Written Answers Nos. 149-154
149. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his response to public comments made by a former member of GSOC (details supplied) regarding shortcomings in the manner in which the Garda confidential recipient system deals with concerns of whistleblowers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5858/14]
View answerThe Garda Síochána (Confidential Reporting of Corruption or Malpractice) Regulations 2007 provide for an independent Confidential Recipient to whom members of the Force can report, in confidence, instances where they believe there may be corruption or malpractice within the Force. The Confidential Recipient is required to transmit each report to the Garda Commissioner for investigation, but there are strong safeguards in the Regulations for the protection of the identities of confidential reporters. This procedure was put in place as part of a sectoral approach towards the protection of whistleblowers, with different provisions made for different sectors.
This Government is taking a different approach, as promised in the Programme for Government, and is committed to a unified system of strong and effective protection for whistleblowers, in both the public and private sectors, based on international best practice. These proposals are contained in the Protected Disclosures Bill 2013, which has been published by my colleague the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The Bill has been passed by Seanad Éireann and is at Second Stage in this House. I recently indicated that I was reviewing the relevant provisions of the Garda Síochána Act 2005, in the context of the Protected Disclosures Bill and in consultation with my colleague the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, with a view to empowering the Garda Ombudsman Commission to receive and act on confidential reports by members of the Garda Síochána.
150. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will outline in the interests of open and transparent justice and in view of the fact that €16 million was spent in installing digital audio recording facilities in most of our courts as an accurate and cost effective method of recording evidence, the reason CDs of digital audio recordings of court hearings are not available to participants who are instead forced to acquire stenographers' transcripts, despite the fact that most EU states make available CDs as they are cheaper and more accurate. [5871/14]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware the courts are, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of their judicial functions, and the conduct of any case is a matter entirely for the presiding judge. All Court records, including recordings of court proceedings, are under the control of the presiding Judge, as provided for in section 65(3) of the Court Officers Act, 1926. As I previously informed the Deputy in response to Parliamentary Questions No. 538 and 539 of 19 November 2013, No. 897 to 899 of 16 July 2013 and No. 444 and 445 of 25 June 2013, the relevant Rules of the District Court, Circuit Court and Superior Courts (S.I. Numbers 99/2013, 100/2013 and 101/2013) came into effect on 8 April 2013. The instruments regulate the procedures whereby parties or other persons wishing to have access to records of court proceedings, including audio recordings, may apply to the court concerned for access to such records. The instruments also set out the terms on which such access may be granted. A party to a case may apply to the court to access the recording. However, the granting of access and the terms under which such access is granted is a matter for the court. In common with all court rules these instruments are available on the Courts Service website.
151. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his views on correspondence regarding a deportation case (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5873/14]
View answerI am advised by the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) of my Department that the persons referred to by the Deputy were given temporary residency in the State on Stamp 3 conditions from July 2010 to December 2012. Stamp 3 is granted to persons who have demonstrated to the immigration officer that they have sufficient funds to support themselves, will not work or operate a business in the State and will not become a burden on the State. The persons referred to applied for a change of immigration permission to a Stamp 4 in September 2012 in order that they could work in the State without a work permit. The General Immigration Section of INIS wrote to the persons concerned in January 2013 and again in July 2013 seeking information in order to progress the application. The requested information was received in August 2013 and the application for a change of status was refused on 27 August 2013. On 18 September 2013, a request for a review was submitted to the General Immigration Section of INIS which also requested that the Stamp 3 permission be reinstated. On review, this was refused on 16 October 2013 as the evidence of finances provided was deemed not sufficient to support a family of two adults and three children without potential recourse to public funds. They were requested to leave the State as no further permission would be granted. The persons left the State on 1 November 2013 and their application was deemed concluded.
The persons referred to by the Deputy subsequently re-entered the State as visitors on 6 November 2013 and were given visitors' permission for one month - up to 6 December 2013. Despite entering the State as visitors, the General Immigration Section of INIS received an application on 5 December 2013 for 'leave to remain' in respect of the persons referred to by the Deputy. As this application had already been assessed, it was not accepted and was returned to the persons referred to by the Deputy. On 6 January 2014, a further request for a review of this decision was received in the General Immigration Section of INIS. The basis of the review request was that the persons referred to by the Deputy were in fact applying for Business Permission to remain in the State. Over the course of the last two months, many representations have been made by many public representatives, including the Deputy, on behalf of the persons referred to by the Deputy. The persons referred to by the Deputy and the public representatives have been informed of the details and requirements of the Business Permission Scheme; one of which is that the applicants must apply from outside the State. The persons referred to by the Deputy can be in no doubt as to what is required of them in relation to this and indeed in relation to their immigration permission or lack thereof.
The persons referred to by the Deputy have exhausted the application and review processes and have no permission to be in the State since 6 December 2013. If the persons referred to by the Deputy do not leave the State, it is the intention of the General Immigration Section of INIS to issue a 'notification of a proposal to deport' letter under Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999. The Deputy may wish to note that queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to INIS by e-mail using the Oireachtas Mail facility which has been established specifically for this purpose. This service enables up to date information on such cases to be obtained without the need to seek information by way of the Parliamentary Questions process. The Deputy may consider using the e-mail service except in cases where the response from INIS is, in the Deputy's view, inadequate or too long awaited.
152. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of applications received for compensation from the Magdalen fund; the number and amounts paid out to date and the length of time it will take to process each application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5893/14]
View answerTo date, 680 applications have been received under the ex gratia scheme which was established by Government for the benefit of those women who were admitted to and worked in the Magdalen Laundries, St Mary's Training Centre, Stanhope Street and House of Mercy Training School, Summerhill, Wexford. The applications are being processed as quickly as possible and over 280 letters of formal offer have issued to women at this stage. As soon as an applicant accepts the offer, payment will be processed quickly. So far, 144 women have accepted the formal offer and as at the end of January payments issued to over 100 applicants totalling €3.5 million.
I am also informed that letters of provisional assessment were issued to a further 32 applicants and if they agree with the provisional assessment with regard to their length of time in a relevant institution they will be issued with a letter of formal offer. The remaining applications require further investigation before a decision can be made on their length of stay in a relevant institution. In cases where the religious have no clear record, my officials will have to carry out a thorough examination checking whatever records are available to see if they support the claim. The applicant will also be asked to provide any relevant information that could corroborate her claim that she was in a specific institution for a period of time.
153. Deputy Noel Grealish asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide wave height data from and the exact location of the buoys mentioned by Bord Iascaigh Mhara in the press release of 20 January 2014 at both of the proposed Galway Bay salmon farm sites for the dates from 25 December 2013 through to 7 January 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5830/14]
View answerThe data referred to by the Deputy is held by the Marine Institute. My Department has asked the Institute to forward the data to the Deputy within 2 weeks.
154. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when moneys due under the single farm payment will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5744/14]
View answerWhile the closing date for receipt of applications under the 2013 Single Payment Scheme was 15 May 2013, there was a 25-day period after 15 May for the acceptance of late applications, subject to a cumulative penalty of 1% per working day. Applications received on or after 10 June 2013 were subject to a 100% penalty and were, therefore, ineligible for payment under the 2013 Scheme. The closing date and the period for receipt of late applications was clearly outlined in the copy of the Terms and Conditions provided to all Scheme participants, including the person named.
The application of the person named under the 2013 Single Payment Scheme was received on 17 June 2013. The person named was informed in writing date 3 July that, as the application was received after the final date for receipt of applications, a 100% penalty would be applied.
The person named appealed this decision on the grounds that he was out of the country during the period 14 May to 14 June 2013. In rejecting the appeal, it was noted that the pre-printed 2013 application form and copy of the Terms and Conditions issued to him on 8 March 2013, thereby allowing more than adequate time to submit the application before he left the country on 14 May 2013. The person named was also advised of his right of appeal to the Agriculture Appeals Office at that time. The person named subsequently availed of this opportunity, an appeal being received in that Office on 28 January 2014. That Office will be in direct contact with the person named in due course.
