I welcome the delegation from the Garda vetting unit. I am increasingly concerned about the system the Garda is operating. If a convicted paedophile from somewhere in Europe came to Ireland seeking employment and did not reveal where he or she had worked previously, there would be no international check carried out. That concerns me. In the context of putting together vetting systems — please correct me if I am wrong — there has not been interaction or co-ordination with other police forces using similar systems across the world to ensure we have the best possible system in place. What research has been done before the systems were set up? What police forces have been visited and consulted to see how their systems work? I would have expected by now that across Europe there would be an inter-agency co-operative vetting system in place, accessible by police forces across Europe through their computer systems. I would have thought based on available technology, that would be a fairly basic system to have.
With the proximity of the State to Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, I would have thought we would have in place by now an exchange of information and access to computers. We have a free travel zone between Ireland, the North and the rest of the United Kingdom. There is free movement for people seeking employment right across Europe; all research shows this happens in particular between Ireland and the UK. I would have thought in the interests of protecting children there would by now be a compiled list of convicted sexual offenders for both islands which, when a vetting application is made, could be consulted. I would like to know what movement is being made in that direction.
Is there some body in existence which is co-ordinating police forces across Europe on this? If the systems do not exist they should be put in place. I am familiar with Interpol and how it works. It seems to me that if we know of someone who has definitively come from a foreign country, it is possible to vet and check him or her using Interpol but, by and large, it is not done. There has been a significant influx of people to this country, 10% of our population are now non-Irish nationals. That makes it of greater importance that there is international co-operation in this area. Looking beyond Europe, I would like to know what, if any, level of international co-operation exists.
How is the PULSE system working in this regard? I recollect when it first started there were teething problems and I would like to know how well it is working. Are all convicted sex offenders in the State, and not just those that have been convicted since 2004, entered on the PULSE system? In the context of those who have been prosecuted and found not guilty of any offence, in particular a sexual offence, what is the nature of the record that is maintained? Is it that someone has been prosecuted and found not guilty, or is it more detailed than that? One of the concerns of this committee is to ensure that children that could be abused are protected. A second concern is to ensure that people are not, as a consequence of false allegations of child sexual abuse, cut off from the right to employment. How does the system ensure that if someone has been wrongly accused of an offence, the accusation does not end up forming part of his or her record for the rest of his or her life?
The remit of this committee is in the area of child protection and children, it does not go beyond that. Deputy Noonan raised the issue of the amount of time it takes to carry out a background check. There have been a number of Dáil questions — some of which have been distributed in our briefing today — about this where Deputies have expressed concern. If someone seeks the job of teacher, or is about to be recruited as a swimming coach, or is about to be appointed to a local parish and inquiries are made, is there within the PULSE system readily identifiable and isolated the names of individuals who are convicted sex offenders? Or is it lost in a morass of those convicted for parking offences? Say, for example, I apply for a job tomorrow morning involving children. As far as I can recollect I have never been convicted of a parking offence. However, suppose five or ten years ago, I forgot to pay a parking fine and the court issued a missive telling me I have to pay €100 or do a month in prison. In that and other instances are people who are fined for parking offences featuring in the PULSE system? Could someone who seeks a job working with children find himself or herself with a negative response because he or she is down as having been in receipt of a conviction for something of a minor nature that has nothing to do with his or her capacity to care for children?
The comment was made to one of the previous questioners that, by and large, this is dealt with by way of checking the PULSE system. I presume it is all dealt with now using PULSE and not some paper trail, can the Garda confirm if that is so? The Garda has also said that only where there is what is described as "soft information" on the PULSE system is the matter sent back to local gardaí to get information. I am a little confused about that. My understanding is that the PULSE system only carries either convictions or unsuccessful prosecutions. If that is the case, what is the soft information on the system and from whom does it come? To what extent is it validated before it is put on the system? Say, for example, someone has a neighbour with whom he or she has had a row about an overhanging tree and the neighbour is embittered and decides he or she is going to get revenge. Suppose the embittered neighbour contacts the Garda saying the person next door is abusing his children. Would that appear on the PULSE system?
What co-ordination exists between the Garda and the HSE with regard to the vetting operation that is in place? I understand that if the HSE wants to employ someone it may seek information on vetting from the Garda. However, what is the situation where a child is taken into care by the HSE because there is an allegation that the child has been sexually or physically abused in the home?
Where there is a court decision taking the child into care in civil child care proceedings based on a court finding that the child has been the victim of abuse, is any of that information put on the PULSE system? If I apply as a teacher for a job to teach in a school, and my children have been taken into care because I physically abuse them, will I get through the vetting system because that information is not on the system? These are serious issues. I am sorry for asking so many questions.
I wish to come to an issue that is of particular concern to members of the committee in the work we are doing and then I wish to deal briefly with one other issue. The remit of this committee is to look at the need for a constitutional amendment to facilitate a vetting system being put in place that does contain soft information. We have yet to define exactly what that is and how the system will work. Leaving aside for a moment that the Assistant Garda Commissioner, Michael McCarthy, has said there is some sort of soft information on the system, the sort of information this envisages certainly would not be required to have been the subject of criminal prosecution. It would be information, perhaps, where there was a concern from people in a position of authority who deal with children that someone might pose a risk to children without them being certain about it. What is going on within the Garda vetting unit to look at what type of system could be put in place to implement a comprehensive soft information vetting system? Is that compatible with the PULSE computer system? I suspect it may not be. Could the existing programmes cope with that or would something new be required? Has there been any preparation to put in place the something new, so to speak.
To my knowledge more than 14,500 applications have been made to the Residential Institutions Redress Board on behalf of adults who, as children, were the victims of institutional abuse. Some of those who perpetrated the abuse have been convicted in our courts over the past ten years, some have died and some have never been the subject of criminal prosecution. In the context of every application made to the redress board, the institution within which the individuals resided has been given the opportunity to facilitate the redress board by providing information to it to confirm whether the individual concerned was resident in that institution and whether the person who is alleged to have abused them was an employee of that institution or a member of the religious order concerned. In the majority of applications made to the redress board the veracity of what has been alleged has been accepted. There are many individuals who have abused children in institutional care over the decades who have not been the subject of criminal prosecution. The adults, who were the unfortunate children of the time, are getting compensation through the redress board.
Is any information provided by the redress board to the Garda vetting unit to identify those who the redress board has accepted have perpetrated abuse on young people? I do not believe the redress board legislation makes statutory provision for that. I emphasise this is not the fault of the Garda Síochána or the vetting unit. It appears to me that if some people who have been abusing children, as a consequence of which they have sought redress from the redress board, are either no longer in religious life or were employees of religious orders running institutions and who today are seeking employment with children, a vetting system if it is to function properly needs to be able to incorporate within it information about those individuals. Is that an issue that has come before the Garda vetting unit so far? If the redress board legislation were amended to facilitate the board furnishing the names of individuals to the Garda Síochána, would the PULSE system cope, based on the existing programmes incorporating that information into it?
