Irish Prison Service.

Mr. Coveney

I would appreciate being told when two and a half minutes are up to permit me to share time with my colleague, Deputy Stanton. Hopefully, I will receive a slightly more detailed response than did Deputy Cowley.

We are concerned about Fort Mitchel, Spike Island, which is a prison facility established in 1985. It is a closed, medium-security prison for the detention of young males aged between 16 and 24 years. While it can hold up to 102 inmates, there are 93 there at present. Of these, 20 are under the age of 18.

Fort Mitchel has built a reputation over the last decade for its excellent prison education and rehabilitation programmes. Some 85% of prisoners participate in an education programme with good exam results each year. Some 45 inmates completed the drug awareness programme last year while 37 completed the pre-release programme. There is also a post-release programme of which the Minister is probably aware. There are 93 prison officers at the prison and 17 teachers, many of whom have taught there since 1986.

What sum has been involved in capital expenditure to develop Spike Island in the last five years? How can the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform reconcile that expenditure with the threat to close the facility on 1 January? Can the Minister explain where the prisoners will go should he not get his way and, if the worst having come to the worst, the prison closes? Will they go to Limerick? They will not be able to take their education programme there as it is sponsored in part by the VEC in Cork. Obviously, it cannot shift to Limerick seamlessly. Where will the prison officers go should the prison close?

What has happened in respect of the new wing in Cork Prison which the former Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, turned the sod for less than two years ago? It has been promised on many occasions on and off the record.

What is the Minister's strategy on Fort Mitchel? Is it purely a game of hardball to frighten the life out of prison officers and their families to ensure that they agree to his demands on overtime and pay? If so, is the Minister to refuse to sit down and negotiate in a civilised manner with the prison officers over the coming weeks?

Mr. Stanton

I welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to the House. This is a serious issue and it would have been better if we could have had a more interactive question and answer session. This issue is so serious that it has the potential to be a disaster if things go wrong. I wish the Minister well in his endeavours to resolve the problem and I call on all sides to sit down and negotiate realistically to reach a solution. There is too much at stake not to do that. It is too serious and too important for everybody involved.

What will happen now? Does the Minister have any answers with regard to the students? Does he realise that this facility in Cork has been very successful over the years in the education and rehabilitation programmes Deputy Coveney outlined? Over 20 years experience has been built up at Fort Mitchel and there are quite a number of teachers working there who are very experienced in dealing with the prison population. They are committed to working at the prison. I call on the Department, the Irish Prison Service and the prison officers to ensure that all this is not lost.

The inmates of the prison are mainly from the south and it will be very difficult for their families if they are transferred to other parts of the country. I also wish to point out to the Minister the implications for the local economy, though that is a side issue. It has already been hit very hard by closures of industry in the area. Fort Mitchel is one of the largest employers in Cobh and we will see other job losses in the area if the prison is closed. If the prison is closed now, it will be very difficult to reopen. The State has invested a large amount of money there over the years.

I look forward to hearing the Minister's contribution. One of the major problems in our prisons is drugs. Fort Mitchel is largely drug free and it would be a shame to lose that ethos. There is a great deal at stake nationally and locally. We do not want to see what has been built up over the years being lost. We want to see a resolution to this problem. I support the Minister in his endeavours to resolve the matter, but he must be careful. I call on the prison officers to step back also, to get around the table and to thrash this out away from the glare of the media spotlight. The debate should not take place in the media where people tend to adopt strong positions. I realise the Minister has provided a window of opportunity which is open until the middle of December and I hope and pray the issue can be resolved before then. I wish the Minister and the prison officers well. Let us hope the Minister has some good news for us tonight with regard to the future of the young people who are locked away.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. McDowell)

I thank the Deputies for raising this issue and I start by making it clear that I, personally, do not want to close or even mothball Fort Mitchel Place of Detention. However, if the Prison Officers' Association is unwilling to agree reasonable terms for the operation of prisons on an economically sustainable basis, it is a course I will reluctantly have to pursue. The responsibility for the choice which must be made rests entirely with the association.

The background to much of this discussion is already known to Deputies. If we cannot get agreement on new working arrangements with prison staff, the Government will have to take action on the unsustainable cost structure in the Prison Service. The Government decided yesterday that it will, in the absence of agreement, mothball Fort Mitchel, Spike Island, and the Curragh Place of Detention from 1 January 2004.

Fort Mitchel is a medium-security institution and its population is drawn largely from the Munster area, as Deputies have said. The prison's population is predominantly young and in the late teen to mid-20s age group. As of this morning, there were 91 prisoners in custody though the prison can accommodate 102. If this scenario comes into effect, it is intended that the prisoners in Fort Mitchel will, in the main, be transferred to Cork and Limerick prisons and to St. Patrick's Institution.

The newly-built block in Limerick Prison has room for up to 100 prisoners and could potentially accommodate all of the current Fort Mitchel population. However, it would not be a simple case of moving the population of the prison as a unit to Limerick. Some prisoners would be more suitable for St. Patrick's Institution in Dublin. Some movement of existing prisoners from Cork Prison to Limerick is also likely, which would in turn facilitate the placement of some of the Fort Mitchel population in Cork. While the majority of Fort Mitchel prisoners will be moved to Limerick, each case will be looked at individually to effect a transfer which is most appropriate. It is intended that all transfers will take place close together, as staff transfers will take place at the same time. There are currently 94 staff serving at Fort Mitchel.

The mothballing of the place of detention at Fort Mitchel will temporarily reduce the number of spaces available to the Irish Prison Service by a total of 102. However, this is almost exactly cancelled out by bringing into commission of new accommodation in Limerick. The re-deployment of staff from Fort Mitchel will allow this to happen. In terms of regime, there will be no major difference in the level of security under which the prisoners are held. They will move from one closed institution to another and, in many cases, the move will be to a more modern facility, so their conditions will be at least equivalent to those experienced in Fort Mitchel.

I read with considerable sympathy the views of teachers regarding the excellent facilities in Fort Mitchel and concerns that prisoners will not get the same opportunities elsewhere. However, while I fully acknowledge that excellent work is being done in Fort Mitchel in terms of education and other types of activities, I emphasise that the prisoners will continue to have opportunities available to them to continue their development in their new institution. For example, the regime in St. Patrick's Institution is considered by experts to be a model of its kind.

I fully appreciate the entirely understandable concern of the teachers regarding their posts in Fort Mitchel and, in this context, I repeat what I said yesterday. However, the teachers and the TUI, which represents them, should express their concerns to the POA, as it is its reluctance to engage in meaningful negotiations that has led us to where we are now. It insists on a regime in the prisons which is no longer sustainable. I have stated already that I do not want to close Fort Mitchel or any other institution. However, if the POA leaves me no option, I am clear on what course of action must be followed.

I must reiterate that this action is not being taken lightly. It will be done solely because the Irish Prison Service cannot continue to spend public money feeding an overtime culture which has gone completely out of control and is sustaining grossly inefficient work practices. Fort Mitchel prison should have a future in the Irish Prison Service. I say to the Deputies and anyone else who is listening that prison staff have it in their power to save these institutions. However, they must make a choice. To date they have rejected all reasonable efforts to involve them in negotiations. The Deputies challenged me to meet them out of the public eye in a non-confrontational manner and I will do so. As I told the POA at its annual conference, I will take any step necessary to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion. However, no one should underestimate the Government's determination that this matter will be addressed this year because next year no money will be made available to feed the outrageous and scandalous overtime culture in the Irish Prison Service which has existed heretofore.

With any goodwill which is available, it will be possible to achieve agreement on sensible work practices and an annualised hours system, which is good for staff and the Prison Service as a whole. I assure the Deputies that, in that event, Fort Mitchel will resume its role as a closed prison. However, the choice is one which falls to the Prison Officers' Association and I will assist it to make it. However, my resolve should not be doubted or underestimated. The end has come for the existing overtime culture.

Mr. Crawford

I thank the Minister for taking this debate in the House.

I seek clarification of what the Minister meant when he announced that Loughan House, County Cavan, and Shelton Abbey, County Wicklow, will be run by an outside agency. Loughan House has accommodation for 85 inmates and employs 45 personnel at all levels. It costs approximately €63,000 per annum to maintain a prisoner there, compared with €207,000 in Portlaoise.

Can the Minister explain why one of the most effective prisons in terms of cost as well as training, is now under threat? Most of the 45 staff live and work in this hard-pressed area and if they are forced to move to other prisons, it will have a major effect on schools, churches and sports clubs.

In spite of the peace process, the Government has failed to provide decentralisation and other job opportunities along the Border. Loughan House authorities work with the VEC and FÁS to provide certified courses in forklift driving, hoists, safe-pass, driving theory tests and so on. Some 47 inmates received their safe-pass certificates recently. They also carried out training in alcohol awareness and money and budgeting advice and a number of inmates are working on farms.

The Taoiseach is visiting County Cavan on Friday and I trust that he will use the opportunity to show a commitment to the Border region and to Loughan House in particular. He must not allow the Minister or anyone else to remove this important open prison and its staff. Most of the staff have been there for 20 years and have their roots there. Some eight or ten years ago, there was anxiety in the region in regard to prisoners not being properly controlled. However, with good management and co-operation with the local community, there are no longer any such anxieties. I dread to think what would happen if any inexperienced personnel are put in place or, worse, if the Garda Síochána, which is already under severe pressure, must be used to replace the prison staff.

I wish the Minister well in his negotiations. I am genuinely angry that Loughan House should be abandoned and would appreciate anything he can do to retain it.

Mr. B. Smith

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this important issue. I am glad the Minister has been in a position to attend and respond to the debate. The Minister has quite correctly stated that the overtime regime in the Irish Prison Service must change. Every prison officer to whom I have spoken in recent months, recognises that the present regime is unsustainable and there must be major changes. Likewise, prison officers agree there are too many restrictive practices which must change too. In the present deadlocked position, one way in which to move forward is to engage the services of the Labour Relations Commission. I hope it is possible for the Minister, his Department and the Irish Prison Service to engage with the Prison Officers Association through the State's industrial relations machinery.

Last night, I spoke to members of the POA who hold positions within the organisation and they told me they are willing to negotiate through that machinery. Since the Minister's appointment, he has correctly pointed out the need to upgrade many of the existing prison facilities. Some of the conditions are Dickensian to say the least and the Minister has identified the need to spend capital funding on upgrading facilities. This is essential, not just for the prison population, but for the prison staff who are working in out-dated conditions.

As Deputy Crawford pointed out, I am familiar with Loughan House too. Since the early 1970s, the institution has played a key and positive role in the penal service. It has consistently been the most cost-effective prison in the State for some time for which I commend the governor, Mr. Brennan, and his staff. The staff are committed to the prison and to their local community. They want to see Loughan House remain as a detention centre and retain its present status. Loughan House, under the auspices of County Cavan vocational education committee, has an education centre where a dedicated, highly-skilled staff give of themselves positively to their pupils, the prison population. Many of those who have availed of the education services have achieved FETAC and ECDL awards despite having come with little or no education in the first place. The education centre has advanced technology and equipment which was provided over the past few years.

I had the opportunity to visit Loughan House on a number of occasions, with the Ceann Comhairle, Deputy O'Hanlon, and Ministers who came to visit the centre. Its facilities have been upgraded over the past decade. I look forward to it remaining as a place of detention. I hope the Minister will visit it in the new year to announce an extension.

Mr. McDowell

I am grateful to the two Deputies who raised this matter. Open centres play an important role in our penal system and will continue to do so. They provide a necessary alternative for dealing with those prisoners for whom the traditional high walls and internal restrictions are not appropriate. In open centres, prisoners are not locked into their rooms at night. Reliance is placed on them not to abscond and there are few restrictions on their movements in the prison complex. As a regime, it represents the closest thing the Prison Service can offer to conditions on the outside. The overall focus is one of either preparation for release of prisoners coming to the end of their sentence or the containment of prisoners considered a low security risk but not yet suitable for release.

I support the work open centres do and acknowledge the efforts put in by many people in Loughan House and Shelton Abbey over the years. I go further and say that I see an enhanced role for the open centre in the criminal justice system. In an ideal world, we should be looking at more open regimes, either separately or as self-contained elements within larger institutions on a model like that of the Grove in Castlerea where prisoners are accommodated in self-contained houses. However, we are not in an ideal world. We are prevented, by the millstone of excessive and unnecessary overtime, from doing the things for which people inside and outside the system have been calling for years, including ending slopping out in our oldest prisons – the Dickensian practice to which Deputy Smith referred – and providing better quality accommodation in our open centres. In the current circumstances the money is just not there to set about this work because almost all our capital expenditure is being cannibalised for overtime.

As of this morning, there were 52 prisoners in Shelton Abbey – there is a capacity of 56 – predominantly drawn from the Dublin-Leinster area although people from any part of the country could be housed there. In the main they are serving sentences of one year or less. Some 41 prison officers are employed there. Loughan House currently has 74 prisoners – there is a capacity of 85 – many of whom are from the western and north-western areas of the country. Again the sentences are short to medium in the main. Loughan House is the place of employment of 45 officers. There will be no job losses as prison officers from both institutions will be reallocated to other prisons to reduce pressure on overtime. There will be no closure of either institution. The decision the Government took yesterday is to move these facilities out of the control of the Prison Service. This is one of the measures which will be necessary if agreement cannot be reached with the POA by the end of the year.

My Department is carefully examining the exact arrangements which need to be put in place to give effect to this decision. This will entail detailed consideration of what best meets offenders' needs and the needs of the Irish Prison Service. I assure Deputies of two things, first, the transfer must go ahead in the absence of an agreement on the new annualised hours working arrangements for the Prison Service and, second, whatever is put in place, offenders will not be disadvantaged by the move. I envisage offenders in these centres enjoying the same conditions which currently prevail.

I am perfectly content for these open centres to continue to be operated by the Prison Service and staffed by prison officers, provided it is done on a sensible, reasonable and effective basis. That is simply not the case at present, and it will never be the case as long as the existing inefficient work practices and unsustainable overtime culture continue. In some respects the open centres, vital though their role and objectives are, illustrate the unsustainability of the present system, with staffing levels more appropriate to a closed prison.

I want the POA to agree to a reasonable and sustainable cost structure for the operation of our prisons and open centres. I want prison officers to continue to man Loughan House and Shelton Abbey. I want to move forward on the basis of consensus. If that is not possible, I will proceed, as soon as possible, with arrangements for the alternative management of the open centres and with the other measures I have outlined elsewhere. I will bring the prison officers there to places which at the moment require high overtime in order that the amount of overtime required to be worked will be reduced.

The Prison Officers' Association has the power to create the circumstances in which its members can continue to have employment opportunities at open centres such as Shelton Abbey and Loughan House. The POA can choose to rule itself in or rule itself out of a role in open centres. It has, effectively, six weeks in which to make that choice. I am not making the choice for them, they will make the choice – I want everybody in the House and all local Deputies to understand clearly that it is their choice, and I will accept whatever solution they offer me.

If they say we must continue with the overtime culture which prohibits places like Loughan house from being manned by prison officers, I will accept that and act accordingly, and staff it with other people. If, on the other hand, they say they will finally sit down and address the overtime culture with me, and ask in exchange that they continue to man Loughan House and Shelton Abbey, I will be the happiest Minister in the House and will accept them at their word. The Prison Officers' Association has power to make a decision. One thing I will make clear to both Cavan Deputies, and the Ceann Comhairle if it is of interest to him, is that Loughan House and Shelton Abbey will remain open centres whatever the prison officers choose.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 12 Nov 2003