asked the Minister for Justice the projected cost of prison overtime for 1986; the estimated cost in 1987; the total number of prison staff serving on 1 June 1986; and the projected number on 1 June 1987.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Prison Overtime.
6.
The projected outturn for prison service overtime in 1986 is £13.40 million, inclusive of £741,152 arising under the terms of a "special" pay award to prison service staff.
The total number of prison service staff serving on 1 June 1986 was 1,615.
The allocation for prison service overtime in 1987 and the authorised staffing levels for 1987 will be determined in the context of decisions on next year's financial provisions for the prison service.
It is time that the Minister openly stated his position on overtime and gave the numbers working within the prison service. Is the Minister satisfied with the overtime figure for 1987 of between £10 million and £14 million? Almost 500 people could be taken on within the prison service if the Minister made a commitment and faced this problem realistically which he has not done up to now. Why has there been such a delay in reviewing the rostering system with automatic built-in overtime costing £5 million? Compulsory overtime is not wanted by prison staff. Has the Minister set a deadline for the completion of these negotiations? This matter needs urgent attention. In a recent reply to me the Minister indicated that these discussions were particularly controversial.
The Deputy cannot make a speech on each part of his question.
I could not get the exact information I required. I would like to know what the Minister's position is because it is unsatisfactory that we are heading towards 1987 with the Minister taking the easy way out saying that he cannot——
The Deputy has asked a question and he should await the answer.
First of all, I would like to make the point to Deputy Wallace that I have already dealt with the first part of his question during the course of the debate on the Supplementary Estimates in this House a short while ago. For the sake of clarity I will repeat what I said on that occasion, that calculations which divide the total overtime bill by average pay to give one a figure of 500 extra staff — I think I am quoting almost the exact words I used — are so far from reality as to be meaningless. The second point raised by the Deputy has to do with discussions on rostering not only in relation to the particular problem he raises of built-in overtime but to rostering generally. I did not at any stage say that those discussions were particularly controversial. I said they were going on in the context of the conciliation machinery and that, therefore, discussions which go on in that context under the terms of the scheme must remain confidential. I would have no other difficulty in discussing those matters with the Deputy. Finally, because I appreciate the difficulties which arise in relation to overtime working in the prison service and because the Government have agreed with that view I recently secured Government sanction for the creation of an additional 184 posts in the prison service most of whom I hope to have recruited by the end of this year.
Can the Minister give me an assurance that that will be the position? We are told that interviews took place last January for the recruitment of the officers he has just referred to and they are still not working within the prison service.
The Deputy is under some misapprehension. Interviews took place last January for the recruitment of people to the prison service because there is, in any case, an ongoing need to replace those who retire or leave for any other reason. In addition, there has been a recent decision to recruit an extra net 184 officers to the prison service. As I have said, recruitment is continuing with regard to that extra batch and I would hope that the vast majority of these will have been recruited by the end of the year.
Can the Minister tell the House the amount of income tax recouped by the Government in relation to the overtime payments?
That is a separate question and is a matter for another Minister.
Would the Minister accept that the real reason they were not recruited is one of economics rather than anything else?
That is a separate question and with all due respect to the Deputy it is one of the more fanciful questions I have ever heard in this House.
Would the Minister get on to Question No. 7, please.
It is reality and the Minister knows it.