Garda Síochána (Compensation) Bill 2021: Second Stage

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister of State at the Department of Justice (Deputy James Browne)

I am delighted to introduce the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Bill 2021 to the House on behalf of the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, and look forward to hearing the contributions from Senators. This Bill is aimed at replacing the Garda compensation scheme that is currently in operation with a new statutory scheme that will reduce the waiting times and costs associated with claims for malicious injury to gardaí or their family members. The key aims of the Bill are to reduce the length of time it takes for Garda compensation claims to be dealt with from the initial application through to award, to ensure settlement and resolution of claims can be reached earlier in the process and to set out clear time limits relating to each stage of the process. It also aims to reduce the number of applications proceeding to court by allowing for the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, PIAB, to assess quantum in the first instance, which will in turn reduce the legal and administrative costs associated with the scheme. At present, with backlogs in the High Court, it can take up to four years for a case for Garda compensation to be heard. That results in significant legal costs, which are covered entirely by the State.

Before I move to the provisions of the Bill, I will outline broadly how the new scheme is proposed to operate. The member, or his or her specified dependant in the case of a fatal injury, will apply to the Garda Commissioner for initial assessment of his or her case within six months of the injury. The Garda Commissioner will arrange for a reporting officer to determine if the person is an eligible applicant and, if so, to prepare a written report within a specified time period, to conclude whether the injury or death appears to have been caused as a result of a malicious incident as defined in the Bill. If the report concludes the injury or death appears to have been caused as a result of a malicious incident, the member or his or her specified dependant is entitled to an assessment of compensation.

If the report concludes the injury or death was not caused as a result of a malicious incident, the member can seek an independent review of that finding. An independent review officer will determine whether the finding of a reporting officer should be confirmed or overturned. If overturned, the member is entitled to an assessment of compensation.

Where a member is entitled to an assessment of compensation, the Garda Commissioner will arrange for an application to be made to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board on his or her behalf. PIAB will process the application in accordance with the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act of 2003, as amended, and will make an assessment by reference to the personal injury guidelines. If either party rejects it, the applicant will receive authorisation from the Personal Injuries Assessment Board to proceed to court. The State Claims Agency will manage the court proceedings on behalf of the Garda Commissioner.

I will now turn the detail of the Bill. The Bill is divided into seven Parts and I will outline its key provisions. Part 1 sets out the Title of the Bill and other legislation that the Bill interacts with and provides for commencement orders for the coming into force of the Bill once enacted. It sets out the relevant definitions for the Bill, including the key definitions of "malicious incident" and "member".

The current Acts make a distinction between injuries of a minor and non-minor nature. This Bill removes this distinction and ensures all injuries inflicted as a result of a malicious incident are covered by this scheme. The transitional arrangements that will apply to applications received prior to the commencement of the scheme are set out in section 5. For those applications where a determination on whether a member has been maliciously injured has not yet been made in my Department, these applications will fall under the new process as outlined in this Bill. In cases where the Minister has given authorisation for an application for compensation to proceed to the High Court, those claims will proceed as if the 1941 to 1945 Acts have not been repealed, and applications already initiated in the High Court will remain there. In other words, there will be no change for these proceedings.

Part 2 deals with the application for initial assessment to the Garda Commissioner. The applicant is defined in section 8 and may make an application to the Garda Commissioner specified in section 9. It captures all persons previously permitted to make claims under the 1941 to 1945 Acts. Section 10 states the time limit for making an application, which is six months from the date of the injury or knowledge of the injury, with provision made for late applications in certain circumstances.

Part 3 sets out the appointment of a reporting officer to assess an application. The criteria for the preliminary examination and the determination of an application are detailed in this Part as well. It gives clear timeframes for the completion of a determination, which is four months, with the possibility of an extension of a further two months. Where a determination is made that the application can proceed to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, it sets a timeframe of 30 days for the Garda Commissioner to make the application on behalf of the applicant.

Part 4 provides for the procedures for the independent review process, the creation of a review panel for independent assessment, the criteria for the preparation of a report and clear timelines for the process. The time limit for making an application is 30 days from the date of notice issued to the applicant set out in section 16. A review officer will have three months within which to either make a determination to either confirm or set aside the original decision issued.

Part 5 sets out the application and amendment of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act of 2003. It permits the assessment of quantum by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board in Garda compensation cases and provides for the application of the cost provisions in that Act. It allows for certain modifications to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act of 2003 for Garda claims to facilitate the new process. However, the process for acceptance or rejection of an assessment by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board will apply in the same way that it does for other personal injuries actions. This means that where either the applicant or the Garda Commissioner rejects an assessment, an authorisation will issue to the applicant to lodge a claim in the relevant court.

Part 6 sets out the particulars where proceedings are being brought on foot of an authorisation by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board under the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act of 2003. The court will assess whether the injury or death, as the case may be, was the result of a malicious incident, and it will also assess the level of compensation. This Bill mirrors the criteria set out in the Garda Compensation Acts 1941 to 1945, while including the requirement to have regard to the personal injuries guidelines, which will streamline cases with ordinary personal injury claims.

This part does not mention which court the proceedings should be lodged to. This is to allow for the bringing of proceedings to a court which has monetary jurisdiction for the claim, thereby removing the need for all Garda compensation claims to be brought before the High Court. For example, if a Garda member wishes to claim €10,000 in compensation, they may now make their application to the District Court instead of the High Court.

Part 7 sets out miscellaneous provisions of the Bill, including providing for certain amendments to legislation to update reference to the Garda Síochána Compensation Acts 1941 to 1945.

In conclusion, this Bill fulfils the commitment made to change procedures for Garda compensation claims and updates the current scheme to streamline applications. It overhauls the process while retaining the parameters of the current Acts to ensure those that can apply and the criteria for consideration of assessments remain. I think we can all agree that this Bill will streamline the way in which compensation claims by members of An Garda Síochána are dealt with and it will reduce the administrative costs and legal fees associated with the current system, as well as ensuring that gardaí and their families can get access to compensation in a simpler and more efficient process. I look forward to hearing the views today and I commend the Bill to the House.

Senator Gerry Horkan

I am not going to repeat everything in the Minister of State's speech and the briefing notes, given he has already very well articulated the purpose of this Bill. As a party, Fianna Fáil, the party of Government, supports this Government legislation which is effectively bringing Garda compensation claims within the remit of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, PIAB. As a former member of the finance committee, which often discussed the cost of insurance, I know much of the cost of the process was not about what the person due the compensation was getting and much of it was caught up in administrative costs, legal fees and so on. I accept that if some people are members of the legal profession and they were making good money out of this, perhaps they might not be overly impressed with some of this legislation. However, from a State perspective and from an applicant’s perspective, anything that ensures those who are putting forward their claims can do it in a more efficient and timely way - and in a way that gets them their compensation more quickly as they are entitled to - and also streamlines the process on behalf of the State, is positive.

The Bill is aimed at decreasing the length of time it takes to dispose of a Garda compensation claim from initial application to award by providing for clear time limits in regard to each stage of the process. The new process is aimed at ensuring that avenues for a settlement and resolution are available at the earliest possible stage and that cases do not end up before the courts and are not necessarily dealt with by the High Court where the amounts claimed in compensation could be awarded by a lower court. Provisions in regard to legal costs penalties for failure to settle or for choosing the wrong level of court will now apply to Garda compensation claims in the same way that they apply to other personal injuries schemes.

I welcome this legislation. There was a commitment that this would be done. In his speech, the Minister of State gave a very good summary of the legislation in his last few paragraphs. It is about updating the current process to streamline applications. It overhauls the process while retaining the parameters of the current Acts to ensure those that can apply and the criteria for consideration of assessments remain.

I say this as somebody whose grandfather was a member of the An Garda Síochána for a very long time - almost all of his career. I certainly want to see people who are injured and who have a legitimate claim get the compensation they are entitled to in a quick and fair manner, and that they are not dragged through a long, drawn-out process when that does not need to be the case. The reason there is a compensation claim in the first place was because there was some level of injury and those people have already suffered enough. Let us make sure they get what they are entitled to more quickly and efficiently, and that we do not end up having a lot of unnecessary legal costs and unnecessary time spent in delay to get what they are entitled to. I commend this Bill to the House.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Róisín Garvey)

Senators Michael McDowell and Gerard Craughwell are sharing time. I call Senator McDowell.

Senator Michael McDowell

I welcome the legislation and it is timely that it should be brought into operation. As a barrister, as a Minister and as Attorney General, it struck me that the previous legislation was well past its sell-by date and had many defects in it. It is good to have one simple method whereby members of An Garda Síochána who are entitled to compensation have a clear path to compensation which is not strewn with obstacles or unnecessary expense.

Second, it seems to me the legislation is designed to, and probably will, achieve greater fairness as between members of the Garda. It was my experience, and I make no criticism of anybody in this, that some members of An Garda Síochána got more for their injuries than others simply because of the attitude or disposition of the judge before whom the case came to be decided in the High Court. Some judges were effusive in their support for An Garda Síochána and tended to express that in the level of awards they made, whereas other judges were pulling back a little to try to be objective and to look at it in simple terms, comparable to other members of the public who suffered similar-type injuries. From that point of view, it is a good idea that the scheme of this Bill will, in effect, ensure there is a degree of standardisation of approach by reason of the PIAB aspect of the matter and also by reference to the newly installed personal injuries guidelines.

I would make the point that some cognisance has to be taken of the fact that a broken leg is one thing, but a broken leg maliciously caused to a person by the driving of a car at a member of An Garda Síochána can have a very different psychological effect on the member. I hope the legislation, when it is through these Houses, makes it very clear that the psychological trauma associated with many injuries is fully maintained, and it is not just simply a matter of a broken leg due to falling down a stairs or in a public house equating to somebody who has a car driven at him or her and has sustained a broken leg in those circumstances.

There is one other thing I want to mention. I notice that the Bill proposes to extend its coverage to Criminal Assets Bureau members, who, I understand, are not members of An Garda Síochána but operate arising out of the same functions that they carry out under the criminal assets legislation. I support that, of course, but the one thing I would query is the complete exclusion of civilian staff of An Garda Síochána from the remit of the Bill. It seems to me that, going forward, we will have a situation where many technical functions associated with criminal investigations now carried out by members of An Garda Síochána will also be carried out by civilian employees or staff members of An Garda Síochána. I notice they are excluded from the term “member” for the purposes of the legislation. It occurs to me that it may be they will find themselves on the wrong end of criminal violence and threats made against them in the future, for example, scenes of crime investigators or people who are handling the administrative side of An Garda Síochána who could come under intimidation from organised crime and the like. I just raise the issue as to whether it is entirely wise to exclude them from a scheme of compensation, given they may be in the firing line, even though they are not technically members of An Garda Síochána. I ask the Minister of State to consider that point. I can see there are probably complexities going either way in this regard.

It seems to me that if there is malice directed towards, and injury inflicted on, a civilian employee of An Garda Síochána by reason of his or her occupation as such, a major distinction should not be drawn between that employee and members of the force, as properly described.

The final point I want to make is that I very much welcome that members of the Garda Reserve are included in the provisions of this legislation. We must get the reserve up and running again. It has been allowed to fall into a state of semi-redundancy and it needs to be revitalised.

Senator Gerard P. Craughwell

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the Seanad for the debate. There are very few occupations in this country where a person goes out to work and is never sure whether he or she will come home or, as my colleague, Senator McDowell, has pointed out, whether he or she may come home with a broken leg and that may only be the outward symbol of what happened. There are vicious attacks every day of the week on members of An Garda Síochána. In 2020, more than 200 such attacks took place. A significant number of members of the force have given their lives in the course of their duty.

There is one only regrettable part of the Bill that I see, namely, the provision that if a person does not go through the PIAB and instead decides to go to the courts, where a reward that is lower than what was on offer is given, he or she will be caught for full court fees. I understand why that provision is there but it will act, in effect, as a sort of a gun to people's head. I hope that when injuries are assessed, it is done based on the occupation of the individuals and the risks to their lives they undertook in going to work each day. I welcome the Bill and I hope it leads to speedy settlements. My brother, who, sadly, is not with us anymore, suffered horrendous injuries while serving as a member of An Garda Síochána. He had to wait meet many years for a settlement to come through. That should never be the case. If the Bill expedites that process, it will be a good thing.

Senator Barry Ward

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit agus roimh an mBille chomh maith. Tá a fhios agam nach mbeidh gach aturnae agus gach abhcóide sa Stát sásta leis an mBille ach, ag an am céanna, feicim an fáth go bhfuil sé ann. I understand the relevance of this Bill and the reason it is being introduced. In my profession, I have seen instances in which gardaí have had to react to violent circumstances, such as when a melee breaks out. Where members of An Garda Síochána are present in such situations, people turn to them, expecting them to react and solve the problem. There is no amount anyone could pay me to be the person to whom people turn to resolve the melee, the violence or whatever it is. I put on the record my extraordinary admiration for the work An Garda Síochána does and for the harm in which ordinary members put themselves while doing their job. It is not to be underestimated by any of us here.

That said, it always has seemed strange to me that there was a separate stream for compensation for gardaí. There was a list in the High Court that was set apart from other personal injuries matters, whereby gardaí had to go through a different process from that applying to ordinary citizens to get recompense for injuries they may have suffered, particularly in the course of what amounts to a workplace accident, albeit in extraordinary circumstances. "Incident" might be a better word than "accident" as the Bill refers to a "malicious incident" in one of the earlier sections. It also seems strange that there are so many Acts governing this issue and even this Bill to undo all of that is very weighty. It is substantial legislation and, as I said, I understand the intention behind it.

Notwithstanding that, there are parts of the Bill with which I have a difficulty, one of which Senator McDowell has outlined. An issue we have pushed in this House and as policy of Government is the civilianisation of certain functions of An Garda Síochána. We want to do away with a situation where a garda who might be very experienced, who has gone through the training regime of Templemore and all the other things that go with that and who, having put himself or herself through all of that to be a qualified person on the street, in a detective role or whatever it might be, ends up filling out passport forms or something like that. This is a terribly wasteful use of the resource that is members of An Garda Síochána. We all agree that we should move towards a situation where those roles are civilianised and there are administrators within An Garda Síochána who carry out that work, thereby reducing the administrative burden on the members who have gone through the qualification process.

It is difficult to say to a person sitting behind the desk in a Garda station when somebody comes in, kicks off and the person is assaulted, that he or she, sitting behind the desk, is somehow not in the same category as the person wearing the Garda uniform who is sitting 3 ft from him or her in the public office or another office inside the station. How can we ask people to be part of a civilian administration within An Garda Síochána while telling them they will not be accorded the same minium standards we are giving to gardaí in protecting their rights and providing compensation in the event of a malicious incident that resulted in injury to them? It does not make sense that any person working within An Garda Síochána, whether in a front-line role or otherwise, would not be covered by this legislation under the definition of "member" in section 2. Will the Minister of State give consideration to whether the scope of the Bill can be expanded to include all of those people?

It is welcome that the definition of "malicious incident" in section 2(1) includes former members. That is very important because it gives full scope to the Bill in terms of those who have worked as members of An Garda Síochána. I welcome that the definition goes beyond the strict parameters of someone who is wearing a uniform or whatever it might be.

We should not underestimate the effort that has gone into the Bill. The Minister of State has indicated that it will save costs, which is, of course, important. Notwithstanding that I am a practising barrister - the Minister of State is not currently practising but we have been in court together in the past - I do, of course, endorse the effort to reduce the State's legal bill in whatever way is practicable, not with a view to penalising people but with the aim of streamlining the process. This Bill undoubtedly does that. Effort, time and expense went into the generation of the legislation by way of the time given by officials and all the other processes that had to be gone through. I may be straying slightly from the subject of the Bill here but it strikes me as incongruous, therefore, that we have a situation whereby criminal legal aid has not been restored. I realise this comes under the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform but it is a justice issue. It is a matter the Department of Justice should highlight because it is creating problems within the criminal justice system that are equally important to tackle as those addressed in these provisions. Legal practitioners are still dealing with a massive cut, of more than a third in almost every case, in the legal aid that is available to them under the criminal legal aid scheme. This means that barristers and solicitors, both new and existing practitioners, are leaving that area of the law in favour of other areas in which they can make a sustainable living. It is incongruous that this problem persists given all the effort, time and attention that has been given to the issue on which the legislation focuses. I am not denigrating its importance, which I recognise, but there are other issues that are equally important to address. As someone who practises in the criminal area, I would even say they are more important. This is an area in which the Department of Justice should equally say to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform that there is an issue that needs to be addressed.

The streamlining process set out in the Bill reduces the time and cost to the State. There is no benefit to the people who are injured in having a lengthy, more complex or more expensive legal process. It makes sense to engage the services of the PIAB in addressing these issues. Previously, a Garda compensation claim had to go through the list in the High Court, thereby raising the level of that case beyond what it might necessarily warrant. It is appropriate now that the full spectrum of court jurisdictions are available to people who seek compensation. On the whole, therefore, I welcome the Bill. Its provisions make sense. I hope the Minister of State will take on board what I said about criminal legal aid and other gaps there may be in the provisions. I look forward to the passage of the Bill through the House.

Senator Paul Gavan

I welcome the Minister of State. Sinn Féin will support this Bill, which repeals and replaces the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Acts 1941 and 1945, which are the basis for dealing with Garda compensation claims. The main aim of the Bill is to provide a new compensation scheme for malicious injuries, including fatal injury inflicted upon gardaí in the course of their duties. I acknowledge that it is designed to make the claims process easier and, we hope, quicker for those who need to use it. It will be less expensive for the State while maintaining the parameters of the right to compensation for gardaí or their dependants.

It also seeks to ensure that settlement and resolution of claims can be reached earlier in the process. The present compensation scheme allows for an injured member, or in the case of death their specified dependents, to make an application to the Minister for authorisation to apply to the High Court for compensation. Most actions proceed on a no-fault basis and both parties require legal representation in the High Court. The costs arising from this are borne entirely by the State.

This Bill provides for an application to be made to the Garda Commissioner, who appoints a reporting officer to determine if the applicant is eligible under the Bill and whether the injury is a result of a malicious incident. If the report confirms it is malicious, an application is made to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, PIAB, by the Commissioner. When an assessment is made by PIAB, it can be accepted or rejected by either party. Where it is rejected, PIAB will issue an authorisation to the applicant to lodge court proceedings. While in the past the State took full responsibility for court costs, this changes with this Bill and the applicant may have to cover legal costs. That is where there are concerns about the Bill. If the Garda Commissioner makes the application on behalf of the Garda member and the claim is managed by the State Claims Agency, it could result in the member feeling powerless or distanced in the initial application stage. I hope that is not how it will transpire for most claimants but it is a concern. They can reject the PIAB assessment if they do not agree with it, but they will then have to pay the legal fees to pursue the application further.

We have to consider that claimants may not feel comfortable engaging with the system and would prefer to engage with a solicitor and go through the courts. Many solicitors say this is because claims are complex and cannot be detailed accurately through PIAB, and this may also be true for members of the Garda when a malicious incident affects their ability to return to work or leads to circumstances deemed too complex to be dealt with by PIAB. Due to their day-to-day work, gardaí are vulnerable to being injured in road collisions or while helping the public, or to being targeted because of their work. The State needs to be prepared to support gardaí.

I acknowledge that saving money and speeding up the compensation system are important, but they should not be the only guiding factors when it comes to assisting injured members of An Garda Síochána. However, we will support the Bill as we appreciate what is trying to be achieved. It has been a constructive debate so far and I was struck by the points made by Senators Ward and McDowell. We look forward to further debate and perhaps some amendments on Committee Stage.

Senator Mark Wall

I welcome the Minister of State. I thank An Garda Síochána for the work it does every day in all our communities. In recent days with St. Patrick's Day parades, etc., we have seen the work gardaí do in our communities and it must always be recognised. As Senator Craughwell has said, over 200 attacks took place in 2020, which indicates how much compensation we need to give to An Garda Síochána for the work its members do and how much thanks we need to give those members every time they put on that uniform and head out through the door.

The Bill is to replace the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Acts 1941 and 1945. Those Acts provide for compensation in respect of death or injury which is maliciously inflicted upon a member of An Garda Síochána while on duty or in connection with their duties. The current scheme operates on the basis that an injured member, or specified dependants in the case of death, may apply to the Minister for Justice for authorisation to apply to the High Court for compensation in respect of the injury received. This Bill aims to reduce the length of time it takes for Garda members, or their dependants in the case of the death of a member, to have their application for compensation dealt with from initial application through to award by providing for clear timelines in relation to each stage of the process. The new process will ensure that avenues for settlement and resolution are available at the earliest possible stage to reduce the number of applications that progress to court. The functions carried out by the Minister for Justice in assessing claims at the initial stage will be transferred to the Garda Commissioner, who will arrange for the making of an initial assessment of whether a member has been injured as a result of a malicious incident. There is a mechanism whereby decisions taken at the initial assessment stage can be reviewed by an independent review officer to be appointed from a panel established by the Minister for Justice, should the assessment conclude that the member was not injured as a result of a malicious incident or is not eligible to apply under the Bill.

I agree with the Minister of State that this Bill will streamline the way in which compensation claims by members of An Garda Síochána are dealt with and will reduce the administrative costs and legal fees associated with the current system, as well as ensuring that gardaí and their families can get compensation in a simpler and more efficient process. I look forward to further stages and working through it with the Minister of State.

Senator Jerry Buttimer

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. This is important legislation. We should remember we are talking about men and women of An Garda Síochána who serve to protect us all. If we ever doubt the value of the role of members of the Garda, we saw it in Covid and see it every day. Senator McDowell made a telling reference to a broken leg and the maliciousness thereof, and extrapolated that out to the types of injuries members receive every day and have received.

Men and women of An Garda Síochána who have been injured in the line of duty will provide harrowing account of their experiences, in some cases involving the death of a colleague or injury to themselves or a colleague. We all welcome the streamlining of the compensatory process but this is about front-line men and women who protect us and who are called at the worst and the best of times. I hope there will be no procrastination, roadblocks or obfuscation concerning the compensatory process. My colleague and friend, Senator Ward, made a telling point on the civilianisation of An Garda Síochána in terms of front-of-office workers, who were also referred to by Senator McDowell. In Cork, with which I am familiar, civilians who work in the front-of-office space should not be treated differently from members in terms of what is being put forward. We have all long advocated the need for civilianisation of roles to free up members of An Garda Síochána for front-line duty. Administrative roles are important but we cannot have a two-tier situation involving people working in public offices or public spaces. It is a concern many of us have about what we are debating.

This is important and timely legislation. We are making it a simple process. Senator McDowell spoke about the pathway to compensation. It is important that there is equity and fairness in the compensation process and in the model of delivery for members of An Garda Síochána. I hope we do it in a transparent and open way. This morning we heard the testimony of a young girl injured in an accident who was unhappy with the amount of money she was awarded in her compensation claim. She was knocked down in a horrific accident on her way to school. The psychological effects and trauma suffered by men and women of An Garda Síochána in the line of duty should not be forgotten and should be at the forefront of what we do.

Mar fhocal scoir, I thank members of An Garda Síochána for their work. It was a mistake that we did not prioritise their vaccination in the heat and teeth of Covid but we have been tremendously served by that body since its formation and the foundation of the State. I hope we continue to support its work. We owe its members a debt of gratitude for what they do for us every day.

Senator Michael McDowell

Before the Minister of State replies I ask him to deal with one question. Is it the case that for the first time there will be an appeal from the High Court decision? There was not, until now. In other words, the State or An Garda Síochána could appeal.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Róisín Garvey)

On a point of information, the Senator is not in order but I would like the Minister of State to have the opportunity to reply now to the entire debate.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice (Deputy James Browne)

I thank the Senators for their contributions and the broad support they have provided. I acknowledge the huge work that is done by members of An Garda Síochána in putting their lives at risk on a daily basis, as a number of Senators pointed out. Indeed, Senator Craughwell pointed out that this is one profession where when you go out you do not if you are going to return home. They have done tremendous work. Let us reflect on the pandemic and what the Garda did then not just in enforcing peace and safety but the community work on a daily basis, reaching out throughout Ireland and ensuring that people were safe. Yesterday I was in Rosslare Europort for five hours. I spent considerable time with members of An Garda Síochána down there who are on the front line dealing with the very traumatic and tragic situation of Ukrainians arriving in the port. I witnessed their humanitarian approach. While they have legal duties to fulfil, they behaved in a compassionate manner and showed their understanding of these people who were very distressed and tired arriving after a long journey from Ukraine to Rosslare, which takes 24 hours on a boat from France. This Bill provides a new fit-for-purpose Garda compensation scheme. Importantly what it will do is help reduce the time that gardaí face at the moment when seeking justifiable compensation when they have been maliciously injured on the front line. It will also reduce the cost of administering the scheme. That is important so that we can get a more streamlined, effective scheme in place that reduces the stress of An Garda Síochána members but also reduces the cost to the State. It does this by setting out clear timeframes for each stage to ensure there is a swift resolution of the claims made.

The Bill also provides more time for applicants. It increases the time to make an application from three to six months. Not having to make a decision so quickly gives the gardaí more opportunity to assess the situation in which they have found themselves. Use of PIAB for assessing the award for Garda compensation also ensures that there is now an independent assessment. As Senator McDowell pointed out, it will also ensure greater consistency of awards across the board. The guidelines that PIAB has will also assist in that regard.

It is hoped that this Bill will mean that the majority of cases will be resolved without the need of court proceedings, which, in turn, will reduce the level of stress and the level of legal costs to the State and increase the speed of resolution. With recourse to the lower courts now available rather than the necessity to bring each claim before the High Court, it will mean a lower level of costs associated with some of the claims that need to proceed to court. This is an important change.

I wish to signal that the Minister may bring forward one or two small technical amendments to this Bill on Committee Stage. The amendments relate to the application forms to be prescribed by the Minister for Justice. It may not be desirable to have a requirement for these forms to be prescribed by regulation as it will be subject to change each time the PIAB form changes and, therefore, a technical amendment may be brought to remove the requirement to prescribe these forms by way of regulation.

I thank Senators for their contributions. I welcome Senator Horkan's support and the acknowledgement of the importance of getting this compensation for An Garda Síochána without delay. I have responded to a number of comments by Senator McDowell. In regard to civilian staff, a point raised by Senators McDowell and Buttimer, they are not included in the provisions of the Bill, nor are they included under the current provisions of the Acts of 1941 to 1945. This is due to the fact that they are not engaged in front-line policing, which carries with it an increased risk of injury or death on duty in comparison with other types of policing duties. I acknowledge that there is an increased civilianisation of An Garda Síochána. Increasingly, roles are being given to members of the staff so it will certainly be kept under consideration. I will bring this to the attention of the Minister.

An appeal is possible under this legislation.

Senator Michael McDowell

That is new.

Deputy James Browne

We can continue to give that consideration.

In response to Senator Craughwell, one of the key distinctions with this is that generally speaking it is for no-fault applications. Psychological injury very much is taken into account.

I acknowledge Senator Ward welcoming this and for pointing out the increased civilianisation. This is something we need to keep an eye on. The Senator also welcomed the inclusion of former members. As he rightly pointed out, the Department of Justice does not have any role in criminal legal aid restoration. He is factually correct that there has been a one third-plus cut that has not been restored to members of the legal profession whereas cuts have been restored to almost every other sector of society. While I have no role in that matter I will certainly bring it to the attention of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The Senator also welcomed the full spectrum of court jurisdictions being available, which is important.

Senator Gavan also recognised that this will be quicker and easier for those who need compensation and welcomed that for An Garda Síochána. Senator Wall also welcomed this and Senator Buttimer acknowledged the front-line role of An Garda Síochána. I welcome the support of Senators for this Bill. I acknowledge the couple of matters that need to be given further consideration. I will bring those to the attention of the Minister.

Sitting suspended at 5.37 p.m. and resumed at 6.15 p.m.

Cuireadh an Dáil ar fionraí ar 5.37 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 6.15 p.m.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 22 Mar 2022