Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 28 Apr 2022

Vote 21 - Prisons

Ms Oonagh McPhillips(Secretary General, Department of Justice) and Ms Caron McCaffrey (Director General, Irish Prison Service) called and examined.

I welcome everyone to the meeting. Deputies Hourigan and Verona Murphy have sent their apologies.

To limit the risk of spreading Covid-19, I ask that all those in attendance wear face coverings when not addressing the committee. The service requests that individuals continue to wear face coverings when moving around the campus or when in close proximity to others and to be respectful of other people's physical space. The public health advice should be heeded.

Members of the committee attending remotely must continue to do so from within the precincts of Leinster House. This is due to the constitutional requirement that in order to participate in public meetings, members must be physically present within the confines of the Parliament.

The Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, is a permanent witness to the committee. He is accompanied by Mr. Paul Southern, deputy director of audit at the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

This morning we engage with the Department of Justice and officials from the Prison Service to examine the 2020 Appropriation Accounts for Vote 24, Justice, and Vote 21, Prisons. As per the committee's request, the Department has provided it with a copy of the independent review of voluntary mess committees in Irish prisons, which the committee may wish to examine during the engagement.

We are joined in the committee room by the following officials: Ms Caron McCaffrey, director general of the Irish Prison Service; Ms Oonagh McPhillips, Secretary General of the Department of Justice; Ms Oonagh Buckley, deputy Secretary General; Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan, assistant secretary; Mr. Seamus Clifford, assistant director; and Mr. Fergal Black, director of care and rehabilitation at the Irish Prison Service. We are also joined by Ms Marianne Nolan, principal officer for the justice Vote section at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.

As usual, I remind all those in attendance to ensure their mobile phones are switched off or on silent mode.

Before we start, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. As they are within the precincts of Leinster House, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentations they make to the committee. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege, and it is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 218 that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government, or a Minister of the Government, or the merits of the objectives of such policies. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The witnesses are all very welcome. I invite the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, to make his opening statement.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The appropriation account for Vote 24 records gross expenditure of €399 million in 2020. This was a reduction of €140 million, or 26%, on the prior year. The main reason for the reduction in the level of expenditure on the Vote was the transfer of responsibility for certain services to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth following the formation of the Government. This included the transfer out of responsibility for the provision of accommodation for asylum seekers. However, the processing of asylum applications remains the responsibility of the Department of Justice.

The Data Protection Commission was also established as a new Vote in 2020. Previously, the commission was funded from the Justice Vote.

Expenditure under the justice Vote in 2020 was distributed across five programmes. The biggest expenditure programme relates to the range of services that together address the strategic objective to "provide a safe and secure Ireland". In 2020, the total spend for that programme was €207 million. This was up almost €27 million, or 15%, year-on-year. The largest component of this spending related to criminal legal aid, which totalled just over €62 million in 2020.

I issued a clear audit opinion relating to the appropriation account for Vote 24. However, I drew attention to disclosures in the statement on internal financial control regarding material instances of non-compliance with national procurement rules that occurred in respect of contracts that operated in 2020.

I also drew attention to the payment of an EU fine by the Department. The fine, in the amount of €2 million, was imposed due to delayed transposition by Ireland of an EU directive relating to money laundering and terrorist financing.

The Irish Prison Service is formally part of the Department of Justice but is funded and accounted for separately through Vote 21. While the Secretary General of the Department is the Accounting Officer for Vote 21, the Prison Service is headed operationally by its director general.

The 2020 appropriation account for Vote 21 records gross expenditure of almost €401 million. Around two thirds of the expenditure, totalling €271 million, relates to pay. The remainder is spread across a range of areas, including maintenance and improvements to the prison estate, equipment purchases, education and services for prisoners, and other operating costs.

Note 6.5 to the appropriation account provides an update as at September 2021 on progress made by the Prison Service in its arrangements for the operation of staff voluntary mess committees in the larger prisons. The note outlines that governance arrangements have been reviewed and written agreements have been put in place between the committees and the Prison Service.

I understand that the Accounting Officer has provided further detailed information about the operation of the committees in recent correspondence.

I issued a clear audit opinion in relation to the appropriation account for Vote 21. However, I drew attention in my report on the audit to the basis of the valuation of land at Thornton Hall. While the land was valued by the Valuation Office at €2.7 million in 2020, the Prison Service continued to carry the assets at Thornton on the statement of financial position at the historic cost of €49.3 million. This was in contrast to the valuation method applied for all other land and building assets. In my opinion, the exceptional accounting treatment of the assets at Thornton Hall was not warranted.

I also drew attention to material instances of non-compliance with national procurement rules that occurred in respect of contracts operating in 2020 for the supply of goods and services to the Prison Service.

Thank you. I welcome Ms McPhillips. As detailed in the letter of invitation, there will be five minutes for her opening statement. I understand Ms McPhillips wishes to share her time with Ms McCaffrey.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am grateful for the opportunity to meet with the committee in relation to the 2020 Justice and Prisons Votes. I thank the Comptroller and Auditor General and his office for their work on this. The Chairman has introduced the team. With his permission, I will share my time with Ms McCaffrey.

Vote 24, the justice Vote, is one of six in the Vote group and covers a wide remit of activity, both in the Department and a number of agencies in the justice sector. In 2020, as the Comptroller and Auditor General said, there were five expenditure programmes with 50 individual subheads. The Vote structure was realigned substantially in 2021 to take account of the Department’s major restructuring and the 2020 transfer of our integration and equality responsibilities to the expanded Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. These changes have rationalised the Vote’s structure and reduced the number of programmes from five to two - criminal justice and civil justice.

Any review of 2020 must take account of the pandemic and, like the rest of the world, managing the impact of Covid-19 on our staff and business has been a central focus at all levels in the Department and the whole justice sector ever since, perhaps nowhere more so than in the prisons, which the director general will speak to shortly. The management of the pandemic in the Department has been led by the management board and the Covid-19 response management group, supported by our specialist occupational health and safety unit. This work included ensuring business continuity for the public services we provide, introducing remote working, onboarding more than 700 new staff over the past two years and safeguarding and supporting all our colleagues, including those serving abroad and those who had to remain in the workplace in front-line and public-facing roles.

Our criminal and civil governance teams communicated regularly and consistently with our 25 agencies to support them in responding dynamically and safely to the evolving public health restrictions. It is a credit to the professionalism and commitment of the whole organisation that, working together, we succeeded in doing this and much more through the last two years.

There was also a significant impact on specific areas of the business. The legislative teams supported colleagues in the Department of Health in drafting legislation and regulations, including the necessary Garda powers. The restrictions on international travel and checks on people arriving into the State meant many dynamic changes for staff of the border management unit at Dublin Airport, including supporting mandatory hotel quarantine. The pandemic impacted the provision of immigration services to our customers, necessitating the temporary extension of immigration permissions through 2020 and 2021.

Innovations were also introduced, including the first ever online citizenship ceremony in 2020 and more followed in 2021. Under the Department’s IT strategy, we are investing in developing much-needed digital systems, but the prolonged need to either restrict or stagger staff attendance in offices increased processing times, particularly in some high-volume immigration areas. This situation improved as restrictions lifted and staff could return to offices. We took the opportunity to re-engineer and streamline processes and this has been having a positive effect in recent months.

Members will appreciate that the recent essential work to welcome and process the refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine has necessitated the redeployment of experienced officials to staff the one-stop shop and reception centre. This currently operates from 8 a.m. to approximately 4 a.m., seven days a week, at Dublin Airport, as well as at offices in Cork, Limerick and Rosslare to facilitate those arriving through other ports of entry. This whole-of-government operation has received and processed over 25,000 people under the EU's temporary protection directive over the last two months. The compassion and professionalism of colleagues involved is a great credit to them and reflects the response of the whole country to Ukraine.

Returning to Covid, as the country entered the first lockdown in March 2020, the Department was acutely aware of the huge difficulties and fear that restricting people’s movement could bring to those at risk of domestic abuse. Colleagues quickly developed and implemented an inter-agency plan, including the Still Here public awareness campaign. This was a collaboration with front-line services in the public sector and in civil society in order to reassure victims that the practical supports they needed would still be available. Additional financial supports were provided to front-line NGO partners and measures were put in place across the sector, including through An Garda Síochána’s Operation Faoiseamh. The Judiciary and the Courts Service also prioritised domestic abuse cases and provided for remote hearings for protection orders where necessary. The Irish Prison Service risk-assessed those being released from prisons and the Legal Aid Board established a helpline to provide prompt legal advice and legal representation in court where needed. The success of An Garda Síochána’s community engagement and policing strategy through the pandemic has rightly been recognised and I know the committee also recently heard from the Policing Authority about its important oversight work, which has had significant value in maintaining public trust.

There are a large number of agencies in this Vote but I want to mention in particular Forensic Science Ireland, as its long-planned, state-of-the-art laboratory HQ is nearing the final stages of construction. I am pleased to report that despite the impact of the restrictions on construction activities in the earlier phases of the project, the lab is now on-track for completion this year within its budget of €99.5 million. This new facility will be one of the most sophisticated pieces of public infrastructure ever constructed in this country and will provide the hard-working staff of Forensic Science Ireland, with a high-spec, purpose-built facility, achieving the highest standards for evidence processing, analysis and storage. It represents a very significant investment in our criminal justice system and the future of the Forensic Science Ireland.

I will now hand over to Ms McCaffrey.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

As the Secretary General has outlined, it has been a truly remarkable and challenging period for communities across the globe and Covid- 19 has also had a major impact on the Irish Prison Service as we sought to keep all those who live and work in our prisons safe. As a service, we have proven to be adaptable, flexible, resilient and highly innovative and our staff have embraced the challenges presented to us by the pandemic with professionalism and dedication.

The year 2020 saw the introduction of new and innovative methods of service delivery, including the delivery of teleservices for chaplaincy and psychology; maintaining links with family and friends virtually using video link technology; the introduction of electronic money transfer systems in partnership with An Post; and the introduction of in-cell telephones to help prisoners keep in contact with their loved ones and to support their mental health. As a result, we were able to face down the challenges of Covid-19 and continue to provide the best possible level of service to prisoners in our care and to their families. In early 2021, it became clear to all of us that living with Covid-19 was going to be a reality for some time. Many of these new systems introduced in response to Covid-19 have now become essential tools for the delivery of prisoner services and for supporting prisoners, and have been permanently retained as we have moved into a less restricted environment.

Preventing the spread of infection into prisons and keeping those in our care safe did have an impact on expenditure and on the costs of providing prisoner services in 2020, with additional costs relating to the purchase of personal protective equipment for staff and prisoners, additional infection control costs, and healthcare and specialist cleaning supply costs. This was necessary expenditure to mitigate against the risk posed by the virus and our infection control measures were central in our success in effectively managing the threat posed by Covid-19 in a prison setting.

In 2020, additional funding was provided to the Irish Prison Service under the Government economic stimulus package. This allowed for a number of important projects to be advanced, such as building roof repairs, CCTV and security system upgrades, nationwide carbon reduction LED lighting replacement and upgrades to fire alarms.

Notwithstanding the challenges presented by Covid-19 since 2020, the Irish Prison Service has continued to deliver on the strategic actions set out in our current strategic plan, including our programme of prison modernisation. Despite the impact on the construction sector due to the closure of construction sites at certain times, significant progress was made during 2020 on the capital development project at Limerick Prison. Work on the project has continued in 2021 and 2022 and the project remains within budget and is expected to be completed later this year. The project will provide quality accommodation for prisoners and enhanced services, and will provide an additional 90 male prison spaces and 22 additional female prison spaces.

Over the lifetime of our strategy, we have continued to implement a programme of reform within our service. We continue to work closely with our key stakeholders to enhance the supports available for prisoners, including supporting prisoners on their transition from prison back into their communities. As we emerge from this global pandemic, work is now turning to the development of a new strategic plan for our service through which we will build on recent reforms and take account of our experiences and learning from the past two years.

I can go into further detail as the members require.

Thank you. The lead speaker today is Deputy Colm Burke, who has 15 minutes. He will be followed by Deputy Carthy, who, along with all other members, will have ten minutes. I call Deputy Colm Burke.

I thank all of the staff in the Department of Justice and the Prison Service for their work over the past two years, in particular. It has been a very difficult time for everyone, given the role of the Garda, the Prison Service and the Department. I thank them for all the work that was done over that difficult period.

On the issue of capital projects, Ms McPhillips referred to the roll-out of the Forensic Science Ireland's laboratory headquarters, which is on time and will remain within cost. I understand the project will cost €99.5 million. Does that include fully kitting out the facility and having it fully operational? When is the project likely to be finalised?

During the transition of evidence from one facility to another, the chain of evidence cannot be broken. How is that planned to be dealt with to ensure there are no gaps in the transition period? Has that been planned for? Over what time period will that take place? What level of planning has gone into that at this stage?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I thank the Deputy. A lot of planning has gone into that. The project is well advanced. It is 79% complete at this stage. The building is watertight. A reasonable amount of it has been kitted out. There were 235 people on-site at the building in February, which I thought was a fascinating number. It is a massive project.

There is a detailed transition plan. The move will start in the third quarter of this year. The building will be handed over from the contractor in or around August, we hope. Then, from August until the end of the year, there will be a detailed transition to move the existing operation out, as well as the accreditations which are necessary for each part of the system. Obviously, all the scientific end of it has to be accredited to the international standard. There will therefore be a certain amount of dual use of the existing laboratory in the Phoenix Park and then the transition to the new one. The director, Chris Enright, and the staff of the laboratory are absolutely-----

Will both facilities be working for a period of time in order to do that transition?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What they will do is stand up the new one but they will not use it 100% until it is accredited. It will not be accredited until the end of the year - roughly December. It is hard to be exactly precise about that because it will be necessary to wait for the accreditation.

I will move on to capital projects in general and the time the Department takes from making a decision to proceed with a capital project to getting it through planning and the appointment of contractors and finalised. In my constituency, for instance, we had a project which went on for eight years. A huge amount of additional money had to be paid by the Department as a result of that delay.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Which one was that?

It was Glanmire Garda Station. Contracts were signed and an issue then arose about whether to proceed with the contract. Full interest was paid on the purchase price for a period of, I think, six years. Interest of six years was paid. It was one of those projects.

I wonder about the mechanism in place for projects from start to finish. The Office of Public Works is involved in some of these projects. There is also the issue of buildings which are no longer being used, for instance, we had problems with many old Garda stations. The issues then arises of the existing building housing the forensic science laboratory. What is the process for dealing with projects from start to finish? In view of the fact that building costs are changing by the day, is there a need to have a process in place so that decisions are made in a timely manner, rather than waiting for two or three years for a decision to be taken? It should be taken from start to finish.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was a lot in that. In terms of capital projects generally, we are guided by the public spending code, which is our bible in these things. We have to follow all the requirements in the public spending code. We rely to a great extent on OPW in relation to acquiring sites and the verification of whether a site is a suitable and meets all the requirements of the particular project. The different agencies in the Department have slightly different approaches to these things. The Courts Service has a huge capital programme. The Accounting Officer for the Courts Service is responsible for that. An Garda Síochána has a big capital programme, as do the prisons, and the Garda Commissioner is the accounting officer for that.

Has the Department of Justice done a review? I know of one case involving the Coast Guard service, which has nothing to do with the Department of Justice. In that case, contracts were sent to the Office of the Chief State solicitor and the OPW to sign off on them. There was a gap of two years between the contracts being sent and being signed. The project was delayed by two years. What mechanisms have the Department of Justice in place to ensure a delay like that does not occur?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are so many projects on the go at any one time. We are trying to do is make sure the projects that are ready for the road or “shovel ready”, as the old expression goes, get going as fast as they can. The legal aspects of it, and I know the Deputy will appreciate this, are important. We have to get the due diligence right with contracts. There can be a frustration with how long that takes. Contracts are important and the devil is in the detail, so it is necessary to go through that.

In terms of us doing a review of the whole capital piece, what we did in preparation for the national development plan, NDP, was look across the whole sector to see what the needs were. Then we looked at what budget we would get and what we could do. However, we rely on the OPW a lot in relation to those matters.

Does Ms McPhillips not believe that this should now be reviewed in view of the way costs have changed? What are the urgent issues that the Department of Justice needs to prioritise now?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are constantly keeping that under review.

I will move on to the issue of policing, security and community safety Bill, which relates to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, and the Policing Authority. Has there been engagement on the Bill? I know it has not been passed. Has there been engagement at this stage to ensure that when it is passed we can put in place mechanisms to ensure an easy and cost-effective transition?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The policing, security and community safety Bill is a big undertaking, which has just completed pre-legislative scrutiny. We hope to get the report from the justice committee on it. In terms of the projects, the Deputy is absolutely right that there will be a real implementation challenge and a huge number of regulations to be made once the legislation is done. On the preparatory work to implement the measures, there is a huge amount of change involved for the oversight bodies in particular, but also for An Garda Síochána and the Department itself. We have an implementation project. I will ask Mr. O’Sullivan to come in on this because it is under his remit. We have approximately seven individual projects, one of which is in relation to GSOC and the changes that will be needed there. We are doing a review of how the process will operate. I ask Mr. O’Sullivan to come in at this point.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

It is a major project. We have a team established solely to look after its implementation. Ever before the legislation is fully enacted, we have already commenced the work in scoping out what will need to be done under each of the seven or eight projects, the number of which will depend on how we decide to break it out. All of the agencies will be involved in that. At some point, we will need to get external advice to tease out the implementation details and make sure the whole thing fits together because all of the different parts in intersect with each other. We need to make sure they are all properly lined out.

Even as we are hopefully moving through the Oireachtas with the enactment of the legislation, as things may emerge from detailed implementation planning, we will be able to bring that back to the Oireachtas and explain how this or that is going to work out or maybe some tweaks need to be made here or there. Also, and importantly so that we have identified what the resource requirements are across the different agencies well in advance of engaging with the-----

From the time the legislation is fully put in place, how long will it take to have it fully operational and functioning?

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

Part of the work of this group will be to put a scientific time on that. That work has not been completed yet.

To return to capital projects, the valuation of the Thornton Hall site is still €49.3 million. Is that an appropriate valuation now, in view of what has occurred? Has there been any engagement with any other State authority about the use of that facility?

Is any income being generated from those lands at this stage? What does the Department plan to do to deal with this? It is a large amount of money that was expended. It was €30 million to buy it and €20 million of infrastructure has been put in place but it is still idle. No State agency is using it but taxpayer money was spent on it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The land has been revalued in recent months on foot on the Comptroller and Auditor General's advice in the 2020 report. In the 2021 appropriation account, which has just been finalised, the land will be reflected at the current valuation of €6.5 million.

The Deputy asked if this has been flagged to other State agencies. At various times in the past five or six years, we have had discussions with Fingal County Council, IDA Ireland and, since its establishment, the Land Development Agency on a number of occasions. There is interest in it but we regard it as a strategic State asset. As the Deputy said, it is fully serviced and quite close to Dublin Airport. We definitely have a strategic interest in a portion of the site from a criminal justice perspective but we would be open to discussions on the rest of the site. We have signalled that to the relevant agencies. The Land Development Agency, in particular, is keeping it as an option. I will yield to the experts on this, and their view is it would not be suitable for housing but it may be suitable for decanting other strategic infrastructure from other areas. They are keeping that under review but it is more of a long-term consideration.

I will move to the Irish Prison Service and compensation claims. My understanding is with in-cell sanitation claims, €3.1 million was paid in 2020. In 2020 there were 2,399 cases in total of compensation claims pending against the Department, with 1,855 of those relating to in-cell sanitation. What is the up-to-date position on that? What is the timeframe for trying to resolve all of those rather than them being prolonged and where we hear every time the service comes before us that the issue remains unresolved?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

In February 2020, the State Claims Agency put in place a settlement scheme to deal with the claims relating to in-cell sanitation. Significant progress has been made on concluding those claims. There have been 2,773 claims received, of which 2,040 are concluded. I suppose the contingent liability that the State Claims Agency put against that scheme was quite high at over €30 million but the expectation now is the scheme will be concluded at around €15 million. There are specific caps in place for compensation and there are also caps in place regarding legal fees that can be paid.

In 2020, €3.1 million was paid. Does Ms McCaffrey have the figures for 2021?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Yes. In 2021, €1.5 million was paid in legal costs, with €2.3 paid in compensation, leaving a total of €3.831 million.

My understanding is that in 2020, there were 2,399 cases pending, with 1,855 relating to in-cell sanitation. What were the other 544 cases mainly comprising and what progress has been made in resolving them?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

A number of different claims are being dealt with by the State Claims Agency on our behalf. Some are claims from prisoners, the majority of which relate to slopping out. Some are claims made by members of the public and some are claims made by staff and relate to injuries received on duty. There were 107 claims by prison staff dealt with in 2020. In that year 445 claims by prisoners were dealt with and concluded, along with 32 claims made by members of the public.

Is there any outline of where processes need to be changed because of how the claims arose? Is there follow-up on how they are dealt with and have lessons been learned about how to reduce the level of claims?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Absolutely. We have a close working relationship with the State Claims Agency and a risk management liaison group, which comprises representatives of the Irish Prison Service and the State Claims Agency. It is specifically aimed at ensuring we learn lessons from claims and put in measures to mitigate future claims.

I will move to a final question.

The Deputy is over his time.

The question relates to the hepatitis C treatment programme in prisons. My understanding is the hepatitis C treatment programme takes approximately 12 weeks. Is there a detailed programme in place in each of the prisons to provide that care to prisoners while they are in prison? It is a 12-week programme and if appointments are missed, the process could be delayed. What progress has been made in having a full and comprehensive hepatitis C treatment programme in place for prisoners?

Mr. Fergal Black

The Deputy is quite right in that hepatitis C is now both preventable and curable. It is more prevalent among the prisoner population due to issues related to addiction, high-risk behaviour and some people's inability to access services. The HSE has a national programme and over 5,000 patients in the State are now being treated with highly effective direct acting antiviral drugs for hepatitis C. Professor Aidan McCormick, the HSE clinical lead for the hepatitis C programme, has engaged directly with us and is committed to giving access to all communities, including prisoners, and that is very important for us.

We now have a process in place with the HSE and pilot projects will be rolled out in Cork and Limerick prisons in the first instance to ensure we can provide a robust and comprehensive hepatitis C programme, similar to what is happening in the community, and where this can lead to a point where the condition is curable for people entering prison. During the course of this year the programme will roll out in the two prisons and be extended.

On the cost-effectiveness point, people can be dealt with in the prison rather than being transferred to hospital facilities. Has that process been put in place?

Mr. Fergal Black

Yes.

I welcome our guests. We have spoken before about direct provision and responsibility for that has moved to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. Will Ms McPhillips comment on or explain why she believes it the case that the responsible Department has now determined so many direct provision contracts to be non-compliant? I understand these are contracts to the value of €91 million.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not in a position to do that as I do not know what the Department has done since October 2020. I am not the Accounting Officer for the-----

This is in respect of contracts that the Department of Justice signed off. They are direct provision contracts.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We do not have the direct provision brief any more.

This is in respect of contracts that the Department of Justice signed and another Department has now subsequently determined them to be non-compliant. Has the Department of Justice examined what it may have done wrong in that respect?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are not in a position to do that. We simply do not have the brief any more. The brief has moved with bag and baggage, including all the files and contracts. We are not placing those contracts any more and we do not have the responsibility any more.

The Department concluded the contracts.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

When we had the responsibility, we dealt with it in the way we did.

That has now been determined by another Department to be non-compliant. Will the Department of Justice evaluate what it may have done wrong?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am just not sure I am following what the Deputy is saying, to be honest.

The Department of Justice concluded direct provision contracts. Responsibility for direct provision has now been passed to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. That Department has determined that €91 million of those contracts signed off by the Department of Justice were non-compliant. Who is going to be answerable in respect of those contracts? The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth representatives might say the contracts were signed before it got them. Ms McPhillips is saying her Department does not have the contracts any more and is not answering any questions on them.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is not that I am not answering questions. I simply do not have any information to help the Deputy. If he wishes, I can go back and have a look at it before reverting to him.

If Ms McPhillips could do that, it would be useful. I am not sure if Ms McCaffrey or Ms McPhillips could answer questions about service contracts with LMC Facilities Management, a company with offices in Dublin and Tipperary.

I understand that some previous deals with that company resulted in an external investigation. Will the witnesses indicate if that investigation is ongoing?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will ask Ms McCaffrey to come in on that, if that is okay.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I can speak generally in respect of that contract.

All I asked is if the external investigation ongoing.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Yes, I understand that it is.

A new contract worth €5.6 million was signed in July 2020. It has since been found to be non-compliant. How did that happen?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

A process was put in place to sign a new contract. That contract was signed in July 2020 for 2019 and the period up to July 2020. The old contract had expired so that would have been included in our returned and 40/02 cases . It simply was not possible to put alternative contract arrangements in place. I must stress the complexity of that contract. It took two years, between ourselves, the Office of Public Works and the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, to draw it up. It is quite a large contract and-----

And it was still non-compliant.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

No, it is absolutely compliant. The previous contract was rolled over for the period 2019 to July 2020, until such time as the new contract was signed.

A new contract was determined in July 2020. It is a seven-year contract.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

A new contract is in place. It is fully compliant. As I said, we spent quite a lot of time ensuring that we got everything involved in the contract right.

Okay. I do not have much time. I would like to touch on the ongoing debacle relating to and the set of debacles that resulted in the killing of Shane O'Farrell in 2011. In 2019, a scoping inquiry was established instead of the full public inquiry that both Houses of the Oireachtas had unanimously called for. Considering that it is now 2022, and I assume that the witnesses will not be able to give us any sense of when that the scoping inquiry will be concluded, does the Department accept that scoping inquiries in respect of matters such as that to which I refer are not an appropriate way to provide answers? Does it also accept that the scoping inquiry in this case has become just another blockage for the family of Shane O'Farrell and for those of us who want to find out precisely how his tragic death was allowed to happen?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is difficult to go into any detail on this matter given that it is with the judge at the moment. My understanding is that the judge expects to wrap that up in the next little while. A scoping inquiry is standard practice before any deeper inquiry takes place because we need to set out literally what the scope of the latter will be. Obviously, the circumstances of this tragedy-----

Has any other scoping inquiry taken three years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would have to go back and have a look, but I do not think so.

Would Ms McPhillips consider three years to be appropriate or even acceptable?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy will have to take into account that we had two of years of Covid, which has had an impact on many things. Obviously, everyone wants to get to the bottom of this issue. However, I do not believe that any inquiry is served by not having definition around it. That is the purpose of having a scoping exercise before one embarks on a more wide-ranging inquiry, if that is deemed appropriate.

Here is the difficulty. Shane was killed in 2011 by someone who should have been in prison. It is now 2022. We had the GSOC inquiry, which took God knows how long, and the Department refused to answer any questions when it was taking place Now we have the scoping inquiry, which has been in train for three years. I assume that if, as directed by the Houses, we are to have a further public inquiry, its deliberations will take some time . What would the Department consider to be an appropriate timeframe for the family and loved ones of Shane O'Farrell to get the truth as to how the set of incidents that led to his death were allowed to happen?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is no answer to that question. Obviously-----

Does Ms McPhillips think it has been going on for too long?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would not want to speak for any grieving family. I presume that they would not want to be in this position at all. Everybody would wish that their loved one was still alive. The length of time relating to the administration of justice is always too long for the people who are suffering.

One of the debacles was that Mr. Gradzuiska, the man who killed Shane, was convicted of two different offences in 2010. Those offences were appealed, but the appeals never happened. On 15 May 2019, the then Minister for Justice signed the terms of reference, approved by the Attorney General, for a review of the District Court system, which, in addition to the error, was also supposed to examine existing risks and so on. Why was that review never advanced as the then Minister instructed?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Chair, I am in difficulty here because the Deputy has named a person.

I have named someone who was convicted. It is a matter of record.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a scoping inquiry into these matters. I do not believe I can go into the detail of the case. In terms of-----

I am asking Ms McPhillips why-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can speak about the review-----

Yes, please do.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----but I cannot go into the detail of some of these matters. The review did not proceed as intended, but that was an accidental oversight on the part of the Department. We have explained this to the family involved. The matter is part of the scoping inquiry, and I expect that the judge will have something to say about it also. We apologised for that at the time.

In 2020, the family had, through the Freedom of Information Acts, sought information but the Courts Service report into that set of incidents was not included in the response they received. It was my understanding that the Minister and senior officials had signed off on the fact that the family would be provided with that information. Why were the family not provided with it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Chairman, I am in difficulty here. I want to be helpful to the Deputy and, obviously, I want to be respectful to the family in the context of their bereavement, but I cannot go into the detail because it is subject to the scoping inquiry that a judge is engaging in at the moment.

I am asking Ms McPhillips why the Department-----

The matter is not before the courts and there are no judicial proceedings or anything like that in train.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I know, but there is a report due from a judge who was appointed by means of a statutory process.

With respect, I am asking why a document was not provided by the Department to somebody on foot of a freedom of information request. I hope Judge Haughton is dealing with more substantive issues than that. I am asking why the Department did not provide a Courts Service report into this matter to an eligible recipient under the Freedom of Information Acts when it was sought.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can communicate with the Deputy on this in detail. There is an enormous level of detail in respect of this matter, and an enormous amount of material has been provided under freedom of information. That review was provided to the family when it came to light.

It did not come to light when the original-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can write to the Deputy in relation to this, but it is an exceptionally detailed series of events and, in that context, I do not want to say anything that is incorrect to the Deputy.

It is my understanding that Ms McPhillips would be very well aware of much of the detail of this case. Does she accept that there is a need for a public inquiry into the killing of Shane O'Farrell, as mandated by both Houses of the Oireachtas?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is the matter the judge Is looking at. It would not be appropriate for me to express an opinion on that.

This matter has come up before. In fairness to everybody involved, I am aware that Ms McPhillips will say that she is limited, and fair enough, but it would be helpful if she could come back to the committee with information on when the scoping inquiry is going to be completed. The inquiry seems to be have been going on for years. It would also be helpful to the Deputy if Ms McPhillips came back with that information because he is dealing with constituents on the matter. Perhaps Ms McPhillips will come back to us as soon as possible. It would be helpful because the inquiry seems to be going on forever.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am happy to provide the committee with an update on that.

Deputy Carroll MacNeill is next.

Deputy Devlin is before of me.

I welcome the witnesses, some of whom have been before the committee previously. They are very welcome back. In the time that I have, I will focus first and foremost on the Comptroller and Auditor General's remarks and opening statement and specifically on non-compliance in the context of Vote 21 and 24. A number of reasons have been provided for that non-compliance.

I note that in Vote 21 there were 16 contracts totalling €15.5 million. Some of those projects went beyond the original contract date and others were rolled over. What procedures have now been put in place to deal with those issues?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To which Votes is the Deputy referring?

Votes 21 and 24.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will ask Ms McCaffrey to respond in respect of Vote 21, if that is okay.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

To reassure the Deputy, a considerable amount of work has been done to ensure we become fully compliant with our procurement processes. That includes a new contract management system to allow us to start planning at the earliest possible stage for a contract to be awarded. We have a comprehensive corporate procurement plan. We have engaged external professional procurement consultants to assist us in ensuring we are fully compliant.

In 2020, the deputy and Comptroller and Auditor General appointed 16 contracts to a total value of €15.15 million, where contracts were rolled over. That compares with 26 such contracts in 2019 so there has been an improvement. The value in 2019 was €18.5 million so our figures are going in the right direction.

Of those 16 contracts, five involved the Office of Government Procurement. I can inform the Deputy that all of those contracts are now in place. Eleven cases were being managed by the Irish Prison Service and I can assure the Deputy that all of those contracts are now in place, with the exception of one which is currently out to tender for a value of €93,000. I can also inform the Deputy that we continue to make improvements in this regard. The value of our non-compliant procurement radically reduced in 2021 to €5.6 million. So far this year, only two contracts are non-compliant. It is an area of particular focus for the prison service and we have made good progress in that regard.

It is good to hear that such progress has been made. Are any of the contracts under Vote 21 or Vote 24 long running? Are any of them contracts that have been in place for more than five years? I know Ms McCaffrey said some of those contracts have been put out to tender, which is good and probably best practice, but have any of those contracts been rolling for more than five years?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I am sorry, I do not have that specific information.

Ms McCaffrey might come back to the committee on that point.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I will do that.

I will turn to the Probation Service and consider an issue that we, as parliamentarians, engage with from time to time. Is there a written service level agreement in place between the Department and the Probation Service?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is. The Probation Service is one of our many agencies but it is a particularly successful one in terms of what it does. I might ask Mr. O'Sullivan, who looks after governance of the criminal agencies, to come in but we have a governance agreement in place that is fully compliant. Mr. O'Sullivan may wish to expand on that.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

The Department has a governance agreement in place for three years with the Probation Service. We also have an annual performance delivery agreement. Under those arrangements, we meet the head of the Probation Service at least twice a year and back that up with a constant stream of regular informal engagement and support. In fact, the Minister met the Probation Service and senior team on-site in the past week or so and had a very good engagement. We obviously set targets and the resource allocations, and work closely with the Probation Service to consider where it is going strategically in the coming years.

There are also service level agreements for the provision of ICT and financial services. The Probation Service relies on the Department for a lot of those central support services.

I thank Mr. O'Sullivan. Our guests might be able to advise if there has been an increase in the referrals received by the Probation Service. Have our guests a breakdown of the most recurring offences that have been referred?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have something here in that regard. I will come back to the Deputy in a moment. The top offences referred to the service in 2020 related to drugs offences. Approximately 75% of referrals related to drugs offences, theft, assault, public order, road traffic and burglary. The number of offenders dealt with in the community in 2020 was 15,500. The figure for 2021 was 15,400. Some 9,300 probation reports were completed for court in 2020 and 10,000 were completed in 2021. That shows a considerable volume of business.

Do we have detail on which community service programmes are being engaged in that regard? I do not know if Ms McPhillips has that information to hand.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not have anything of that sort to hand.

Ms McPhillips might send that information to the committee. There seems to be a lack of engagement between the Probation Service and local authorities on work that is required and could be done within the community. That could assist the Probation Service.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I agree with the Deputy. Of course, Covid-19 has had an impact on that kind of work.

I appreciate that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

People could not be brought together in groups and so forth. Community service orders have been a difficulty for the past two years. We are doing a piece of work at the moment on community sanctions generally and examining how the Probation Service can have a more consistent offering throughout the country, working with local authorities, as the Deputy mentioned, and other bodies.

When does Ms McPhillips hope that piece of work will be concluded?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The target would be to try and get something done by the summertime in that regard.

That community service aspect was patchy in the run-up to the onset of the pandemic and stopped thereafter.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is effective and the Deputy is right that patchiness is the issue. It is effective in some places-----

That is correct.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----and not so effective in other places. Mr. O'Sullivan may wish to come in on that point.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

The Probation Service has an enormous appetite to identify new partners, whether local authorities, voluntary groups or community centres, to look for innovative ways to use community service as a means to have reparation carried out in communities and meaningful responses to crime.

I thank Mr. O'Sullivan for that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Another thing, just for the information of the Deputy, is that the Probation Service is carrying a lot of vacancies at the moment and we are trying to support the service in its recruitment because the jobs market is very competitive. The service is anxious to fill those vacancies.

I will turn now to consider compensation and legal costs, specifically table 6.2 in the document relating to Vote 21. I am struck by the number of claims that have been made by prisoners for injury and other actions involving prisoners. There are 445 claims of that kind and more than €2 million has been awarded in compensation. There are 107 civil claims for injuries received while on duty and other issues involving prison staff, which is a high number. There are 110 claims through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal arising out of injuries received by prison staff. Have our guests the figures for recent years that we could use as a comparison? Has that trend increased? The number of prisoner claims seems high. Have those numbers increased or decreased?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will turn to Ms McCaffrey, if that is okay.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I do not have comparative figures with me. I will follow up on that point. As I mentioned earlier, many of the claims by prisoners relate to in-cell sanitation. We have received a significant number of in-cell sanitation claims and they account for many of the claims made by prisoners.

Unfortunately, our staff do become injured on duty. There are some slips, trips and falls but it is obviously a difficult environment. Our staff are required to break up altercations between prisoners and become injured while doing so. They are also, unfortunately, assaulted from time to time. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal is a specific scheme to deal with prison officers who have been-----

What about the prisoners' claims? Does Ms McCaffrey have a percentage breakdown of the types of claims they are making? I heard what she said about sanitation but can she give us examples of other types of claims that are being made?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

They could be claims of injury. Prisoners may have been involved in accidents within the prison. I can certainly come back to the Deputy with a full breakdown.

Please do. A percentage breakdown would be helpful.

I thank our guests for coming before the committee. I have many questions about prisons. The Joint Committee on Justice recently spoke to Ms McCaffrey and Mr. Black. It is good to see them again.

Much of what we have been talking about relates to the costs and benefits of the rehabilitation programmes and the emphasis on the rehabilitation of prisoners with a particular focus on libraries, education and access to education. The spending review for 2021, the Review of the Programme of Work and Training in the Irish Prison Service, was produced by Ms Caroline Finn.

It states it does not represent the official views of the Department or Minister for Justice, so I am not sure what its status is. Will Ms McCaffrey clarify its status?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

That was something we had sought as a review because we certainly see that work and training is very successful. We want to ensure that what we are doing at a prison level is aligned to what is happening within the employment market. We put that forward as a spending review so that we could learn and improve our work training activities.

Fair enough. The second key finding states: “Approximately 30% of the prison population take part in Work and Training at any given time, though this is not the only structured activity available in prisons.” That figure seems low. Is it a fair reflection?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

If we compare that with education, in February 2022, 45% of the prison population were engaging in education. Within a prison, you may go to school for the day or you may go to work and training. In some cases, you may go to school in the morning and to work and training in the afternoon. Obviously, from a Prison Service perspective, we encourage as many prisoners as we can to participate in work, training and education. There has been an impact because of Covid, unfortunately, but we are now back at a stage where our workshops and education facilities are operating at maximum capacity. One of the core functions of the Prison Service is to help people gain an educational qualification or a work training qualification so that they are much more employable on release.

When Ms McCaffrey says "maximum capacity", is that the maximum capacity pre-Covid or is it a new maximum capacity? What does it mean now?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

It is the maximum capacity pre-Covid. Unfortunately, because of Covid, we had to reduce the number of people in our workshops to ensure social distancing, but we are certainly now back to ensuring our workshops and schools have as many prisoners as can possibly be held within a work training activity or classroom.

The figures are 45% in education and 30% in work training and there may be some crossover in that. I am concerned about equal access for all prisoners to those programmes, and prisoners on protection in particular. What proportion of prisoners on protection have access to education, training and work?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I do not have a statistic with me, I am afraid. The majority of prisoners self-declare that they require protection; it is not a regime imposed on them by the Prison Service. It is much more difficult for people to access education and work training under those circumstances. However, we make every effort to ensure they have access to activities. In certain prisons, schools would be open on certain mornings or afternoons for protection prisoners. Similarly, teachers in some prisons go to protection landings to ensure those prisoners can engage in education.

It is a constant theme in the series. The Inspector of Prisons inspected all the prisons in 2021 and all but four of the reports have been published by the Department, which is very helpful. Do our guests know when the four other reports will be published?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think they are due to be published very shortly, maybe even this week.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

If they are not published already, they will be very soon.

Does that mean in one month, for example?

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

No, I think it will be today or tomorrow. They might even have been published already.

In each instance the reports go through, difficulties are identified with education and training for protection prisoners, in particular, and access to that. I appreciate the point Ms McCaffrey made about self-declaration, but the State is paying for these prisoners to be in prison and it is part of the prison rules, and of the Nelson Mandela Rules, that people should have access to education and training. That is a key part of the strategy.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Absolutely. One of the critical things we did earlier in the Covid pandemic was to introduce in-cell learning and a blended model. That is something we are working hard to build on. I might ask my colleague-----

In fact, I am familiar with it. There is a cost to that and to providing the digital tools that are necessary for it. The Prison Service could come under criticism at a later stage for having invested in the sorts of digital tools, such as tablets and so on, that would be necessary to deliver that and I do not think it should be criticised for that. I am trying to pre-empt that criticism. A consistent recommendation in the report of the Inspector of Prisons is that digital tools such as tablets be made available to prisoners in order that interaction can take place with education facilities outside the prisons to ameliorate some of the difficulties we are talking about.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

We recently met some of our colleagues in Her Majesty's Prison Service to look at what they have done from a digitisation perspective, particularly in respect of in-cell technology to support learning and to support prisoners with mental health issues in accessing government services. We are planning a trip, along with some of our colleagues from the Department, to look at what has been done there and to see if we can build on what we have done during the Covid-19 pandemic. I certainly believe a central focus of our new strategy will be on ensuring the tools are available to prisoners within their cells.

Significant sums were spent over the past three years on enhancing library facilities, yet libraries have been closed and there has been difficulty in accessing libraries, particularly in Arbour Hill, Cloverhill and Mountjoy. This issue arises in the context of the different programmes for prisons’ officers, whether they relate to regime management plans or the organisation of the prisons more generally. The library seems to be the first facility to go every time, with the additional gym instructor being cancelled. Access to education is always the first thing to be removed. On our recent visit, we talked about staff being occupied by court visits and so on. That is a necessary part of the process and it would not be a solution to have remote hearings only, and perhaps the courts should come to the prisons if there is an overwhelming issue in that regard. Are the regime management plans, following lockdown and from now on, task specific or office specific? For example, are staff attached specifically to committals or to the library? Is there an opportunity for enhanced efficiency? If, for example, committals take up only a part of the day, could that person then be assigned to a different task, such as opening the library again?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Our regime management plans are premised on the basis that not always the same service is cut. Regrettably, there are unpredictable draws on staff and that has an impact on the services. The purpose of the regime management plan is to give as much predictability as we can to services so that they know in advance that they are not going to be in a position to do face-to-face work and can plan their administrative work around it. Some of the difficulties with closures of libraries earlier in the Covid pandemic were infection control issues, such as the sharing and cleaning of books, and that constituted a significant part of the closures. I might ask my colleague-----

I apologise for interrupting but I find that difficult to accept. People are locked up for very significant periods and the Irish Prison Service has done an exceptional job in managing Covid throughout. Nevertheless, people still need something to do, not just to watch the-----

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Our education team were absolutely incredible and educational material was printed and dropped to every prisoner in every cell who required it. Our Red Cross volunteers also played a huge part, supported by our psychology service, in giving in-cell learning packs. While it might be the case that books were not available in certain prisons at certain times, there was a huge effort to provide material-----

I accept that and, indeed, prisoners reported they could request books through the Red Cross or get them through staff and so on. My point was that cleaning books is not very difficult.

I think Mr. Black wanted to come in.

Mr. Fergal Black

I am the person responsible for services at prison level. Maintaining all the services is a difficulty because, as the director general pointed out, there is a draw on staff to carry out necessary court escorts and so on. We have also had to assign staff temporarily to Covid duties over recent years. I am reassured by the Minister, as recently as yesterday, having made clear that in order to address this systemic problem, she wishes to seek to secure, through the Estimates process this year, additional resources for the Prison Service. From my perspective, that should ensure we will be able to provide psychology, education and work training services on a more optimal basis because it is a challenge to maintain them all daily.

I have many further questions but I will ask them in a later slot.

I welcome our guests and thank them for their continued efforts and work over recent months and years, especially through Covid.

My first question relates to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's 2020 spending review of the performance targets in policing, and to the Department of Justice’s evaluation in light of the level of management information currently being received from An Garda Síochána regarding the value of money for policing. What oversight does the Department of Justice have of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's report on design and performance indicators in policing? What work is being done in this area?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have a performance agreement in place with An Garda Síochána and there are twice-annual - or perhaps quarterly - governance meetings between me and the Garda Commissioner.

Then there are monthly performance meetings with An Garda Síochána and ourselves, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Policing Authority. Those are very exacting performance meetings every month. They assist with where the Garda is at, what is going on and where it needs to get to. I might ask Mr. O'Sullivan to expand on this if it is okay because he oversees the governance side.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

I will just make a few additional comments. We have worked very closely as part of developing our performance arrangements with all the agencies to integrate the work we are doing around performance targets and KPIs with the work the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform as part of the Revised Estimates volume. As the committee knows, in the Revised Estimates volume each Vote appears alongside key outputs and public service activities and measurements. We now ensure what we are engaging with the agency on is lined up to what is appearing in that so there is a clear link between the money that has been voted and the type of indicators being provided.

Performance targets in the area of policing are obviously a complex area. There is clearly a long way to go and I think all the agencies will accept that. The other thing to say is there are other important actors in the oversight environment for An Garda Síochána, principally the Policing Authority which through the annual policing plan engages with the Commissioner and his senior team around their targets under the policing plan and also holds them to exacting account. It takes part in the monthly resource meeting the Secretary General has referred to. Ourselves, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, the authority and An Garda Síochána work closely on managing wider resource issues and what kind of impacts there are. It is internationally recognised as an area where there is more work to be done and obviously ensuring we do not skew activity by putting in indicators that are easy to measure but are not necessarily what communities want. A lot of it goes beyond numbers. The Garda has done much work around assessing community confidence in its services and sometimes that is at least as important as whether or not a particular number of incidents is reported or whatever. There is an awful lot of work in the space but more to do.

I thank Mr. O'Sullivan for his briefing. On the mechanisms in place for the Department, if An Garda Síochána does not meet its performance indicators, what type of procedures are in place, or how is that being dealt with?

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

Where you get into areas of non-compliance in terms of things that are about, say, procurement and so on, then clearly corrective action needs to be taken in that space. However, more generally, what you have is an iterative process, and this is something the Policing Authority would speak to as well, where you are working through the issue and asking the organisation to go back and review what it is doing to try to reach the target or maybe identify why the target has not been met and what are the factors. Usually there are a lot of external factors that would impact on levels of activity so there is kind of an iterative process rather than a command and control one. At the end of the day, the Commissioner remains accountable and responsible for the performance reports and we work through the issues with them as they arise.

I refer to setting 2021 or 2022 performance indicators. I welcome the additional expenditure allocated to Garda resources and to administrative staff. What are the Department's priorities regarding the allocation of resources as we move forward? As we move into a new policing model, where does the Department see challenges?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The allocation of the resources is a matter for the Commissioner-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----and he determines where he puts the resources the Government gives him. That is his independent role as the head of the service. The Government's policing priorities are set out every year to the Commissioner in the plan and then he determines the resource allocation based on those.

On the expenditure and the Vote associated with that-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

I assume it is-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are always keen on recruitment and obviously that has been prioritised over the last seven or eight years. The Garda is the envy of its counterparts worldwide as a growing service, both with respect to sworn members and also civilians. There is lots more expertise in the Garda staff cohort as well. The growth of that is really important. Digital and IT is an important area from our point of view to get the best value, to ensure the staff of An Garda Síochána have the best tools available to them and to combat the growth in ever more sophisticated cybercrime, etc., but also just ordinary crime. Every element of crime has a digital element to it now and gardaí need the tools to combat that.

I thank Ms McPhillips for that response. On IT, we hear a lot at joint policing committees with local authorities around community-based CCTV grants. In the Department's current expenditure, can the officials give us some indication of what the grant allocation has been over the last number of years and the demand for this type of assistance from the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will come back to the Deputy on that, if that is okay. I do not have it to hand but I will grab it and come back. Some of it is in the Garda Vote rather than in the justice Vote. We work closely on the Garda on this but I will revert to the Deputy on that one.

Yes. It is administered to the Department of Justice, in terms of the applications and forms.

I move on to the miscellaneous items in note 6 on commissions and special inquiries. Will the officials provide the committee with an update on the ongoing expenditure on the permanent commissions and also the fixed-purpose commissions?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was €6.4 million expended in 2020 on commissions and special inquiries. A number of those were in relation to the section 42 inquiries, of which five were established in 2017. Four of those are now complete. There were costs on, I think, 335. I think that is 2020. The Haughton inquiry referred to earlier incurred costs of €269,000 in 2020. The Hickson commission of investigation was €908,000 in 2020. The disclosures tribunal is ongoing and had costs of €4.3 million in 2020. That is ongoing but is expected to finish this year.

I thank Ms McPhillips. I raise the item on training and development and incidental expenses. For the benefit of the committee, the officials might be able to provide a breakdown of the incidental expenditure that included €18.7 million for 2020.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure. The biggest chunk of that relates to legal fees. There is quite a significant chunk of legal fees. There are also things like training and development, as stated, but the incidental expenses include legal fees and there is quite a chunk there related to immigration cases in particular.

On the EU directive not being implemented more efficiently to avoid the payment of a fine, will Ms McPhillips provide some information on why that was the case?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. That related to the fourth anti-money laundering directive. There was a gap in between the time it was transposed. The Commission had instituted legal proceeding and we ended up with a fine. We have done a lot of work on our transposition of EU measures generally but on that one, a fine of €2 million was paid to the Commission in 2020 due to the delayed transposition of the directive. It referred to a period between July 2017 and December 2019 that related to the enactment of both the primary and secondary legislation for that directive. I should add there are two more directives since. It is an ever-evolving area and we are constantly trying to keep up to date on money laundering. It is a difficult area and one the EU is very active in.

Have those two additional directives been transposed?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The fifth one was transposed in 2021 and on the sixth, we are in the process, I think, of examining at the moment.

Are there any fines on the way or have all fines been paid to date?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is the only fine in play at the moment.

It has been finalised.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. In 2020.

Okay. I thank the Chairman.

I thank the Deputy. Deputy Catherine Murphy now has ten minutes and then we will break for ten minutes.

On the direct provision issue raised by Deputy Carthy, Ms McPhillips said she was not in a position to give us the information. Will she pass us a note on that afterwards? The committee cannot find itself falling through the cracks between two Departments.

This would have been prior to-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I agree with the Deputy that it should not fall between the cracks, but the staff, the funding and the whole operation transferred.

I know, but some of what I am referring to was prior to that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

We need a note on that aspect so we can examine it. It was an area where some significant issues arose in recent years, especially during Covid-19. I would certainly like to have a look at what the Department has to say about non-compliance.

Turning to the Dóchas Centre during Covid-19, two reports were carried out but they have not been published. The most recent response I received to a parliamentary question stated that, "based on legal advice received by my Department, it is not proposed to publish the report at this time". Somebody said the Prison Service did an exceptional job in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. One of these reports concerns Covid-19 and the experience in the Dóchas Centre. I cannot understand why that report would not be published. It should be published. Ms McPhillips might tell us what is meant by “at this time”? The other report may or may not be linked to the original report. We would need to see it to evaluate that aspect. Is it intended, at some point, to publish these reports? What is the impediment to publishing a report relating to Covid-19?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are threads running between the two reports. There is also a separate process that I cannot go into. Between all that, the strong legal advice is that we cannot publish these reports at this time. We are examining them to see if there may be elements we can publish, because we do want this information in the public domain. We also want to implement the recommendations. We are not, however, in a position to publish the report at this time based on the legal advice.

Regarding the redacted format being considered, is that process expected to be resolved reasonably quickly?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I did not say that in respect of the redacted form. We are looking at what we can publish. We hope to make progress on it, but it is a complex issue. There are ongoing processes in this regard as well. They are parallel to it.

The non-publication of reports-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

-----raises a flag for me, in respect of being denied access to information where reports have been carried out. The non-publication of the reports creates a degree of inquiry. I do not find it at all satisfactory that we are in this position. One of these reports was produced in 2020, while the other might date from 2021.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was 2022.

Okay. Moving on to Thornton Hall, the new valuation for the site is €6.2 million. The Comptroller and Auditor General has drawn attention to the valuation of €2.7 million. In this context, there is the land itself, but also the significant development of a road and lighting at the site, which means it is now fully serviced. That is my understanding. Can Ms McPhillips provide the methodology to explain the variance between the €2.7 million and €6.2 million valuations? We already know there is a significant issue regarding the historical cost of the site. What is the methodology? How are the valuations so different?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We did not value it ourselves. We get expert valuation people to do it. In 2015, it was valued at €2.4 million. It was then valued in 2020 at €2.7 million. Probably because of Covid-19, but I am only speculating in this regard, that was a paper-based, desk exercise. It did seem to us to be a reasonable valuation in respect of the increase in land values between 2015 and 2017. On foot of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s views on this issue, we sought a further valuation and that was €6.7 million.

Who did that valuation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was a private company. I think it was Lisneys.

Is that paperwork available in that regard?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have not seen it, but I am sure I can write to the Deputy about this.

The value of a site is often determined by what it can be used for-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly.

-----and how it is zoned, etc. This site's purpose has changed from that originally envisaged. Can Ms McPhillips give us an idea of what engagement was undertaken in this respect? Has there been interest in the site? Is the Prison Service likely to use it? Has interest been shown in the site by other State agencies? Has the Land Development Agency, LDA, for example, been in contact? Is that something being considered in the context of the housing crisis and the refugee crisis arising from the war in Ukraine?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Starting with our interest in the site, Ms McCaffrey and I have discussed this aspect on several occasions in recent years. Our view is that there is a portion of the site, roughly 40 acres, that we would like to retain as a contingency, in case that land might be needed in future.

How many acres are there overall?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are 150 acres. Our interest is in roughly 40 acres. The remainder of the site is available for development by the State. We flagged this in 2015 and 2016 to Fingal County Council and we had a detailed discussion about the site's proximity, or lack thereof, to Ashbourne. The council feels it is outside their zones in respect of being suitable for housing, and I yield to the experts on this matter. The land is a little bit distant from both those things. We also flagged the availability of the land to the IDA, which has looked at it several times. More recently, when the LDA was established, we flagged the availability of land with that organisation as well and we have had discussions in this regard. Ms McCaffrey and I met with representatives of the LDA in recent weeks to discuss this issue. Additionally, in the context of the war in Ukraine, we have also flagged the availability of the site. If the land is not suitable for housing, and again other people will decide the suitability in this regard, then it may also not be suitable for modular housing in the context of the refugee crisis either. The site is, however, suitable for other developments.

Another point is that there is a building on the site.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

I understand it is a listed building.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, it is a farmhouse.

In such cases, the protection offered usually extends to the curtilage of the site. Is that limited to a particular portion of the land around the house or is it more extensive?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is very much the curtilage of the house. It is a fairly standard 19th-century farmhouse, but it is a listed building. There has been some discussion from time to time about applying to delist it to see if that would increase the attractiveness of the site, but that avenue has not been pursued at this time. It is a fine house, but it is not a particularly important building from a historical perspective.

Much discussion over the years has focused on the Department of Justice. A transformation programme was overseen by Ernst and Young, EY. A report was done. Is that company still involved? Are there ongoing running costs in respect of the transformation programme? Is it complete? Has it been evaluated?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Regarding the transformation programme, we devised a plan in 2018 as a result of the report produced by the effectiveness and renewable group. It was implemented in nine months, from January 2019 to the end of September 2019, and in full at that time. The consultants who supported us to do the transformation were EY, but the Department very much led the process. That was completed at the time. Elements of the Department were unaffected by that process and we always knew we would have to return to them. The immigration area is one of them. We are now looking at immigration from the perspectives of its structure and its modernisation. I refer to bringing digital services----

Are consultants being used in that endeavour or is it based in-house in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We will be, but we are not now.

I also asked if there has been a follow-on valuation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry Deputy. Our intention is to do a full evaluation. I was reluctant to do that during the Covid-19 pandemic, to be honest, because the transformation was less than six months old when Covid-19 hit us and the structure has been resilient in recent years. We will, however, do a full evaluation of it this year.

I ask the Chair to put me on the list to come back in later for more questions.

We will break and resume in ten minutes sharp.

Sitting suspended at 11 a.m. and resumed at 11.10 a.m.

I will first touch on the review of the voluntary mess committees. This committee had requested an investigation into voluntary mess committees in prisons. Our inquiries arose following protected disclosures from a whistleblower. I will direct my questions to Ms. McPhillips from the Department first. Was that whistleblower, Noel McGree, directly engaged in the course of this report?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry. I cannot comment on a specific individual or on protected disclosures generally.

The report has been published. We have a copy of it here. I am just asking Ms McPhillips a straight question. Was the whistleblower directly engaged in the course of the report?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can talk about the report but, under the terms of the Act, I cannot acknowledge whether there was a whistleblower.

Okay. Does the Department agree the report largely substantiates the allegations made in that protected disclosure?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am glad the comprehensive review has now been completed. Obviously, there were some obstacles to accessing the prisons in the past year or so. However, it is important to understand the context of the report, which relates to the independent voluntary mess committees. One of the things-----

Does Ms McPhillips agree that it largely substantiates the allegations made by the whistleblower? The response should really be "Yes" or "No".

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry but I will not get into the whistleblowing end of the matter. I can deal with what the report investigated.

Does Ms McPhillips agree the report largely substantiates the issues that were brought to the fore and which resulted in the investigation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The report reflects that there is considerable room for further improvement. We absolutely accept that.

Absolutely. I understand the Minister had previously apologised to Mr. McGree for the despicable manner in which he was treated and for having ultimately lost his job, but am I correct in saying that Ms McPhillips's Department still opposed him receiving the compensation adjudicated upon by the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry. As always, I want to be helpful to the committee but I cannot deal with questions on a specific individual and a specific process. It is just not possible for me to do so under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014.

Could Ms McPhillips say that her Department would engage-----

I am sorry, Deputy Munster. I will just be a moment. Am I correct in saying that the case is not before the WRC at the moment and that there are no legal proceedings under way?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is referring to a protected disclosure. I am not in a position to deal with a protected disclosure in public.

I just wanted to clarify that point. The Deputy may continue.

If Ms McPhillips is precluded from engaging on the matter of the whistleblower, can I then direct my questions to-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am obliged under the law to protect the process.

You would wonder what protection the whistleblower got under the law. I will now direct my questions to Ms McCaffrey. The report substantiates a number of specific claims relating to funds from the prisoners' assistance fund being used for staff recreation, medals for staff and a whole list of other things. Has anyone ever been disciplined for this?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

To clarify, the report on the voluntary mess committees deals with the voluntary mess committees specifically. The Deputy may be referring to matters contained in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report of 2019.

I am talking about the prisoners' assistance fund being used for staff recreation, medals and service recognition awards given to staff.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I may have clarified the last time that there were two staff events that were incorrectly coded to the prisoner assistance programme fund. Those funds should have come under staff development. I have actually abolished the prisoner assistance programme fund, PAPF. It was based on the profits generated from our tuck shops. The money was primarily spent to address prisoner hardship, on prisoner programmes and to support our community return and community support programmes. I was of the view that selling items in the tuck shop as an economic activity was not really what the Prison Service is about. It is a service to prisoners. We have changed the manner in which our tuck shops operate and, instead of selling at recommended retail prices, we now sell products at cost plus 5%. The programmes that were previously supported by that fund now receive Exchequer funding. We received Exchequer funding for prisoner programmes and to support the community support and community return programmes. However, we continue to sell tobacco at cost price. That generates enough money to allow governors to support prisoners who find themselves in economic hardship.

My question was whether anyone had ever been disciplined in respect of that matter.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

As I mentioned, two items were incorrectly coded to the prisoner assistance programme fund that should have been coded to a staff development fund. That expenditure was permitted under the staff development fund. It was an administrative and accounting error.

Okay. There was another incident in which a person was paid €141 per month to allow use of his personal Sky account in the mess. The report said that no invoices were made available when the review was carried out. Why did the mess committee bank account not make the payment directly to Sky?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

It has been absolutely clarified with that mess committee that any subscription for television channels is to come out of mess committee money and not the PAPF. That has been clarified and rectified.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

It has absolutely ceased.

Has that money been refunded?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I would have to check that point and come back to the Deputy. May I also correct something I said? I mentioned that cigarettes were being sold at cost price. Of course, they are being sold at the recommended retail price. I just wished to clarify that.

With regard to that Sky account and the moneys involved, was anyone ever disciplined?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I cannot talk about individual disciplinary cases but I can say there was misunderstanding on the part of the mess committee with regard to the payment. I have absolutely-----

So nobody was disciplined as such.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

-----clarified that it is not appropriate for that money to come from the prisoner assistance programme fund and that it is absolutely appropriate this cost be met by staff themselves, as is now the case.

Nobody was actually disciplined. The approach taken was that of a slap on the hand.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I cannot talk about individual disciplinary cases but I would like to clarify that-----

I am not asking Ms McCaffrey to go into the details. I am just asking whether anyone was disciplined. I am not asking her to identify anybody. Was anybody ever disciplined for that?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

My understanding, again, is that there was confusion on behalf of the mess committee. I have made it abundantly clear to the mess committee the appropriateness of where that subscription should be paid for. I can confirm to the Deputy that any subscription payments for television channels are paid directly by mess committees.

Okay. There was nobody disciplined for it. It was also identified that the purchase of beer, cider and rum to a value of €945 was in breach of the Civil Service code. Again, was there anyone disciplined for that?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Just to clarify, moneys that are involved in the mess committee are not public moneys, rather they are staff moneys. It is money collected to reimburse the costs of the meals provided. This is not public money that we are talking about. I think the Deputy is referring to a staff recognition event that took place in Mountjoy Prison, for which the mess committee, from its own funds, purchased a small amount of alcohol. I would clarify that the mess in Mountjoy Prison is not within the confines of the prison. It is outside the prison, just inside the main gate. I will further clarify that there is not a provision in the Civil Service code that prohibits alcohol being consumed at an event. I can clarify that there is certainly no alcohol being consumed within our prisons. This was a specific staff recognition event that took place outside of work hours and the moneys involved were the staff's own moneys, not voted or public moneys.

Okay. It was also suggest that there was more than €3,500 spent by one prison in 24 months in local pubs, which was from the prisoners assistance fund.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I believe that relates back to the payments that I mentioned earlier, where there were staff recognition events held. It was appropriate for them to be supported through the staff support programme. However, regrettably, through an administrative error, they were coded to the wrong account. That was subsequently rectified.

That was some administrative error. Was it not another administrative error?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I believe it relates to the same event.

Yes, but for €3,500.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I believe that related to a number of staff events. We would regularly hold staff-----

Yes. That was by one prison in 24 months in local pubs.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Those would have been staff events that were held-----

Yes, but how would that-----

Ms Caron McCaffrey

-----and just to say-----

-----money come out? Setting aside administrative errors, how would somebody in Ms McCaffrey's employment actually think that funding could come out of a prisoners assistance fund? How would that benefit prisoners? How would that mistake be made? Where was the oversight?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I was just going to add something. If it is helpful to the committee, I realise it has not had the report on the voluntary mess committees, VMCs for long, but one of the things that comes out of that is these VMCs are voluntary and run by volunteers in the prison service. These volunteers are not trained in administration and accounts, which is probably an explanation for what the Deputy is drawing attention to.

Where was Ms McPhillips's oversight?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Again, just to clarify, it is not public money. It is the staff's own money.

Yes, but I am talking about the prisoners assistance fund.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That assistance fund was generated through profits from the tuck shops, as I understand it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

One of the things that comes out of the report is that if this structure and process is to continue, that the staff who are volunteering need to have the requisite skills.

Okay, we are going over time. We have members back in now for a second round of questions. I have some questions as well. On whistleblowers generally, under the legislation and the situation regarding that, in the course of an examination or investigation into matters brought forward by a whistleblower, would whistleblowers normally be engaged with it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, absolutely. When the disclosure is received by the Department, it goes for assessment, after which the discloser is engaged with by the investigator through the process and is kept in touch with.

There have been some fairly in-depth examinations done, that I am aware of, under the aegis of the Department of Justice and the Prison Service, where the whistleblower was not engaged with.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Some of these things-----

What is the explanation for that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are two aspects to it. There is an initial disclosure, or perhaps multiple disclosures, depending on the circumstances. First of all, they are assessed. They are then investigated by an external concern. These issues may sometimes morph into or may be factors in more wide-ranging systemic examinations that the Department does or causes to be done of specific issues. In that instance, there may not be the read-across from the initial process around the discloser's own concerns into the bigger issue. However, obviously, the issues are taken into account.

I have a question on the treatment of whistleblowers. Obviously, sometimes the information they provide is good and sometimes it is not. I understand that prison is a very challenging environment and staff are dealing with very challenging situations at times and all of that. However, prisons would have a high level of autonomy and Ms McPhillips outlined that in her briefing notes, which I read yesterday. I would be aware of that from Portlaoise and Midlands Prison, which is just up the road from me. Some whistleblowers seem to go through the consequences of the whistleblowing - I suppose I could phrase it that way. For some whistleblowers who I have spoken to, the turn of events since and the outworking of the cases would confirm that they suffered enormously.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

I will make this point to Ms McCaffrey as well that because each prison has much autonomy, it is important that if staff come forward with genuine information that is not vexatious or anything like that, that not only do we have the process there for them to whistleblow, but also that the consequences do cause suffering. We cannot have a situation where staff that come forward are bullied, browbeaten or forced out of their job. We cannot have situations such as that. That has happened, unfortunately. I will not name any specific cases. There is one case that I am aware of and have followed very carefully. The consequences for that person and her family have been absolutely enormous. The Prison Service has a duty of care. It is not like a lot of other jobs. It is not like being on a building site or working in here or in an office. It is different. I just would make that point to Ms McPhillips and Ms McCaffrey. Going forward, we have to do these things differently.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I agree.

We will just move on to Thornton Hall. Who made the decision to buy Thornton Hall in 2005? I know it is before Ms McPhillips's time. However, there will be records of all this. Who made this decision to buy those 150 acres?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Department and the Minister. The Government, I suppose.

The Minister, correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would have to look back. I am not sure if it was the subject of a Government decision or whether it was the Minister's decision. However, within those two-----

What would normally happen?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

A purchase would normally be made by the Department and the Minister.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

There was Government approval in November 2004.

Was the Minister for Justice at that time Michael McDowell?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is right.

There was some money paid for it - €200,000 per acre. I know it is in north County Dublin, but this was good agricultural land and-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Very good agricultural land, clearly.

-----was making barely €13,000 and €14,000 an acre at that time. Some €200,000 an acre seems extraordinary.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Comptroller and Auditor General did a report on this, as I understand, in about 2015 or thereabouts.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

In 2005, and there was a subsequent report-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

An update.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I cannot remember what year that was.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe it was 2014 or 2015. It was obviously the height of the Celtic tiger and all that, but it was-----

It was a mad time. Even allowing for all of that, good agricultural land was making about €13,000 or €14,000 an acre at the time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is interesting to note - I was going back over the history a little bit - the purchase of the site was funded by the sale of lands at Shanganagh Castle, which the Prison Service also owned at the time and they-----

There were other uses for that money at the time-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----they fetched €29 million. To some extent, it is a long time ago. There was a certain amount of buying and selling land that was engaged in at the time.

The policy intention, as I understand it, was to sell off the Mountjoy complex in Phibsborough, which was regarded as valuable land that could be redeveloped, and to use the proceeds to build.

The State is not an estate agent.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I agree.

It appears an excessive sum of money. Here we are 17 years later with €50 million buried in it and nothing to show for it. Is it let in conacre, as we call it in the part of the country I come from? Is it leased out every year?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think it is leased. Yes.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

We have a grazing arrangement in place. That is really to protect the site. We had some trespass incidents in 2019. We believe that having a grazing licence protects the site.

I presume there is beef dry stock on it at present.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I do not have any agricultural technical knowledge I am afraid.

It is not a dairy farm, so it would most likely be beef dry stock. In terms of what the land will be used for, it was mentioned that the Irish Prison Service wants to retain some of it for the justice system. Will Ms McCaffrey explain? Will it be for a smaller prison? I understand that the crash came. It is basically a retrofit of Mountjoy. Everybody will accept that the staff are working in appalling conditions in Mountjoy and the prisoners are living in appalling conditions. What is the Irish Prison Service looking at there? How much of the land is it looking at?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Of the 150-acre site, we have had a look to see what we would potentially like to keep for future development and what might be available. We have identified 112 acres of the site as available for future development and we are looking to maintain 40 acres, as the Secretary General mentioned earlier. We have very limited availability to build on the existing footprint of the prison estate. We are putting a new wing on Limerick Prison at the moment. There is potential for wings to be added to some of our existing prisons, should capital money allow, but we do not have any land on which we would be on a position to build a larger prison and I suppose we-----

The Irish Prison Service is holding 40 acres.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

We want to hold 40 acres. Many of the prisons that are still within use-----

I apologise for interrupting Ms McCaffrey. It has been said that the other 110 acres is suitable for development. What type of development? Is it residential development?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

It would have to be conducive to working beside a prison. One of the issues that has bedevilled Mountjoy Prison, and one of the reasons we wanted to move to greenfield site, is the issue of drugs being thrown over the yards and its proximity to the canals. Certainly, that remains a problem. Many of our prisons are inner-city prisons. The greenfield site offers an especially secure location for the construction of any new prison.

Why did it take eight years to get an updated valuation? The land was valued at €2.7 million. I know Ms McPhillips was said it was a desktop valuation, but it is an incredible fall for a site that was somehow valued at €30 million 17 years ago.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have heard people who are more expert on land value than me refer to that period of time, from 2004 to 2006, as the silly season in terms of land value. Certainly when one looks at this exercise, it appears this way. The current valuation is €6.5 million. That is based on its agricultural zoning. If a use was to be proposed, there would be an application to rezone and the value, as Deputy Catherine Murphy said earlier, would be for whatever would be put on it.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

The valuation process in terms of revaluing prison land is done at five-year intervals. Is it not done every year. It is done every five years.

I would like to return to the question of prisons and Covid. I think prisons did an incredible job, especially in the first wave, of protecting prisoners and staff in overcrowded congregated settings from what could have been an absolute catastrophe. It came at a significant price, however, and there is an opportunity to learn from that. It is clear from going through all the reports of the Inspector of Prisons that prisoners reported very significant information about how not to get Covid but much less information about what to do if they had it and how that was to be managed. There was a significant mental health impact from the isolation that was necessary, especially in the first wave, including the missing of family visits. There is an opportunity there.

I would like to refer to the staff survey that was done in 2021 by the Office of the Inspector of Prisons. The staff recommended in-cell telephones and video calls to improve relationships with family members and to improve mental health. This would have obvious benefits for education and training and access to mental health supports, which is a big problem irrespective of Covid. That recommendation came from the staff. Sometimes one is criticised for providing services to prisoners, but this is a staff recommendation. I want to amplify it from the staff survey.

There is an ongoing concern about the mental health impact of the current quarantine experience. Ms McPhillips is aware of that but I want to flag it to her because it will come back. These things can come back in many different ways from a cost perspective to the State. In terms of the directions that were possible under the Act, it was July 2021 before a direction was given. However, the sunset side of things is not clear with regard to unlocking and unwinding the restrictions on exercise and so on. Ms McPhillips is aware of that also but these are the difficulties.

We spoke in great detail about Dóchas at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, but the overcrowding in Dóchas and the refurbishment that is necessary are very significant. There is an ongoing problem about the profile of people there with overwhelming addiction, mental health and welfare issues, many of whom should not be there but need to be in supported facilities. I am not sure where the Department is moving and whether sufficient departmental priority is being given to being able to move to that. We have gone through it in detail at the justice committee but I just wanted to highlight it here again.

Deputies have talked about the cost to the State of the slopping-out cases. It was €1.5 million in compensation and another €500,000 in legal costs for in-cell sanitation for 2020 and 2019. It comes with the overcrowding problem. In the Inspector of Prisons report on Arbour Hill, one can see the effect of a doubled-up bunk being in a single cell with a toilet, with no screen between the toilet and the lower bunk. Prisoners report trying to use the toilet on the landing for each other's dignity. These are ongoing very visible and obvious problems that have to be addressed, especially where there are not separate sanitation options.

With regard to the priority areas under the regime management plan, RMP, there will be work on training as an essential service. That will be prioritised.

I want to leave prisons for a second. The money laundering directive came from the EU in 2015. Ms McPhillips said there was a difficulty between July 2017 and 2019 in the transposition of it. Will she clarify that? It was a 2015 directive. It should have been implemented by 2017.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It should have been implemented by 2017 and it was not implemented until December 2019.

The Department of Justice is very good at legislation, especially criminal justice legislation. It has more expertise within it than many of the other Departments. It produces criminal justice legislation all the time. What happened?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There were other priorities. I agree with the Deputy that this should have been done but there were other legislative priorities. Anyone who is on the Oireachtas justice committee knows that the volume is absolutely overwhelming. Since then we have put a structure in place to manage the transposition of EU measures to make sure we accord them sufficient priority and the Minister can bring them forward in the Dáil in time.

This was not the first EU directive that had to be transposed into legislation on the criminal justice side. The Department has experience of that before.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have multiples of them. I ask Mr. O'Sullivan to come in because we have a very complex structure in place now to deliver on the transposition of EU measures.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

This is obviously-----

I ask Mr. O'Sullivan to be very brief because I want to go back to Ms McPhillips.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

Okay. This is a very significant event for us. This is the only time the State has been fined in the case of a measure which we were responsible for implementing. It is very complex legislation. It introduced entirely new concepts in the area of money laundering. It also involved much engagement not just with the Attorney General and the usual parties but also with the Department of Finance, the Central Bank and so on. We were delayed. We were-----

The Department would have been involved in the development of the directive at EU level and would have had sight, similar to the GDPR directive, and deep knowledge of the directive before it was ever agreed at EU level.

Surely this work had begun at that stage.

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

I wish the work had begun. As the Secretary General said, it was part of an overall suite of measures, including perhaps other EU measures which had more pressing timelines even at that point. The other complication in this instance was that the State fell foul of a change in European Commission practice in regard to the enforcement penalties beginning in January 2017. Previously, where a member state had remedied the infringement by the time the case came to court, the Commission would not seek a fine. The Commission changed its practice so that by the time this came to court - and this is not an excuse obviously but the context-----

I appreciate that and I understand the context. We would have been aware of that but I appreciate the point.

I will go back to Ms McPhillips who made a comment earlier that caused me concern so I want to make sure I understand what she means. She said that we are constantly keeping up with money laundering directives, and that there were subsequent directives. That phrase "constantly keeping up" raises a very large flag for me. Given what we are seeing with Russia, the difficulties throughout Europe and our own exposure even though it is very small going by those figures from the Department of Finance, I do not like that phrase from Ms McPhillips. Would she like to clarify or explain what she means?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It just reflects the amount of resources that we have to put into this. We recognise the value of this legislation. We have a range of agencies that have responsibilities under the money laundering Act. It is a constant iteration and the EU will continue to iterate it and we want it to because we have to keep on top of this.

I would much rather hear that we were keeping ahead of it and that we were leaders in Europe rather than keeping up with what was going on in the EU. Scrambling to keep up, is the impression I am getting.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I take that point. It is very demanding and technical. It takes many resources. By the time somebody is up to speed on it, you must make sure that there is some resilience in terms of our own organisation and in terms of expertise around that. That can be a challenge as well.

I appreciate that. The Department is competing with the private sector in many respects to do that, so I acknowledge that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I take the point. We absolutely want to be leaders in this space.

I call Deputy Murphy.

This is linked. The ODCE was to be replaced by the Corporate Enforcement Agency. The expectation was that would happen in January. My understanding is that there was an error in the legislation as well as an issue around the provision of gardaí and that there was a memorandum of understanding, MOU. What role did the Department have in the MOU? Has it been signed at this stage? When the Garda Síochána was in recently, we were told it would be within weeks. A huge level of frustration was expressed when it was discovered in FOI. We are seeing cases, for example, the FAI case. People are wondering where it is. I do not think that the new body has the extent of powers that it should have but the very fact that these new and expanded powers are not in place yet is a huge frustration.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is not our legislation. It is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment that is bringing forward that legislation.

There would have been a role in regard to the Garda Síochána. Does Ms McPhillips's Department not have a role in regard to that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. The memorandum of understanding that is being prepared is a memorandum between the Garda Síochána and the Corporate Enforcement Agency. However, we have been working with both the agencies and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in order to facilitate that. I understand it is very close to being finalised.

Over the years I have heard words like "imminent" and "expected soon". I think that is tomorrow. That is my interpretation of it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

At the end of the day, what is involved in that is the provision of gardaí, of people. As the Deputy and all members will be aware, everywhere has an acute demand for Garda members. The Commissioner has been constrained to some degree over the past two years by the fact that Templemore has been restricted. The numbers that have come on stream-----

To be honest, corporate enforcement is either important or it is not.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Essentially, the number of gardaí is relatively small in the context of a very big area. Deputy Carroll MacNeill talked about the legislation. Legislation is one thing while the actual delivery of the terms of that legislation is another. This agency cannot do its work. It has been frustrated in doing its work because it has not had the gardaí. I am really trying to find out where the blockage is.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I said earlier, the assignment of gardaí is a matter for the Commissioner. The MOU is being agreed so that the resources to be allocated to the agency will be agreed in that MOU and then the Garda Síochána will assign them. That is the purpose of that.

Okay.

On the Hamilton report, is there a wall-planner in terms of the roll-out? For example, the Hamilton report identified a number of significant shortcomings with agency resources. It was not only personnel. Some of it was IT and technology. Are we going to see a plan of action?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is-----

We know legislation takes time but what of those other aspects?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a detailed plan of action. I am happy to provide the Deputy with a note on that, if that is helpful.

Yes, that would be helpful.

On the ex gratia payments in regard to the Department's expenditure on legal aid, presumably there are controls in place and there are very specific arrangements where that happens. Will Ms McPhillips tell us how it happens? What kind of scenario would qualify for that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Ex gratia in this context refers to the fact that that scheme is not yet on a statutory basis. However, it is a scheme. There are rules around it and there are criteria to qualify for the payments and the payments are tightly controlled.

What kind of examples would have fitted in with the Garda station legal aid scheme? Can Ms McPhillips give an example of a scenario where that would apply?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The scheme applies where somebody is detained for questioning. He or she is eligible for legal assistance under the scheme. If somebody is detained for questioning for a serious offence, as you might hear on the news, that person will have access to a solicitor and that solicitor will be able to claim expenses under the Garda station scheme. That is what that applies to. There is a set scale of fees.

How is that different from-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

How is it different from the criminal legal aid? That refers to the presence in court; that is when you are before the court.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

No, this is a standard scheme. In fact, there are plans to put it on a statutory basis. We are bringing forward a new criminal legal aid Bill and that would put this and other ex gratia schemes on a statutory basis.

Mr. O'Sullivan mentioned the time we were fined. What was the extent of that fine?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was €2 million.

Is there any question of any other fines being in the offing?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not at present.

I thank Ms McPhillips.

I call Deputy Munster.

I have a couple of questions. A detective garda inspector recently commented that the divisional protective services units are under-resourced. He also said that was an issue throughout the State. Does the Department accept that analysis?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I said to other Deputies, the allocation of resources is a matter for the Commissioner. It does not come within our Department's Vote.

Okay, so you would not like to comment on it either way.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think I would have sufficient information. Obviously, the establishment of the divisional protective services units has been an innovation over recent years. I would imagine that there are swings and roundabouts in terms of the resources available. In terms of any unit I have, I know that you can have it fully staffed this week, but then somebody gets promoted, somebody takes leave and somebody gets sick. It is a constant battle to keep those units fully staffed and at the optimum degree.

Another deputy Garda commissioner commented recently that there are more than 300 gardaí. Does Ms McPhillips have the figure for those working in child protection units prior to the establishment of the DPSUs?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not. That would come under the Garda Vote.

Could we request that information?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, from the Commissioner as Accounting Officer.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sure the Deputy can.

I am asking Ms McPhillips's opinion on the DPSUs that do not currently have the capacity to investigate domestic violence cases. Does she know if there is any plan to rectify that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not in a position to confirm whether that is the case. What I think the Deputy is referring to are perhaps media reports around a Garda conference or something like that. When the Commissioner is here I am sure he will be able to provide the Deputy with detailed information on what the DPSUs are doing at the moment. It is not something that comes within my Vote.

That is all right.

I wish to return to the issue raised about slopping out. Do prisoners have to slop out currently? Are there cases where prisoners do not have in-cell sanitation?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

The incidence has reduced because of a significant capital investment programme. The most recent figures indicate 36 prisoners, which is broken down to include 18 to 20 prisoners in Limerick Prison. I mentioned earlier that there is a very big construction programme under way there at the moment to replace the current accommodation.

Are the 18 or 20 prisoners in Limerick doubled up in cells?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

They are all in single cells.

Where are the remaining prisoners located?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

The rest are in E block in Portlaoise Prison. As of yesterday, the total there was 13 prisoners. The completion of the construction work in Limerick Prison will eliminate slopping out on that site. We have been giving consideration to what the options might be in respect of E block.

How far from completion is the E wing in Portlaoise?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

It is quite complex. At the moment, we are doing a sample cell to see how in-cell sanitation could be installed. A project is ongoing to trial the installation in a sample cell, but it is technically difficult and involves knocking two cells into one cell.

Is that because the cells in E wing are not big enough?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

They are not big enough to incorporate a toilet, so it is required to put two cells into one.

That is far from satisfactory from the point of view of prisoners and staff.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

We all agree on that.

It is 2022.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

The capital investment has transformed the prison estate, much of which dates back to the 1800s. There was a major project in Mountjoy Prison to eliminate slopping out there and currently there is a significant investment in Limerick Prison. We expect accommodation-----

How many prisoners are doubling up at the moment? Ms McCaffrey can give a rough figure. I do not expect her to have today's figures.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I have the figures.

I know there have been situations in recent weeks.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Our accommodation is a mix of single cells, double cells and triple cells. As of today, 2,030 prisoners are accommodated in single cells, which is 54% of the population; 1,458 share a cell, and there are also triple cells. Cloverhill Prison is built on a three-man cell.

Are the cells designed for three people?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

They are designed for three.

I acknowledge the work of prison staff, in particular during Covid when we know it was difficult.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Staff have been absolutely incredible.

They really stepped up to the mark.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

As have prisoners. To pick up on a point made by Deputy Carroll MacNeill, we are completely cognisant of the impact that success has had on prisoners. Mr. Black and I, and all of the decision makers, met a group of prisoners in our progression unit on Monday - our Red Cross volunteers - who had done a survey to help us better understand the impact of isolation and quarantine on them. We took that away to make sure we have the learnings for the future, but also to look at what we can do now to support people with their mental health. We are looking at group psychology sessions to support people because of the impact of isolation and quarantine, which were absolutely necessary in the context of Covid outbreaks within the prisons but which, regrettably, were quite impactful on people. We are very attuned to that.

Could Ms McCaffrey come back to the committee with projections for the complete end to slopping out within the Irish Prison Service?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Absolutely. In Limerick, we expect the new wing to open in the third quarter of this year and we will certainly come back when we finalise plans on the E block.

Could I ask Ms McPhillips about the planned Policing, Security and Community Safety Bill? Could she say, briefly, why the Department views it as necessary?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Commission on the Future of Policing reported in September 2018 and the Government accepted its recommendations. In December 2018, we brought forward an implementation plan and part of it is the Policing, Security and Community Safety Bill.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will expand on the oversight piece of it. The oversight elements that are in place at the moment in all the agencies have been added individually over the years. GSOC was created in approximately 2006 and the Policing Authority in around 2015, so they are piecemeal. The intention of the Bill is to make that coherent. It does not make it much simpler, but it makes the processes more coherent.

One of the intentions of the Bill is to strengthen the independence of GSOC and that is being strongly opposed by An Garda Síochána. The day the Commissioner was before the committee, he seemed to indicate that the Garda is not happy with that. Does Ms McPhillips have any comment in that regard? Is that the situation at the moment? Is there a big pushback against the legislation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

A lot of agencies are affected by the legislation.

I ask specifically about pushback against the legislation from An Garda Síochána.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Commissioner has a view, which he has given in the context of the pre-legislative scrutiny. We have engaged with him and with the other agencies in that regard. Where the Minister and the Government will land, having taken all those views into account, including the view of the committee when it comes forward with its PLS report, has yet to be determined.

I wish to ask about restorative justice. As I understand it, there is a community-based project in Dublin and one in Tipperary, but it does not seem to be widespread throughout the State. I saw some information in recent days to the effect that there was a spend of €532,000 on restorative justice in 2020. That would seem to be a very small portion of funding.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We want to do much more in this space.

It seems to be taking a long time. As I recall, Judge Mary Martin promoted this approach a decade ago. It is acknowledged that it is a successful approach to reparation, which is very important for victims, but also in moving people away from reoffending. Why can the process not be accelerated? Ms McCaffrey has a problem with prison space and people have to be doubled up in cells that are not suitable. It would be better if the cells where there is slopping out were empty and we did not have prisoners in them. Most people would agree with that, but because of the pressure for space within the Prison Service, with approximately 3,500 prisoners, people are being committed to prison who will reoffend. Why are more programmes of restorative justice not being rolled out? It is a benefit, even if we only look at it from a financial position. That is one concern, but reducing crime and antisocial activity and improving community safety should be the big considerations. Why is this process not being driven on more quickly across the State?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I could not agree with you more, Chair, on this. A review of penal policy is nearing completion at the moment and that will set out the guiding principles for our priorities. Restorative justice is one of those priorities and a sparing approach to the use of imprisonment. Prison is a sanction of last resort. You are quite right, Chair, about the need to invest in restorative justice on a consistent basis in terms of its application across the country. Announcing it, as we said earlier-----

I am sorry for interrupting Ms McPhillips, but the model is working in Tipperary and in other countries. It is frustrating. People are being sent to prison and while I am not advocating locking people up and throwing away the key, the system does not allow for reparation for victims. I recall one case where an individual had robbed four or five different households and they got a number of weeks in prison and then they came out.

I remember totting up the amount of money stolen as this detail came out in the court case. Surely it would have been better for the person to repay the money and make reparations to the victims. If the people who had been burgled or assaulted received some compensation from the perpetrator or if there had to have been a restorative justice element of some kind, that would have been better. This has been proven internationally and everyone in the Garda up to the Garda Commissioner knows it. While I do not want to misrepresent him, my understanding is the Garda Commissioner, Drew Harris, wants it. Senior gardaí at all levels believe this is the way to go. Why are we not doing it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What we are doing is developing it.

It is proven.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I absolutely agree with the Chairman. I could not agree more, but we have to do the work to develop the option to have that provision.

Is it bogged down in bureaucracy?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Where it has worked in Nenagh, County Tipperary, it has been very successful for years. It had a very passionate advocate in Judge Michael Reilly, who initiated it originally. We want to create that kind of provision throughout the country and have that as an option for the courts because ultimately it will be for the court to decide the appropriate sanction. It is absolutely vital in addressing criminality and addressing people's behaviours, surfacing the issue that has caused the criminality in the first place. That is absolutely in our plans and should be coming to fruition over the course of the next few months. I would be happy to come back to the Chairman on that.

I would be grateful if Ms McPhillips would because it is something we could-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I agree with the Chairman absolutely.

I return to the question I asked earlier about the hepatitis C treatment programme. My understanding is there was a particular issue with prisoners needing to be taken from Cork Prison to an outpatient clinic in Cork University Hospital for their care. I had understood it was proposed that all treatment would take place within prisons rather than having to incur the additional cost of taking prisoners to a medical facility. What is the proposed programme for hepatitis C? As it is a 12-week programme, it is an ideal opportunity. There will be significant long-term savings in the cost of medical treatment.

What is the proposal for the old prison in Cork? Obviously, there is a maintenance cost associated with a facility not being used. What are the plans for that property now?

Mr. Fergal Black

I will pick up on the issue of hepatitis C. The intention is that the treatment plan will be devised over an eight-week period and, as the Deputy points out, it will be extremely cost effective in the management of hepatitis C. Based on our discussions with Professor Aiden McCormick, the lead for the national hepatitis C treatment programme, the intention is to have a particular tailored programme for people in prison. The Deputy is quite right. One of the difficulties that bedevils us is we have a population of people in custody whose health status does not compare favourably with the general community. Therefore, taking them out to external secondary services for tertiary care is very costly in terms of the resources we need to assign, in terms of drawing staff away from prison. We are very anxious to develop any clinical services we can provide within the prison. This is one of the services we feel we can pilot successfully, it is hoped in Cork and Limerick, and extend nationally subsequently in a very cost-effective manner.

That does not answer my question. Is treatment being provided now within the prison precincts?

Mr. Fergal Black

Yes.

Will that apply to all prisons in the long term? There is a significant cost saving not only for the prison service but also for the health service. When does Mr. Black expect to have it available in all the prisons?

Mr. Fergal Black

I do not have a timescale for all the prisons. Our intention is to have both pilots operational this year in Cork and Limerick. They will then be evaluated and, in consultation with our colleagues in the HSE, we will seek to roll that out across prisons throughout the country. We have had this operational through a collaboration between Mountjoy clinical staff, our staff, and the Mater Hospital on an interim basis for a number of years. We are now looking to develop a programme that will be consistent and applied across all closed prisons in the estate.

What is the timeline for Cork and Limerick? When does Mr. Black expect the evaluation to take place? Is it likely to take six months or 12 months?

Mr. Fergal Black

I would imagine we should be able to do that in a six-month time period. Essentially, we just need to agree with our colleagues in the HSE on the treatment plan that will be rolled out for prisoners in those prisons. We ensure the prisoners who require treatment receive that treatment. We evaluate the effectiveness of it in the context of clinical care and in the context of the savings that will accrue both to the prison service in terms of escorts and to the HSE in terms of clogging up its services. I would hope that, early next year, we would seek to roll it out to all our prisons.

May I also get an answer on the old Cork prison issue?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I will take that. When we constructed the new prison on the site of Cork Prison, we decommissioned the old prison, so we are not maintaining that building. The accommodation in Cork Prison was the worst quality of accommodation we had within the estate before it was replaced. It had a very limited regime of activities. The new prison has been built and the old one has been decommissioned. We have not moved to demolish it because demolition would cost several million euro. It is quite expensive to demolish a building. It remains decommissioned, but obviously it is a site that could potentially be used in the future by the Prison Service.

I know the building has been decommissioned, but I presume there will still be maintenance and security costs, for instance.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Our fire alarm system, obviously, would still be active because we would have concerns around the risk. The maintenance would be very small because we are not maintaining it for future use.

Have there been discussions with any other State authorities about what could be done with that site now? What is the proposal in that regard?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

As I understand it, I know the governor of the prison has had some conversations with local Deputies. I certainly believe there might be potential for future accommodation or step-down facilities to be developed on that site. That is certainly into the future. I know the governor in Cork Prison has had some approaches from some local Deputies who might have some ideas or suggestions in that area.

However, for the moment the Department has not proactively engaged in trying to make a decision on the future of the site?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

Any potential future that could be realised from the site would necessitate the demolition of the existing building. As I said, that would cost millions of euro. That is not in our capital strategy at the moment.

I wish to pick up where I left off from the previous session. Much has been said about Thornton Hall and it is also referenced in the Comptroller and Auditor General's comments. I note the expenditure on the construction in Limerick, which is very welcome. What is being done regarding Mountjoy Prison? What are the plans to upgrade Mountjoy Prison?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There has been a lot of work done on it in the past decade. I might ask Ms McCaffrey to come in on that.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

A substantial project was completed at a cost of more than €30 million to put in-cell sanitation in place and radically improve the accommodation. The accommodation is now of good quality. All the cells in Mountjoy are maintained as single cells, which is of significant benefit to the prison population. All of the attendant services are available on site. We have a school. We have work training activities. There are no plans in the short term for future development on the Mountjoy site. We spent some money recently on the training unit, which is also on the Mountjoy site. We had closed it in 2017 to repurpose it as an older persons' unit. Unfortunately, just as it was finished in December 2019, Covid hit and we did not think it was the right decision to put all our vulnerable elderly prisoners in that accommodation. We are moving now towards its reopening. That has been fully refurbished and decorated.

What is the timeframe for that to be utilised?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

The expectation is that it will be open by the end of June or early July.

The Dóchas centre was mentioned.

There is a rolling programme of improvements in the Dóchas centre. Some of the houses have been upgraded and refurbished, which has been welcomed by the women who live there, and there is an ongoing plan to continue to develop and improve the accommodation and its quality.

It should be acknowledged that it was particularly difficult for the staff in the Prison Service during the pandemic. There were certain scenarios that could be accommodated and some that could not. However, I acknowledge the work of the Prison Service in engaging with both families and public representatives in that regard. That is good news about Mountjoy and the Dóchas centre.

Turning to Vote 24, I have a number of questions on different headings and I will ask them in the time I have remaining. Subhead D3 is social disadvantage measures, and there was an underspend of nearly €1 million. Some of that was obviously down to Covid-19 but it also refers to certain projects for youth justice not being fully drawn down in 2020, related to the delays in establishing new projects. How are we getting on with that at this point?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Obviously, Covid-19 had an impact on those. They are activated again. In fact, the budget for youth justice and the youth diversion projects for 2022 has an increase of over €6 million, so there is a huge amount of work going on there. They are fully firing now.

That is good. With regard to the Property Services Regulatory Authority, I found it very problematic during the pandemic, obviously because staff were working remotely. There is a slight overspend there of €162,000. Is that service fully operational again now?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is.

What about recruitment?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe it is fully staffed.

Okay, because that was an issue. What is the update on the gambling regulatory authority?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The legislation is going through the Oireachtas.

The Department is going to appoint a CEO-designate.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. My apologies, I misled the Deputy. It is in pre-legislative scrutiny.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In terms of recruitment, the CEO job is advertised and that is going through the Public Appointments Service, PAS, process at present. The PAS is recruiting that post for us.

Okay. In theory, how long is it before we expect to have somebody if the recruitment process is successful?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We expect to have somebody in place, and certainly identified, by July, but that depends on if the person has to give notice and so forth. Again, no more than with the policing, security and community safety Bill, there is a detailed project implementation plan relating to the establishment of the regulator. It is a very complex project and complex regulation so there is a lot of work going into that. A team is working on it at present.

That is good to know. The next two matters are linked. They are the funding for prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence as well as funding for services for victims of crime. I note the services to the victims of crime increased during the pandemic for obvious reasons, unfortunately, as did the expenditure relating to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. Can Ms McPhillips give us an outline of the expenditure there?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Estimate in 2020 was €2.069 million and the outturn was €2.464 million. That excess arose due to the roll-out of the Still Here campaign. We also increased the grants available to the front-line partners we have in this space. Between the Still Here campaign for awareness raising and the increased provision for front-line services, there was approximately €400,000 extra spent in 2020.

It is to be hoped that we will see an increase in that funding in the Department into the future because it is something that is really needed. The pandemic just exposed it. It does not mean it is going to go away, as Ms McPhillips knows. It exacerbated the problem.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Ultimately, there is this clear sign that victims need these services. They availed of the services due to probably extreme duress and stress, but we certainly need to look at that. I will leave that in Ms McPhillips's capable hands.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sure my colleague in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is listening carefully to that as well.

Yes. I thank the witnesses.

I welcome the officials to the committee meeting today and thank them for the information they have been providing. First, I have a brief question. In 2020, an issue under the remit of the Department of Justice that came to my attention is funding for the coroner's court. I understand there has been some difficulty with the discharge of bodies, particularly in areas where there is high population. Outside of Dublin and other areas of the country this is the remit of the local authorities, but it is the remit of the Department of Justice as it pertains to Dublin. What measures has the Department been undertaking to deal with that issue in the context, of course, of it being a deeply personal issue for many people? In Ireland we have an important tradition where the death and funeral process is very swift in comparison to what might be the case in the United Kingdom where it takes weeks. It is quite important from a cultural standpoint. I will open with that question.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is correct. Something we were very conscious of at the beginning of the pandemic was the potential and the great unknown about how this would all play out. We established a dedicated team in March-April 2020 in respect of coroners and the pathology services generally. Obviously, the Office of the State Pathologist is under the Department. The pathologists in hospitals are under the HSE, so there can be quite a complicated provision there. I will ask Ms Buckley to comment on this.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There are challenges around this and they became particularly difficult during the pandemic because of the Covid-19 precautions that had to be brought to bear. Dublin also became the recipient of a lot of bodies where Covid-19 precautions had to take place so it took a bigger hit nationally, if I can put it that way, which was really unfortunate. As the Deputy said, one is always conscious of the families involved. One thing involved here is that Covid-19 deaths are natural deaths so unless there was another reason for a post-mortem they would not necessarily have undergone that.

The other issue with this, and the Secretary General has mentioned this a few times, is that there are very specialist skills associated with doing post-mortems and so forth. It is constantly a challenge to recruit and have those skills in place to facilitate the mortuary service. The other issue is that some hospitals offer the service and depending on whether the hospitals are in a position to offer the service, that can increase or decrease the pressure on the Dublin mortuary. We had quite a significant issue in the last few weeks where a couple of hospitals had to stand down, for reasons pertaining to themselves, and the mortuary then took the hit. At one point, we were up to a delay of two weeks in post-mortems. I am pleased to tell the Deputy that as of yesterday, when I was briefed on the matter, we had only nine post-mortems outstanding. Effectively, there is currently no backlog of post-mortems in the Dublin mortuary.

We have a specialist unit now that is concentrating on the coronial service and the mortuary service. A feature of the justice plan for this year is that we intend to look at the overall structure of the system to see how it needs to be structured for the future. Our coronial service was last properly overhauled in 1846, so we probably need to have a look at it. That is very much in our plans for the future. However, at the same time, I have a dedicated and excellent team working on making sure that the current service is maintained and supporting the Dublin coroner, who is independent, in doing her important work.

Excellent. The year 1846 is a small bit before my time.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The Deputy will note that the date is stuck in our head.

I compliment the witnesses on the fact that they are taking this quite seriously and that work has been done. Obviously, they understand the fact that it is an emotive topic.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Absolutely.

In particular, when it happens in Dublin it impacts across the country, given the centralisation of the hospital facilities there. That is good to hear.

I will move to a slightly more controversial matter. As part of our briefing and with regard to the State Claims Agency, there are approximately 2,400 claims outstanding in respect court cases being brought against the Irish Prison Service. Am I right that approximately €3.1 million was paid out in compensation in respect of claims by prisoners in 2020 and there was €1.5 million in compensation and €500,000 in legal costs awarded in respect of in-cell sanitation cases between 2019 and 2020?

To me, that sounds a little unusual. I want to try to get a better understanding from the officials of what is actually going on in that particular case. Obviously, it is quite a large amount of money relating to the Prison Service. Will the officials give us the background if that is possible?

Ms Caron McCaffrey

I can assist the Deputy in that regard. There was a case that went as far as the Supreme Court in regard to the lack of in-cell sanitation in Mountjoy Prison. That case was allowed on appeal and damages in the sum of €7,500 were awarded. The legal costs involved in that case were very significant. The State Claims Agency manages these claims on behalf of the Prison Service. In February 2020, the State Claims Agency put in place a specific scheme to address the number of claims that had been made in this respect. To give an update on the figures, as of now 2,773 claims have been received, of which 2,040 have been concluded, so there has been very good progress in respect of that scheme. An important point to note in regard to the scheme is that damages have been capped at a maximum of €7,500. There are three different categories or levels of compensation depending on whether a person was on a restricted regime and sharing a cell, on an open regime and sharing a cell or in their own cell. Importantly, the legal costs have also been capped and that relates to the level of award that is granted. The maximum legal costs that will be paid in respect of a claim is €1,700 and the minimum for compensation awards at the lower end of the scheme is €1,000.

It has been a very successful scheme. Certainly, if we look at the legal costs that were attached to the original case that was litigated in the courts, the expenditure is far less than that. The State Claims Agency at the beginning of the process in regard to in-cell sanitation claims put a contingent liability of €37.7 million against the claims. Now, because of the success of the scheme, it looks like the liability to the State will be in the order of €15 million. Therefore, the scheme that has been put in place has been very successful. There has been good engagement with both plaintiffs and their solicitors and the expectation is that that scheme will be concluded, hopefully, before the end of this year.

It is good to at least have certainty in regard to where all of that is going but €15 million is a very large amount of money and I have to say this cannot be accepted.

Ms Caron McCaffrey

A point to make is that there has been massive investment in the prison estate to bring it up to standard. Some €150 million has been invested in the last ten years to put in-cell sanitation into Mountjoy, which was the biggest facility. We now have a construction project in Limerick which will eliminate the small number who continue to not have access to an in-cell toilet. A significant amount of progress has been made.

Thank you. I want to make one final point. The pandemic obviously brought about an enormous change in the requirements of policing in Ireland and the work the Department had to do in order to adjust to facilitate that. One observation is that I felt there was a significant rise in the level of substance use by younger members of society in Ireland, which is extraordinarily concerning to me, particularly when it comes to the use of what we would consider class A drugs, such as cocaine, among young members of society. I am hearing about a lot of usage by teenagers and this has been reported to me through my constituency office. This is extremely concerning.

I want to put on record that this is something we need to try to get some degree of control over. I do not wish to put across the position that this can be eliminated and, obviously, it cannot be. However, it is the case, unfortunately, that drug use is rampant in Ireland, particularly among younger members of society. While that is a topic of much debate, when it comes to more serious drugs it is a huge concern. The Department has to try to find more useful ways and, instead of trying to put people in prison, to try to guide young people away from substance abuse and drug use. It needs to find more proactive ways of getting people off the streets and away from dealing drugs. That is very important. We need to re-evaluate this through education programmes, rather than the stick approach, which, unfortunately, is not working.

Gardaí are under immense pressure and finding it very difficult to deal with gang-related crime, which has been an issue in Ireland over a long number of years. I want to make the point to the Department, the Secretary General, the assistant secretary general and all of the officials here that we have a lot of work to do to prevent people from ending up in prison and in situations of addiction. Unfortunately, from what I have seen and what I have heard through my office, this is a huge problem that is going to have huge knock-on consequences for people's mental health and the growth and development of young people in Ireland in general.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would endorse that absolutely. The Department is a very active participant in the national drugs strategy that is led by the Department of Health. That health-led approach is something we are very committed to and the Garda probably outlined to the committee its increased use of the adult caution scheme in regard to this, rather than criminalising people. Obviously, gardaí enforce this area very strictly in regard to large-scale importation and so forth. They have had a lot of success over the last couple of years and I am sure recent events will help to support that. In terms of street-level activity and young people, the health-led approach is something we are completely committed to.

Before we finish, I would like to ask about the budget for the domestic violence refuges. There are nine counties, including Laois and Offaly, that do not have even a single bed, despite all of the attendant difficulties which public representatives and others come across. What is the current situation with the budget? Am I correct to say there are only 140 beds in the State? That is very low.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think it is around that. That remit is under the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and Tusla at the moment but it is coming to us under the Government's new strategy.

Has it fully transferred over?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

It is coming.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. We have a very detailed interdepartmental group that we are leading on in order to develop the provision going forward. We hope to make some progress on that. The strategy will be finalised in the coming weeks.

Is there any indication of what kind of budget there is for providing new beds?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will have to leave that to the Minister in regard to the strategy launch, if that is okay.

I understand the Istanbul Convention recommended that for a State with 4.9 million people there should be 490 beds. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will have to come back to the Chairman on the numbers, although Mr. O’Sullivan may be familiar with that. There is a view under the Istanbul Convention as to how many beds, what distance and all that kind of thing. When it comes down to the practice, it is not 100% as straightforward as that. I agree there is an under-provision at the moment and we will be working on that. We are committed to making a huge difference on this.

It is a huge problem in the nine counties, and Laois and Offaly are the counties I am most familiar with. When victims of domestic violence leave, often taking children with them, they are sent 60 or 70 miles away across two or three counties to a refuge. Their children are taken away from schools, from social workers and, very importantly, from family support, the GP and all other services. It creates chaos, and that is the only way I can describe it. It is making it difficult for people to leave those situations. Even in genuine cases of domestic violence, unfortunately, victims often make their way back, hoping things will change. There is always that hope.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I want to confirm that the Chairman is right on the number: there are 141 units at present.

I ask the Department to come back to us with a note on the plan for rolling out domestic violence refuges in those nine counties. Offaly has a different plan, by the way, although I do not want to go into it in detail. Offaly has a plan that involves three locations and it is trying to operate a different system for domestic violence. That is the plan going forward and it has been shared with me. Nonetheless, we badly need one refuge for the two counties of Laois and Offaly.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

One of the difficulties up to this point in time has been the system. The State has been overly reliant on very committed people in local communities. The State has to step into this to some degree and make sure that consistent provision is there across the whole country.

The domestic violence services are there but with all the advice, information and supports they give, they are absolutely stretched to the limit. They got some extra money recently, which is welcome, but we are overdrawn on people's goodwill.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

That is all I would say to Ms McPhillips. We need to provide those spaces.

I would say the same to Ms McPhillips with restorative justice. Do not let it all get bogged down in bureaucracy in the Department. I first raised this issue in 1999. It is going on too long. Other people have raised it as well. We need to get on and do it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Chairman will understand - not to be defensive - that we have not had responsibility for refuges up to this point in time.

I know that. The Department is getting it though.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are, and we are hoping to make a difference there. Our colleagues are doing their best as well. It has been a difficult space, there is no question.

I would be grateful if Ms McPhillips could give us some projections on progress on it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

I thank the witnesses of both the Prison Service and the Department of Justice and thank their staff for the work involved in preparing for today's meeting. I also thank the Comptroller and Auditor General and his staff for attending and assisting the committee. Is it agreed that we request the clerk to the committee to seek any follow-up information and carry out actions agreed at the meeting? Agreed. Is it agreed that we note and publish the opening statements and the briefing provided for today's meeting? Agreed.

With the agreement of the committee, we will resume in private session after lunch to deal briefly with some housekeeping matters before moving into public session to deal with correspondence and other business of the committee. I would bring to the attention of the committee that there is a substantial amount of correspondence today.

The witnesses withdrew.
Sitting suspended at 12.31 p.m. and resumed in private session at 1.32 p.m.
Barr
Roinn