in a merger situation with two existing bodies, whose staff will transfer across to the new Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission. This includes the one existing person at CEO level, who will become the director of the new body. The person involved is not my nominee but is the person in situ in a merger situation. The Government and the new commission would be subject to justifiable criticism were the cost of a duplicate CEO director post to be incurred. Lest there be any doubt, I am completely satisfied that the person in question will do an excellent and independent job in the role. The decision to continue with the existing CEO during the initial transitional phase as we set up the new body is a rational one which is supported by the emphasis in the working group's report on the need for change management and continuity during this phase. The person concerned was recruited by the Equality Authority, not by my Department, using the services of the Public Appointments Service. She is an employee of the authority for the duration of her contract and not of the Department. She is not on secondment from the Department, that is, her salary is paid by the Equality Authority. She does not report to or take instructions from the Department. Likewise, she will become an employee of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission. If the Equality Authority CEO post, rather than the Human Rights Commission post had become vacant, the exact same process would have been followed, subject to the person involved also becoming an employee of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission.
There are no specific references to staffing issues in the Belgrade Principles, which relate to the relationship between national parliaments and national human rights institutions and cover such issues as parliamentary oversight of the selection process for recruiting commissioners. I am entirely satisfied that everything we are doing and the very helpful and productive involvement of the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence in reviewing the general scheme of the Bill and in meeting with members of the selection panel has been entirely positive and in line with the spirit of the Belgrade Principles.
I thank the Minister for his response. The UN office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had concerns about the whole approach here. I attended the committee meeting where the selection panel made its presentation and would certainly have no issue with the five members of that panel. Their contribution to public life speaks for itself. I have no doubt about their integrity and the fact they will recommend a very capable commission when the time comes. However, concerns arise - this echoes somewhat the earlier discussion we had on judicial appointments - when the Minister has the ability to appoint people and does not give that task to an independent body. The process by which the five panel members were selected was criticised for a lack of independence. Again, I must reiterate that I have no issue with the five panel members. Their capacity is obvious but the Minister knows that there has been criticism of its selection. Indeed, the members of the panel stepped aside voluntarily for a period. They then appeared before the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. As a member of that committee, I am happy to assist the process towards its completion but I urge the Minister to reconsider the way in which this matter was approached. We must ensure that the independence of the commission, as required by the Belgrade Principles, is not in question. Human rights commissions must be clearly separated from governments and fearless in their defence of human rights.
There has been some ill-informed and misinformed criticism of our proposals which has resulted in some individuals and some sections of the media being misled. It was always our intention, as announced, that a group of individuals, clearly independent of Government, would be appointed as a selection panel and they were so appointed. I do not know what other procedure the Deputy is suggesting. We cannot have independent people emerging from the ether and self-appointing themselves. Somebody, at some stage, has to have some accountability for the way we conduct public affairs. A selection panel was selected, whose members, as the Deputy acknowledges, are unimpeachable in their independence. Indeed, the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality recognised them as being unimpeachable so I cannot work out why the process should be the subject of criticism of any description, other than because there are some individuals who feel compulsively required to criticise everything.
I thank the Deputy for reminding me that we took an initiative. It was our initiative to write to the Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights to seek her advice on the heads of the Bill because of the important role her office has in providing the secretariat to the international co-ordination committee that deals with the accreditation of national human rights institutions. There was some confusion created about the status and contents of her response to a letter which I received. However, I can inform the Deputy that the confusion has now been completely dispelled and we are back on track with the process of selecting members of the new commission, with advertisements to invite applications expected to appear in the next week or two.
Regarding the letter from the Deputy High Commissioner and the paper that accompanied it, my Department provided a very comprehensive paper in response to the points raised and I can also inform the Deputy that a group of officials, led by the Secretary General of my Department, met the Deputy High Commissioner and some of her officials on 8 October in Geneva. This was a very positive meeting. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights considers that we have engaged in a good process in the development of the new commission and has full confidence that the Irish Government is approaching the issue in the right way. The OHCHR hopes that it can continue to use our approach as a best-practice model for other member states. In reply to questions as to whether there were any matters in the Department's paper responding to the OHCHR's observations that struck them as being problematic in the context of the future re-accreditation process or if there were any remaining issues they would have concerns about, the OHCHR said there were none. That answer could not be clearer. Far from potentially causing confusion or inadvertently limiting the powers of the commission, the approach in the heads of the Bill, of having two definitions of human rights, which led to some very uninformed comment, is an approach which the OHCHR says it now regards as a best-practice model and one that other states should be encouraged to adopt.
I thank the Deputy for giving me the opportunity to address this issue because there have been some extraordinarily inaccurate reports published in a number of outlets, and in one obsessively, about this process. We will have an enhanced, independent human rights commission in place, dealing with human rights and equality issues, following a best-practice approach with an appointments system that is superior to that which previously applied to the human rights commission and with a direct relationship between that commission and the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, something that does not exist under the current legislation and which did not apply to the outgoing commission.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response, particularly his assurances regarding the OHCHR. The fact that the UN is now content with the process is critical for public confidence. There was some confusion around the process, as the Minister said.
When does the Minister expect that the process of the panel recommending the new commission and the new commission being appointed will be completed? What is the timeframe for that? Will the Minister accept the recommendations of the selection panel? The understanding is that the Government will accept the recommendations of the panel for the members of the new commission.
I was personally disappointed that the panel did not commence its work earlier. It was appointed in mid-July. I welcomed that the individuals who we requested to sit on the selection panel agreed to do so. I appreciate that it was a great burden for them and I was grateful to them for taking up the position. Unfortunately, instead of commencing their work and advertising in September as I originally hoped and expected, they raised some issues as a result I think of misinformation that was made available to them and they postponed proceeding with the work we had asked them to undertake. I met with those individuals in September. We cleared the air entirely of any misunderstandings that had arisen. It was important that they were also given an opportunity to meet members of the Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality so that committee would be fully assured through a public and transparent process that the individuals are appropriately qualified and independent. I originally thought the advertisement might be in the newspapers and other media this week but I understand they will be advertising next week. A period of time will be provided for those who are eligible to apply and the panel will ultimately make recommendations to the Government regarding the individuals who are to be appointed.
Under the process for these panels in the past there were no particular assurances from the Government regarding who would be appointed and previous Governments appointed some but not all of those recommended to them. I hope I am accurate in that. I do not want to mislead the House in any way. We have given a commitment that we will appoint those who are recommended unless some unexpected and exceptional circumstance arises. Should that apply to some individual reasons will be given to the panel as to why a certain individual should not be appointed. I envisage in circumstances where the panel might recommend individuals in good faith that some information could emerge before the Government formally made its appointment which indicated for some reason which the panel was unaware of that an individual was unsuitable. It is very unlikely that such an issue would arise because we are anxious that the process is seen to be completely independent. Should it arise, reasons will be given and the panel will be asked to nominate an alternative individual. I am not anticipating that we will get into that difficulty.
I hope we will have the appointments to the new commission before Christmas. We cannot formally establish the new commission without the legislation. The intention is that the same individuals will be appointed under existing legislation to the Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority and that they will work together in moving to the creation of the single body because the new legislation will not be enacted until next year.
8. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the progress that has been made in achieving the goal, as set out in the Programme for Government, to overhaul the student visa system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43109/12]
View answer25. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if his attention has been drawn to difficulties or delays in job applicants and students receiving visas to come to work or study here; and if he has any new proposals to address these difficulties. [44826/12]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 25 together.
In line with the objectives of the programme for Government, my Department has been working on implementing the recommendations set out in the new immigration regime for full-time non-European Economic Area students which has been in operation since 1 January 2011. Before outlining the steps which have been taken to implement the new student regime, I advise the House that approximately 30,300 non-EEA students are registered with the Garda National Immigration Bureau, GNIB. Statistics from the GNIB provide a snapshot of registrations. Of course, the majority of non-Irish students currently pursuing studies in Ireland are from EU countries.
I can report to the House that the Government has made significant progress on the reform of the student migration system within the framework of the new immigration regime. To date the following initiatives have been implemented. The regime distinguishes between degree programmes and language and non-degree programme courses and provides for appropriate time limits for each programme. The recommended maximum time limit of seven years residence in Ireland as a student has been implemented. Short-term English language students - those staying for a maximum period of up to 90 days - are now regarded as educational tourists for visa purposes and are therefore not subject to the student residency requirements. An enhanced post study pathway for graduates has been available to non-EEA students since October 2010, with honours degree graduates now able to avail of a 12 month graduate scheme permission. Fast tracking of Irish accredited degree programme visa applications has been rolled out in visa offices. A pilot visa scheme developed by INIS and Marketing English in Ireland, MEI, the representative body for English language schools, has been rolled out in the Turkish market to attract students from Turkey. A pilot visa scheme with regard to Chinese English language students is being developed with MEI with a view to maximising the potential of the Chinese student market, which we regard as substantial. A trusted agent programme has been launched in India in conjunction with Enterprise Ireland, whereby reputable agents in India who work with the Irish higher education sector would have their cases prioritised in the visa system. A new pilot scheme for verification of the finances the student needs to support him or herself in Ireland is currently being piloted in the key markets of India and China.
Visa Statistics for 2011 and the first three quarters of 2012 are available on the web pages of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service. A comparison of the two years illustrates the success of the Government's ongoing initiatives in regard to international education. In the first nine months of the present year, 5,881 student visas were granted and 619 were refused, which represents an overall approval rate of 90% for student visa applications. During the 12 months of 2011, 4741 student visas were granted and 671 refused, representing a 87.6% approval rate for student visas. The number of visas granted in the first three quarters of this year already exceeds the number granted for the whole of 2011 by 24%. Adjusting for the fact that junior English language students from Russia were treated as visitors rather than students during 2011, a policy that was changed for this year, the figures show that the number of visas granted to students in the first three quarters of 2012 still exceeds the 12 month 2011 figure by 12.5%. The individual approval rates in the first three quarters of 2012 for key markets are also very encouraging. The approval rate for China stands at 93%, for India it is 85% and Russia it is 98%. My officials inform me that these approval rates represent a slight increase on the rates for the applicable period in 2011.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
In relation to the processing of visa applications for the purpose of study or taking up employment, while some issues may arise in specific cases I am not aware of any systemic difficulties or delays at present in such processing. With regard to the latter category the applicant will have obtained, in the first instance, a work permit from the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and in these circumstances the visa process is usually a routine matter. On study visas, I am informed by officials in the visa section of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service of my Department that there are no undue delays in the processing of such visas.
The number of visa allocations has significantly increased on the 26,000 issued in 2010, which brought revenue of €900 million to the economy. The importance of overseas students to our universities cannot be overstated. My colleague, Deputy Jonathan O'Brien, who is our spokesperson on education, tabled Question No. 8. I urge the Minister to continue co-operating with the Department of Education and Skills in this area. I understand that he is also working with the Ministers for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and Foreign Affairs and Trade on allocating visas that can benefit trade. I ask the Minister, Deputy Shatter, to ensure his Department has sufficient resources to process these visas.
My Department is focused on increasing the numbers of students coming to this State for educational purposes. There are enormous benefits for the State in increasing the number, including from the impact on future economic relationships between Ireland and the various countries from which students come. The Government is taking a comprehensive approach to the student migration regime. The new immigration regime for full-time non-EEA students forms part of a comprehensive overhaul of the international education system in Ireland and my Department and the Department of Education and Skills are working closely together in this regard.
My colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, has implemented a comprehensive reform process in the education sector, including the establishment of a new qualifications and quality agency. He also plans to establish a quality mark for English language schools and further and higher education colleges as part of efforts to get more international students to study here. I strongly support this initiative as it should make it much harder for disreputable providers to function and will act as a significant marketing tool to attract students to this country.
In addition, the Department of Education and Skills established a new high level group charged with the development of the strategy for building Ireland's international education sector. This group, under the chairmanship of the Department of Education and Skills, brings together the key Departments and agencies involved and includes a representative of my Department. We regard this area as one of substantial growth for the coming years. In the work we are doing in my Department, we are looking at the various possibilities with regard to ensuring we have a proper system in place which does not create unnecessary obstacles for those who wish to come here to study.
I agree with the Minister's comments on the economic impact inward migration of students can have for our economy. The spin-off that can create in the wider economy is immense. Unfortunately, we are playing second fiddle to the United Kingdom in terms of tapping into the potential of that unrealised market and anything we can do should be done post haste.
With regard to a separate but linked issue, we are having a discussion around the criminalisation of the purchase of sex and the area of prostitution and are engaged in the consultation under way currently. We know there is factual evidence that many of those people who are trafficked into this country for the purpose of prostitution or sex work travel here on visas for educational purposes. The Minister may not have the figures to hand on this, but has he any handle on the number of people the authorities have come across in prostitution who have educational type visas?
There is a long stretch between dealing with reform of the laws relating to prostitution and visas for students. As the Deputy knows, we are engaged in a consultative process on the report we published last June. We passed the report on to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality and it is engaged on that. I understand it either has held or will hold hearings on that report and that submissions have been sought.
On the issue of trafficking, I do not have statistics to hand with regard to individuals trafficked to Ireland for the purpose of prostitution who have come here on a student visa. Some of those who are alleged to have been trafficked to Ireland have denied to gardaí, when they have become engaged in the matter, that they have been trafficked to Ireland and have asserted they are here independently engaging in the form of work the Deputy described. Of course, some of the individuals who make that assertion do so out of fear, because of the individuals hidden in the background. We are very conscious of that.
Some of those who come here and engage in that activity come from outside the European Economic Area, but not all and some of those who arrive in this State and engage in prostitution are independent contractors who are not trafficked at all. There seems to be a tendency for a certain number of people to arrive on weekends of rugby internationals and then fly out when the internationals are over. This is a complex area, but I do not wish to minimise the level of concern about it. However, I am not sure we will ever have accurate statistics which indicate individuals who come here on student visas who engage in prostitution or which will indicate those on similar visas who have been trafficked here under pressure as opposed to travelling here voluntarily.
Nevertheless, as the Deputy knows, we are very serious about reviewing our laws on prostitution. I anticipate and look forward to the response of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. We had a very full and interesting one-day seminar two Saturdays ago at which there was full participation from those in the audience and at which some very interesting papers were delivered on the issue. The Deputy was unable to be there, but I urge him to read some of the papers presented.
We were represented there.
They represent different perspectives and views on the best way forward legislatively. I value the feedback we will get as to the manner in which we should address this area.
