asked the Minister for Justice if he will make a statement indicating the moneys provided for the probation and welfare service for each of the years 1984 to 1987 inclusive, in 1988 to date and the amount estimated for 1989, indicating the number of personnel employed in the probation and welfare service for each of the same years; if he will make a statement on the trend indicated and the level of service being provided during the current year by this service; an assessment on the resources of the service for 1989; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Probation and Welfare Service.
8.
Expenditure incurred in respect of services provided by the Probation and Welfare Service in the period 1984 to 1987 was as follows: £3.928 million in 1984; £4.5 million in 1985; £5.37 million in 1986 and £5.436 million in 1987. £5.749 million has been provided for 1988 and expenditure up to the end of October amounted to £4.719 million. The estimate provision for 1989 is £5.903 million.
The number of persons serving in all grades in the probation and welfare service during the period 1984 to 1987 was as follows: 205 in 1984; 211 in 1985; 207 in 1986 and 208 in 1987. The number of serving staff at present is 192.
I have no reason to believe that staffing levels in 1989 will fall significantly below their present numbers.
Notwithstanding the reduction in staffing levels in the current year the probation and welfare service continue to meet the demands being placed upon them.
Would the Minister agree that it is a cause of concern that their excellent work — and I want to pay a tribute to the work being done by the Probation and Welfare Service — showing an appreciable reduction in numbers, from 208 down to 192, and likely to remain the same in 1989, represents a very serious lack in a most valuable and essential service? Is the Minister not concerned that the level of service needed so much, of probation and welfare officers, must be affected in the level of service being offered those people who need it? Is it not a fact that the Estimates for 1989 show a reduction of 2 per cent in the provision being made available for the Probation and Welfare Service? Would the Minister not agree that it is really outrageous that such an essential social service should be adversely affected in that way?
The Deputy will be aware that the Probation and Welfare Service, like so many other services, are subject to Government policy on staffing and recruitment. The bulk of reduction in staff numbers since the beginning of 1988 is attributable to staff — 12 of them — taking career breaks for which there is no automatic replacement. Staff retiring or resigning from the service may be replaced by staff returning from career breaks or by the redeployment of staff from other areas of the public service. So far no replacements suitable for redeployment on probation and welfare service work have been assigned to the Probation and Welfare Service. The number of career breaks staff, two, who have returned to the service during the year have been minimal. Should staffing levels reduce further and the workload from the courts continue at its present level or show an increase, consideration may have to be given to a redeployment of resources within the Probation and Welfare Service.
Would the Minister not agree that that constitutes a very unwise policy decision particularly at a time when it is costing between £20,000 and £30,000 to maintain a prisoner in prison, when one sees in the Estimates a reduction of between 2 per cent and 3 per cent for community services orders and 2 per cent for the Probation and Welfare Service, one area in which there should be an increase in revenue rather than a reduction in order to save on the other side? Furthermore would the Minister not agree that this is an area in which the Fianna Fáil Government have failed miserably to produce any proposals in regard to alternatives to custody? Furthermore, would he not agree that the staff in the Probation and Welfare Service — whose dedication has to be admired, as Deputy Taylor said earlier — despite the hazards under which they work continuously deserve much more support and resources in order to save taxpayers by there being fewer people locked up in prisons and more community service orders being used under the auspices of the Probation and Welfare Service?
With regard to that part of Deputy Barrett's supplementary question which deals with alternatives to custoday, I have already indicated to the House some couple of months ago that the operation of the community service orders scheme is being monitored by my Department. As yet it is too soon to say whether the scope of the legislation ought to be extended in order to provide for the greater use of community service orders. I want to assure the Deputy and the House that the matter is being considered.
It appears the Minister is getting no support from his Cabinet colleagues.
With regard to the difficulties obtaining in respect of staffing levels for the Probation and Welfare Service, I have acknowledged the fact that, in recent times, staff numbers have declined and, since the beginning of 1988, there have been 12 staff taking career breaks. We just cannot get people to replace them. I wish they did not go and that I could stop them.