Wednesday, 10 Feb 2021

Written Answers Nos. 673-691

Deportation Orders

Questions (673)

Seán Sherlock

Question:

673. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice if consideration will be given to revoking a deportation order on a person and their family (details supplied). [7225/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

For reasons of maintaining full confidentiality, it is not my Department's practice to comment on whether an application for asylum or subsidiary protection has been made in the State. An applicant for such protection status, or their legal representative, should contact either the International Protection Office (IPO) or the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) directly, as appropriate.

It is important to note that, while a decision on an application is pending at either the IPO or the IPAT, a deportation order will not be made.

The IPO may be contacted: by email to [e-mail]; by telephone to the IPO Customer Service Centre at 01 6028008 or in writing to Customer Service Centre, International Protection Office, 79-83 Lower Mount Street, Dublin 2.

The IPAT may be contacted either: by email to [e-mail]; by telephone at 01-4748400 (or Lo-Call 1890 201 458), or in writing to Corporate Services Division, The International Protection Appeals Tribunal, 6-7 Hanover Street East, Dublin D02 W320.

Queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to my Department by e-mail using the Oireachtas mail facility ([e-mail]) which has been specifically established 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 is, in the Deputy’s view, inadequate or too long awaited.

Citizenship Applications

Questions (674)

Seán Sherlock

Question:

674. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice the progress to date in the determination of an application for citizenship in the case of a person (details supplied). [7227/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

The application for a certificate of naturalisation from the person referred to by the Deputy is at an advanced stage of processing and will be submitted to me for decision as expeditiously as possible. If any further documentation is required, it will be requested from the applicant in due course.

The granting of Irish citizenship through naturalisation is a privilege and an honour which confers certain rights and entitlements not only within the State but also at European Union level and it is important that appropriate procedures are in place to preserve the integrity of the process.

It is recognised that all applicants for citizenship would wish to have a decision on their application without delay. However, the nature of the naturalisation process is such that, for a broad range of reasons, some cases will take longer than others to process. In some instances, completing the necessary checks can take a considerable period of time.

Queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to my Department by e-mail using the Oireachtas Mail facility at [e-mail] which has been specifically established 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 Question process. The Deputy may consider using the e-mail service except in the cases where the response is, in the Deputy's view, inadequate or too long awaited.

Garda Youth Diversion Projects

Questions (675, 676)

Seán Sherlock

Question:

675. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice the reason for the reduction in the number of Garda youth diversion projects in the Dublin metropolitan region, north central area, from five in 2015 down to three in 2020; the details of the locations of these programmes in 2015 and 2020; her plans to extend the Garda youth diversion project in the north inner city; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7232/21]

Seán Sherlock

Question:

676. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice the number of full-time equivalent youth justice workers, family support and early intervention posts that are employed for each of the three Garda youth diversion projects in the Dublin metropolitan region, north central area; the average number of full-time equivalent posts in each of the Garda youth diversion projects nationally; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7233/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

I propose to take Questions Nos. 675 and 676 together.

I am informed that funding in Dublin Metropolitan Region (DMR), North Central Division for Garda Youth Diversion Projects and activities has increased from €566,236 in 2018 to an allocation of €1.2m in 2021. Alongside this increase in funding, the currently funded projects are being provided with increased staffing and support to increase their catchment areas to cover the majority of the DMR, North Central area. This is part of the overall objective of my Department to increase and develop the Garda Youth Diversion Project (GYDP) network to ensure access to all young people that need the service nationally.

The reduced number of projects in the DMR, North Central area since 2015 is due to the cessation of funding to the Dime and Nickol GYDPs.

The Deputy may be interested to know that there are currently 105 GYDPs nationwide. The intention is to further develop this service so that it is available to every child in the State who could benefit from it, through an ongoing expansion of existing services and the foundation of new projects where necessary.

I am informed that the average national number of full time equivalent posts in a GYDP is 2.8 posts, with an average of 6.7 posts in the DMR North Central Area. Currently there is funding available for 20 workers in the combined GYDPs within the DMR, North Central area. This includes a range of different posts including 14 General Youth Justice Workers, 2 Youth Justice Workers who specialise working with the Roma community, 2 Family Support Workers, 1 Early Intervention Worker and 1 Project Leader. A full breakdown of these numbers per project is set out in the Table below.

PROJECT	GARDA DISTRICT	Year Closed	Youth Justice Workers	Roma Workers	Family Support workers	Early intervention worker	Project leader
HAY	Fitzgibbon St	N/A	5		1	1
Most	Fitzgibbon St	N/A	5	2*
Swan	Store Street	N/A	4		1		1
Dime	Fitzgibbon St	2015
Nickol	Fitzgibbon St	2019

*serving Dublin 1 and 2

My Department is supporting the ongoing development of practice in Garda Youth Diversion Projects through the Action Research Project led by the University of Limerick. The Action Research Project works directly with front-line Youth Justice Workers from local projects to develop interventions and best practice. Based on initial outcomes from the Action Research Project, and evaluations of a number of pilot projects, it is intended to develop proposals to expand the existing services. This would ensure national coverage and a stronger focus on difficult issues such as the hard-to-reach cohort.

These issues are addressed in the draft Youth Justice Strategy 2020-2026, which I intend to finalise and bring to Government shortly.

Sentencing Policy

Questions (677, 678)

Catherine Connolly

Question:

677. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Justice her plans to bring forward legislation with regard to sentencing in criminal cases that involve serious or intimate violence to remove the possibility for being from a decent family to be considered a mitigating circumstance in sentencing. [7265/21]

Catherine Connolly

Question:

678. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Justice her plans to bring forward legislation to remove the possibility for offenders in criminal cases involving serious or intimate violence to avoid or shorten prison sentences by paying compensation to the victim; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7266/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

I propose to take Questions Nos. 677 and 678 together.

I know the Deputy will appreciate that judges are independent in the matter of sentencing, as in other matters concerning the exercise of judicial functions, subject only to the Constitution and the law. In accordance with this principle, the court is required to impose a sentence which is proportionate not only to the crime but to the individual offender, in that process identifying where on the sentencing range the particular case should lie and then applying any mitigating factors which may be present.

There are, of course, a small number of situations where statute has created exceptions to this approach and an important safeguard rests in the power of the Director of Public Prosecutions to apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal to review a sentence she regards as unduly lenient.

In relation to the issue raised on sentencing, and in particular sentencing in cases involving serious or intimate violence, the position is that the law sets out the maximum sentence that can be imposed for an offence and it is then a matter for the court to decide the appropriate sentence in each particular case, taking into account all the circumstances.

As the Deputy may be aware under the Judicial Council, a Sentencing Guidelines Committee was established on 30 June 2020. The Committee is responsible for compiling guidelines designed to increase consistency in relation to criminal sentences.

Brexit Issues

Questions (679)

Neale Richmond

Question:

679. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Justice if co-operation between the PSNI and An Garda Síochána has been affected by the end of the Brexit transition period; her views on whether the two police services can maintain the level of co-operation enjoyed pre-Brexit; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7291/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

The Deputy will be aware that the Garda Commissioner is responsible, by law, for the management of An Garda Síochána, including matters relating to cooperation with law enforcement in other jurisdictions. As Minister, I do not have direct responsibility for such arrangements.

However I am informed by the Garda authorities that An Garda Síochána have not experienced any adverse effect to its border policing operations since the end of the Brexit transition period on the 31 December 2020.

I am advised that the four Divisions of Cavan-Monaghan, Donegal, Louth and Sligo-Leitrim continue to collaborate with the PSNI on a number of levels, including cross border local arrangements and sharing of information which allow for ongoing day to day cooperation between both Police Services.

I am assured by Garda authorities that the long established and close working relationship with the PSNI remains central in An Garda Síochána’s efforts to providing an effective policing service to the border area and its communities, and is exampled in many areas such as Roads Policing Operations, Major Investigations and State Security.

I am further informed that the Cross Border Joint Agency Task Force also continues to enjoy high levels of co-operation and operational activity between all the Law Enforcement Agencies in tackling organised and cross jurisdictional crime. This collaborative effort continues to effectively achieve the shared objectives of An Garda Síochána and the PSNI in keeping our communities safe.

Ministerial Meetings

Questions (680)

Neale Richmond

Question:

680. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Justice if she will report on her recent meeting with the Garda Commissioner; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7292/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

Following a number of initial discussions on our shared concern about recent serious crime incidents, particularly in Dublin, I met with Garda Commissioner Drew Harris to further discuss the issue last week.

The Commissioner confirmed that An Garda Síochána has a comprehensive policing plan in place in Dublin’s north inner city and we also discussed what more can be done to tackle knife crime.

We both agreed that strong community engagement, increased community safety and youth services are a key element in preventing and reducing crime. We also discussed outreach and information programmes, run in a number of different languages, for all communities, as well as youth justice and other interventions.

It was also agreed that further analysis is needed to provide greater insights into the level of violent incidents in society and the Commissioner and I will remain in ongoing contact on the issue.

Finally, I would like to once again extend my deepest sympathies to all those impacted by the shocking violent incidents which have taken place in Dublin in recent weeks.

Visa Applications

Questions (681)

Paul Kehoe

Question:

681. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Justice the reason for the delay in processing an application by a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7297/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

I understand that a request to withdraw the visa application referred to by the Deputy was received by the Immigration Service of my Department on 4 February 2021. A response was issued on 9 February 2021, which advised the correct procedure for withdrawing an application and that the applicant would be welcome to submit a future application at their discretion.

Queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to my Department by e-mail using the Oireachtas Mail facility ([e-mail]), which has been specifically established 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 is, in the Deputy’s view, inadequate or too long awaited.

Crime Data

Questions (682)

Ruairí Ó Murchú

Question:

682. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for Justice the expected timeframe for the completion of the two pilot projects for children caught up in serious and prolific crime; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7315/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

As the Deputy will be aware, the newly designed community intervention programme, based on the research of the Greentown Project, will offer new hope and opportunities for children caught up in serious and prolific crime.

This new evidence-informed model will be trialed on a pilot basis in two communities over a period of three years, and each will be overseen by a local advisory committee involving state agencies and community representatives.

The locations of the pilots (one in Dublin and one in a provincial town) are not being disclosed to ensure that the work can continue in a discrete manner and without compromising safety or stigmatising individual communities.

I am informed that four core elements will be implemented to make up the Greentown Programme: Network Disruption; Improving Community Efficacy; Improved Pro-Social Opportunities; and Improved Family Functioning.

The programme will identify and target individuals involved in cultivating relationships with children for crime, and employ legitimate means to disturb this activity. There will be local activities designed to improve the ability of the local community to withstand network influence and take back control of public spaces.

Children who are involved in a criminal network will be encouraged and incentivised to re-engage with school, training or to secure and sustain employment.

There will also be a focus on intensive case-work with families to improve parenting capacity, and protecting the child and family from exploitative network relationships.

Importantly, the University of Limerick REPPP project will provide the scientific supports for the trial.

The pilots will get underway shortly and the lessons learned from the pilots, which will be evaluated after two years, will have a key influence on the development of my Department’s ongoing development of policies and interventions in the youth justice area.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (683)

Neale Richmond

Question:

683. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Justice the number of Covid-19 regulation breaches reported by An Garda Síochána since their introduction; the breakdown by category and month; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7374/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

As the Deputy will be aware, confirmed Covid-19 incident figures (powers used/breaches of regulations) are crime incidents in which files are prepared for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in order to charge or summons.

I am informed by the Garda authorities that due to the substantial checking and reviews undertaken on these incidents prior to publication, there is a slight reporting time lag. Updates are published on the Garda website when available, and I am informed that currently this is approximately every four weeks.

I am advised that the most recent figures available cover incidents which occurred between 8 April 2020 and 9 January 2021. Totals by category are included in the table below:

Category of Covid-19 Incidents	Total
Initial Lockdown Period – 8 April 2020 to 28 June 2020 Breaches of Health Act 1947 (Operation Fanacht etc…)	361
Period from 29 June 2020 up to 9 January, 2021 Breaches of Health Act 1947 [*]	126
Licensed Premises (Operation Navigation – commenced 3 July 2020)	398
Retail Premises (Operation Treoraím – commenced 25 October 2020)	108
Face Covering Regulations (File to DPP)	12
International Travel Regulations	10

[*] Excludes Licensed Premises, Retail Premises, Face Coverings and International Travel Regulations .

The following table provides a breakdown of the total number of incidents by month:

Covid-19 Incidents	2020									2021
	Apr*	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan*
Total	193	144	26	95	112	59	118	140	98	30

*Figures for incomplete months (from 8 April 2020 to 9 January 2021).

COVID-19 related fixed penalty notices (fines) are currently in operation for a number of distinct offences. I am informed that these are recorded on the Fixed Charge Processing System (FCPS), which only records that information essential to process and post the fine.

It should be noted that different categories of fines came into effect on different dates.

COVID-19 Related Fines	2020	2021	Total
	Nov* - Dec	Jan
Events - Dwellings and Non-Dwellings	-	136	136
Face Coverings	14	65	79
Movement of Persons	-	2,803	2,803
Total	14	3,004	3,018

*Figures are based on the date the fine was incurred and different categories have been in effect in different time periods. The earliest fines came into effect on 22 November 2020.

I am informed that confirmed COVID-19 incident figures (powers used/breaches of regulations) are based on PULSE data as of 11 January 2021 – these are operational statistics and are the most recent verified figures available.

In addition, fines information is based on FCPS data on 5 February 2021 and is provisional, operational and liable to change. Fines figures reported include only those where the fixed payment notice has been printed and sent; this is to ensure that the fine has completed the processing stages.

Fines Data

Questions (684, 685, 686)

Noel Grealish

Question:

684. Deputy Noel Grealish asked the Minister for Justice the number of persons who failed to pay fines imposed by the courts since the commencement of the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014; the number that had an attachment order, a recovery order or community service order made against them as a result; the number of persons imprisoned for failure to pay such fines by year; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7394/21]

Noel Grealish

Question:

685. Deputy Noel Grealish asked the Minister for Justice the value and number of unpaid fines in each of the years 2013 to 2020; the value and number of fines imposed by the courts in each of the years; the steps being taken to recover unpaid fines; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7395/21]

Noel Grealish

Question:

686. Deputy Noel Grealish asked the Minister for Justice the offence categories in respect of which fines were imposed by the courts in each of the years 2016 to 2020; the offence categories in respect of which fines were imposed but were not paid in the same period by the number and value in each case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7396/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

I propose to take Questions Nos. 684 to 686, inclusive, together.

I have requested the figures sought by the Deputy from the Courts Service and I will write to the Deputy once the information has been submitted, collated and verified.

The following deferred reply was received under Standing Order 51

I refer to Parliamentary Questions 684, 685 and 686 of 10 February 2021. As all questions relate to the operation of the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014 I trust a single response, providing insofar as is possible the information requested, will suffice. I hope you will accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your questions, there was a significant amount of information to be collated and verified.

While your questions were statistical in nature, I feel it is important to outline the current fines process which is governed by the Act, to provide better context to the statistical data.

Explanatory note on the court fines system

As you will be aware, the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014 (the Act) came into force on 11 January 2016. It provides for alternative orders to imprisonment in the event that a court imposed fine is not paid. The Act was introduced to help address the high level of short-term prison sentences for the non-payment of court imposed fines. In 2015, prior to commencement of the Act, there were 9,883 committals to prison for non-payment of fines.[1] By 2019 this had fallen to only 861;[2] a reduction of 91%.

Fines are generally imposed in the District Court, for minor offences, however a small number of fines are also imposed by the higher courts. Once imposed, the Courts Service starts a process of communicating with the person in order to recover the fine. This process has a number of stages that are followed in order to give the person every opportunity to pay the fine.

The Court Service issues a number of communications to the person concerned to try and recover the sum owed and avoid the matter progressing. Such communications include the initial fines notice, a reminder where necessary, an instalment reminder (in applicable cases), and a warning notice (shortly after the fine has lapsed into default). In the event the fine still remains in default at that stage, the Courts Service will then issue an enforcement notice, under section 7(4) of the Act. This requires the person to return to court so that the default can be managed. A document instructing the fined person how to pay is enclosed with these notices in order to provide another opportunity for the person to pay the fine before returning to Court.

At an enforcement hearing, a judge can decide to use one of the new sanctions introduced by the Act as an alternative to imprisonment in the event of fine default. These sanctions include an attachment of earnings order (the debt is recovered from the defaulter’s salary), a recovery order (seizure of property if the fine is greater than €500), or the debt can be discharged via a community service order. If, at an enforcement hearing, the court is not satisfied with matters relating to these alternative orders then it is open to the Judge to discharge the fine by way of an imprisonment order but it is of course intended that this would be used as a measure of last resort.

It should be noted that it remains open to the person to pay the fine at any stage of the proceedings. This is again with a view to providing every opportunity to them to avoid the need for an alternative sanction and ultimately to prevent matters progressing to the point of an imprisonment order being imposed.

The Act stipulates that the alternative orders can only be made once the defaulter appears at their enforcement hearing. In the event of non-attendance – and if satisfied that the original notice was served – a court may decide to adjourn the hearing to a new date, or issue a warrant for the arrest of the person. The result of non-attendance at court has led to a number of hearings being adjourned and a marked increase in the issuance of fine enforcement bench warrants; as noted by my predecessor. [3]

As a consequence, fine recovery can become a drawn-out process with fines imposed in more recent periods appearing as though they remain unpaid when compared with fines imposed in historic periods. This is because of the time that is allowed for people to make payments which makes comparing recovery rates across a time series problematic.

To quantify this, an analysis of fines data has shown that of fines imposed in 2014 an overall proportion of approximately 57% were recovered. A certain proportion of the remainder would then have been discharged by way of imprisonment orders.

For fines imposed in 2016, there was a slightly reduced overall rate of 52%. An additional 2% were discharged by way of imprisonment orders.[4] A further 18% of fines were outstanding at the date of analysis; most of which had an open bench warrant arising from non-attendance at an enforcement hearing. These fines are still recoverable, and in many instances will result in repayment once warrants are successfully executed. Finally, the remaining 26% of fines were ultimately deemed uncollectable, mainly due to the case being struck-out at court.

The rate of recovery presented for more recent years will increase as enforcement actions come to pass which will, in a number of cases, result in payment. This was borne out in the data for fines imposed in 2019; the most recent full year at the time of analysis. Unfortunately, the data also indicated a slippage in the proportion of fines paid by the court specified date, which fell to 25%. However, as noted above the court specified date is not the end point for engagement with the person in order to recover the unpaid fine. While at present there has been a lower rate of recovery for 2019 (approximately 35% for fines imposed in that year), table 4 below shows that a significant proportion of fines remain collectable and efforts to recover those will continue. Once these fines are enforced, it is expected a number of defaulters will pay their fines rather than proceed through the enforcement process, thus increasing the rate to levels similar to previous years.

Of course, all debt systems have a degree of attrition and while the proportion of fines paid in 2016 (52%) is somewhat comparable to other jurisdictions,[5] there is considerable room for improvement. A High Level Group was established by my predecessor, Charlie Flanagan tasked with looking at how to improve the operation of the fines system. It includes representatives from my Department, the Courts Service, the Office of the Attorney General, An Garda Síochána, the DPP, the Irish Prison Service and the Probation Service.

My Departmental representatives have been exploring potential solutions, many of which have been introduced in other jurisdictions, such as Scotland and Northern Ireland, where similar difficulties had previously arisen. In both instances reform took a number of years before improvements were seen. A second review into the new Northern Irish fine collection and enforcement regime – introduced by the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 – has recently been published by the Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI).[6] Both of these reviews will provide essential learning for direction of reform in Ireland, which I expect will require significant legislative changes.

I trust this explanatory note provides you with some context for the fines system and will assist in enabling you to analyse the statistical data supplied by the Court Service in response to your questions of 10 February.

Question 684 of 10 February 2021 | 7394/21

“…asked the Minister for Justice the number of persons who failed to pay fines imposed by the courts since the commencement of the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014; the number that had an attachment order, a recovery order or community service order made against them as a result; the number of persons imprisoned for failure to pay such fines by year; and if she will make a statement on the matter.”

I am informed by the Courts Service that, as at 10 February 2021, there are a total of 112,889 persons with outstanding fines imposed between commencement of the Act and 31 December 2020:

Year of imposition	Persons
Year of imposition	Persons
2016 (11 Jan – 31 Dec)	8,517
2017	24,036
2018	30,385
2019	29,600
2020	20,361

The significant increase, comparing 2016 to other years, relates to the problems highlighted in the explanatory note, i.e. the reduction in enforcement hearings arising from significant non-attendance from defaulters.

In relation to the number of persons receiving alternative orders, the Court Service have supplied the following data.

Order				Year of order
2017	2018	2019	2020
Order				Year of order
Attachment of Earnings	-	13	26	8
Community Service	4	280	589	243
Recovery	1	8	31	32
Imprisonment[7]	3	739	396	139

Again, the explanatory note outlines the reasons as to why the number of orders made has been low. As noted, the Department is considering the requirement that the defaulter appear at court, in-person, before an order can be made.

Question 685 of 10 February 2021 | 7395/21

In question 685 of 10 February you :

“… asked the Minister for Justice the value and number of unpaid fines in each of the years 2013 to 2020; the value and number of fines imposed by the courts in each of the years; the steps being taken to recover unpaid fines; and if she will make a statement on the matter.”

The Courts Service have provided the following data, I trust the explanatory note provides sufficient information on the steps taken to recover fines.

Year		Volume		Value
Imposed	Due[8]	Imposed	Due
Year		Volume		Value
2013	69,444	6,492	€21,075,888.67	€2,058,254.11
2014	73,762	7,080	€22,527,683.78	€2,416,632.74
2015	70,659	11,334	€22,421,690.98	€4,238,665.63
2016	67,259	12,385	€21,598,824.36	€5,590,152.04
2017	68,293	31,733	€21,980,331.78	€11,302,520.98
2018	66,698	41,434	€20,901,251.79	€13,492,540.55
2019	63,191	40,864	€21,248,808.43	€14,492,568.53
2020	37,548	27,151	€11,723,048.03	€8,855,830.86

Question 686 of 10 February 2021 | 7396/21

“…asked the Minister for Justice the offence categories in respect of which fines were imposed by the courts in each of the years 2016 to 2020; the offence categories in respect of which fines were imposed but were not paid in the same period by the number and value in each case; and if she will make a statement on the matter.”

The Court Service have noted that it was not possible to produce data on fines “imposed but were not paid in the same period”. Instead they have provided an annual breakdown of the volume of fines, the value imposed and the value subsequently recovered – as at 9 Feb 2021 – by offence category:

Table 1: Fines imposed 11 January – 31st December 2016

Fine Status	Complaint Category	No of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Recovered
Fine Status	Complaint Category	No of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Recovered
Appeal/JR Pending	Assault	4	€3,500.00	€0.00
Dangerous Driving	3	€3,500.00	€0.00
Drink Driving	2	€1,350.00	€0.00
Other	14	€21,039.16	€0.00
Public Order	6	€2,150.00	€0.00
Road Traffic	33	€14,538.00	€0.00
Television Licence	1	€350.00	€0.00
Appeal/JR Pending Total	63	€46,427.16	€0.00
Due	Assault	36	€10,015.00	€0.00
Criminal Damage	46	€13,961.00	€0.00
Dangerous Driving	66	€27,949.00	€0.00
Domestic Violence	9	€3,350.00	€0.00
Drink Driving	199	€70,245.00	€0.00
Drugs	372	€91,546.00	€0.00
Firearms/Offensive Weapons	28	€5,947.00	€0.00
Liquor	6	€2,000.00	€0.00
Other	1,638	€2,532,486.69	€0.00
Public Order	605	€109,691.00	€0.00
Road Traffic	7,526	€2,109,564.06	€243.00
Sexual Offences	3	€675.00	€0.00
Television Licence	835	€265,752.52	€0.00
Theft	377	€82,378.00	€0.00
Due Total	11,746	€5,325,560.27	€243.00
Paid	Assault	212	€80,763.60	€80,763.60
Criminal Damage	130	€31,447.00	€31,447.00
Dangerous Driving	260	€87,457.50	€87,457.50
Domestic Violence	41	€10,405.00	€10,405.00
Drink Driving	1,945	€617,097.00	€617,097.00
Drugs	1,071	€246,355.00	€246,305.00
Firearms/Offensive Weapons	89	€23,348.00	€23,348.00
Liquor	155	€55,485.00	€55,485.00
Other	2,209	€2,075,897.50	€2,075,897.50
Public Order	1,736	€341,937.00	€341,712.00
Road Traffic	23,967	€5,054,773.78	€5,054,123.78
Sexual Offences	12	€6,200.00	€6,200.00
Television Licence	1,426	€355,061.11	€354,911.11
Theft	726	€164,085.00	€163,935.00
Paid Total	33,979	€9,150,312.49	€9,149,087.49
Part Paid	Criminal Damage	1	€250.00	€125.00
Dangerous Driving	2	€1,000.00	€300.00
Drink Driving	9	€3,450.00	€1,270.00
Drugs	7	€2,800.00	€1,120.00
Liquor	1	€300.00	€250.00
Other	33	€48,061.01	€17,526.25
Public Order	10	€2,550.00	€829.00
Road Traffic	214	€71,912.00	€25,768.66
Television Licence	31	€10,036.60	€2,878.03
Theft	4	€1,200.00	€825.00
Part Paid Total	312	€141,559.61	€50,891.94
Refundable	Assault	3	€1,250.00	€1,250.00
Criminal Damage	1	€101.00	€101.00
Dangerous Driving	4	€1,190.00	€1,190.00
Drink Driving	8	€2,600.00	€2,600.00
Drugs	7	€1,715.00	€1,040.00
Firearms/Offensive Weapons	1	€150.00	€150.00
Liquor	1	€150.00	€150.00
Other	17	€24,310.00	€24,310.00
Public Order	1	€100.00	€100.00
Road Traffic	328	€57,096.00	€53,588.87
Television Licence	1	€300.00	€52.50
Theft	1	€300.00	€50.00
Refundable Total	373	€89,262.00	€84,582.37
Uncollectable	Assault	85	€26,113.00	€0.00
Criminal Damage	126	€33,159.78	€450.00
Dangerous Driving	129	€35,615.00	€140.00
Domestic Violence	34	€7,505.00	€0.00
Drink Driving	398	€145,720.00	€3,125.00
Drugs	703	€142,772.00	€1,735.00
Firearms/Offensive Weapons	64	€14,391.00	€250.00
Liquor	19	€5,775.00	€0.00
Other	1,763	€1,933,993.45	€5,828.00
Public Order	2,024	€377,052.00	€5,377.50
Road Traffic	11,586	€3,107,125.10	€35,919.75
Sexual Offences	1	€250.00	€0.00
Television Licence	1,536	€471,736.50	€4,330.62
Theft	951	€183,141.00	€2,600.00
Total uncollectable	19,419	€6,484,348.83	€59,755.87
	Grand total	65,892	€21,237,470.36	€9,344,560.67

Tab le 2: FFines imposed in 2017

Status of Fines	Complaint Category	No of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Recovered
Status of Fines	Complaint Category	No of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Imposed	Value of Fines Recovered
Appeal/JR Pending	Assault	5	€2,300.00	€0.00
Dangerous Driving	6	€4,250.00	€0.00
Drink Driving	14	€8,225.00	€0.00
Drugs	1	€300.00	€0.00
Other	21	€49,688.10	€0.00
Public Order	10	€4,650.00	€0.00
Road Traffic	43	€13,540.00	€850.00
Total	100	€82,953.10	€850.00
Due	Assault	98	€34,761.00	€0.00
	Criminal Damage	115	€29,807.00	€0.00
	Dangerous Driving	184	€70,022.00	€0.00
	Domestic Violence	38	€9,935.00	€0.00
	Drink Driving	720	€245,678.00	€0.00
	Drugs	1,224	€293,944.00	€0.00
	Firearms/Offensive Weapons	88	€20,559.00	€0.00
	Liquor	26	€10,000.00	€0.00
	Other	2,908	€3,572,873.12	€0.00
	Public Order	2,251	€423,503.00	€0.00
	Road Traffic	19,251	€5,089,795.31	€80.00
	Sexual Offences	6	€1,324.00	€0.00
	Television Licence	2,999	€940,590.83	€0.00
	Theft	1,022	€202,920.85	€0.00
	Total	30,930	€10,945,713.11	€80.00
Paid	Assault	223	€90,051.00	€90,051.00
	Criminal Damage	115	€30,368.00	€30,368.00
	Dangerous Driving	252	€96,690.00	€96,690.00
	Domestic Violence	37	€8,770.00	€8,770.00
	Drink Driving	2,142	€711,824.60	€711,824.60
	Drugs	1,124	€276,295.00	€276,195.00
	Firearms/Offensive Weapons	68	€16,099.00	€16,099.00
	Liquor	154	€54,861.99	€54,861.99
	Other	1,914	€1,964,610.14	€1,964,215.40
	Public Order	1,462	€290,475.00	€290,475.00
	Road Traffic	20,321	€4,562,502.12	€4,562,302.12
	Sexual Offences	9	€5,450.00	€5,450.00
	Television Licence	1,173	€285,575.31	€285,575.31
	Theft	610	€139,395.42	€139,395.42
	Total	29,604	€8,532,967.58	€8,532,272.84
Part Paid

Bench Warrants

Questions (687)

Noel Grealish

Question:

687. Deputy Noel Grealish asked the Minister for Justice the number of bench warrants issued in 2019 and 2020; the number outstanding in this regard; the effect the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the execution of warrants; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7397/21]

Written answers

Minister for Justice

The Deputy will be aware that the Garda Commissioner is responsible, by law, for the administration and business of An Garda Síochána, including the allocation of Garda resources, in light of identified operational demands. As Minister, I have no role in these matters.

In addition to supporting the pubic health regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, Gardaí have continued to execute warrants as expeditiously as possible, giving priority to the execution of warrants relating to serious crimes. As the Deputy will appreciate, difficulties in relation to the execution of warrants, including bench warrants, are a long-standing issue for many police services around the world; notably relating to persons actively seeking to evade detection, and where limited identification information might be available to support enforcement. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health restrictions have of course added to these longstanding difficulties, but An Garda Síochána are continuing to make every effort to serve as many warrants as possible.

The table below, furnished to me by the Garda authorities, shows the number of bench warrants issued and the number outstanding for the years in question.

Issue Year	Bench Warrants Issued	Nr. Outstanding
2019	38834	5999
2020	15682	4346

I am informed that these figures were based on collated data from the PULSE system as of 8 February 2021.

Question No. 688 answered with Question No. 629.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (689, 885)

Róisín Shortall

Question:

689. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health the role of pharmacists in the Covid-19 vaccination programme; when contact will be made with the profession; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7820/21]

Neale Richmond

Question:

885. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Health the role pharmacists will have in the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out; the phase of the roll-out at which their skills will be required; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7107/21]

Written answers

Minister for Health

I propose to take Questions Nos. 689 and 885 together.

As this is a service matter, I have asked the Health Service Executive to respond to the deputy directly, as soon as possible.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (690, 697)

Róisín Shortall

Question:

690. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health when he will meet his commitment to publish daily reports on Covid vaccine numbers delivered to Ireland and the vaccine numbers administered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7823/21]

James Lawless

Question:

697. Deputy James Lawless asked the Minister for Health if he will provide real-time statistics on the daily numbers receiving the vaccines; if he will make this information available on the Covid tracker app; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6345/21]

Written answers

Minister for Health

I propose to take Questions Nos. 690 and 697 together.

Daily vaccine numbers are now being uploaded to the Covid-19 public dashboard since 8 February 2021 (https://covid-19.geohive.ie/pages/vaccinations). This includes a breakdown by dose, cohort and vaccine type. Daily vaccination figures are sourced from the HSE’s vaccine information system.

Daily figures will be available on the Covid App shortly.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (691)

Bernard Durkan

Question:

691. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health when the Covid-19 vaccine will be made available to Dublin Fire Brigade paramedics; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7827/21]

Written answers

Minister for Health

As this is a service matter, I have asked the Health Service Executive to respond to the deputy directly, as soon as possible.