I welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to whom I wish to put a question before we commence. Does the Supplementary Estimate for the Office of the Chief State Solicitor come under the Minister's remit?
Estimates for Public Services 2005.
Vote 20 — Garda Síochána (Supplementary).
No, it comes under that of the Department of the Taoiseach.
The purpose of today's meeting is to seek approval for a net Supplementary Estimate of €13.7 million for the justice Vote group, which represents 0.7% of the original provision for the group. The need for additional funding arises in respect of one of the justice Votes only, namely, the Garda Síochána Vote, where an additional €31.7 million is required. This amounts to 2.9% of the original provision for the Vote in question.
Savings as well as appropriations-in-aid in respect of the Votes for prisons and the Courts Service — of €13 million and €5 million, respectively — will be surrendered at year end and will reduce the total Exchequer requirement for the justice group to the net €13.7 million sought in this Supplementary Estimate.
The saving in the prisons Vote has arisen due to reductions in overtime as a result of strict overtime budgets being implemented in 2005 and other payroll savings. Four prisons commenced the new annualised hours method of working in November 2005 and the others will move to this system in February 2006. I am pleased to inform the committee that further savings are projected from this improved system of working, as well as from the introduction of modern technology and a dedicated prison escorts corps. Surplus receipts of €1.5 million in appropriations-in-aid have also contributed to the savings in the prisons Vote. This is a result of the sale of part of the lands at Shanganagh Prison in Shankhill to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and the sale of two other properties, one in Manorhamilton, County Leitrim, and the other in Cabra, Dublin.
The savings in respect of the Courts Service is due to a surplus in appropriations-in-aid for 2005 of €5 million, which is mainly due to the collection of arrears by a number of offices. This excess is a once-off occurrence and will not recur in 2006. The current position is that all offices have filed accounts up to date and will, moving into 2006, continue to do so.
The year end outturn for Vote 20 for the Garda Síochána is likely to be €47.186 million in excess of that provided in the original Estimate. However, this amount will be offset by savings on some subheads amounting to €10.486 million and additional receipts of some €5 million, leaving a net requirement of €31.7 million.
On subhead A1, salaries, wages and allowances, I am seeking to increase the provision by €7.5 million. As the committee will be aware, I announced that the Garda Síochána launched Operation Anvil this year. This was one of the most intensive special policing operations undertaken in the State and was aimed at those involved in gun crime of any kind in the Dublin metropolitan region. It provided for approximately 15,000 additional hours overtime each week for gardaí in the Dublin area. This expenditure was additional and did not adversely affect existing agreed overtime allocations across the Garda divisions, including those for the Dublin metropolitan division.
Operation Anvil involved: divisional uniform and detective patrols throughout the region, backed up by national units; overt and covert operations; mobile and foot patrols; random checkpoints at specific locations; searches; executions of warrants; and the gathering and collation of high quality intelligence. It was focused, sustained, targeted and relentless.
I have made provision in the 2006 Estimates for the continuation of Operation Anvil as long as it is deemed necessary to operational policing and, even more significantly, have asked the Commissioner to extend it to Garda divisions outside the Dublin metropolitan division.
On subheads A2, A3, A7, B, D and H, which concern travel and subsistence, incidental expenses, consultancy services, clothing and accessories, transport and witnesses' expenses, I propose an increase of €8.486 million to cover additional expenditure.
On subhead A5, office machinery and other office supplies, I am seeking to increase provision by €4.7 million, arising from costs associated with IT support for the establishment of the Garda information service centre, Castlebar, as well as increased costs of existing and additional software licences.
On subhead A8, station services, I propose to increase provision by €5 million. Increases in utility and cleaning charges during the year resulted in expenditure on those services being considerably higher than the estimated provision. This subhead has been under pressure for several years and I am glad that significantly increased funding has been provided for this and other subheads in the 2006 Estimates. Arguably, they had been very conservatively stated in previous years.
On subhead F, I am requesting an increased provision of €2.2 million to provide for the making of a down payment regarding the purchase of a new EC135 helicopter for the Garda air support unit. This new helicopter will replace the existing Squirrel helicopter, which has been in operation since 1997.
On subhead G, I wish to increase provision by €13.7 million to bring the full-year figure to €216.14 million. That additional provision is to meet the cost of a higher than anticipated rate of retirement from the force. Members of the Garda Síochána can retire with full pension benefits at 50 years of age, once they have completed 30 years of approved service. Members at sergeant and garda rank must retire at 57 and those of other ranks must do so at 60. In 2005, it is estimated that there will be 465 retirements — 366 voluntary and 99 compulsory, after reaching 57 or 60 years of age, respectively.
Notwithstanding the number of retirements, I assure the committee that the commitment in the programme for Government to increase the strength of the force to 14,000 on a phased basis is fully on target. That phased increase will lead to a combined strength of attested gardaí and recruits in training of 14,000 by the end of 2006 — this time next year — with a fully attested body of 14,000 by 2008. It is simply incorrect for anyone to suggest that the recruitment of the additional 2,000 gardaí is not proceeding at maximum speed. Equally, it is entirely wrong to suggest that the rate of gardaí retiring from the force is outstripping or keeping pace with the rate of incoming recruits. To nail that falsehood once and for all, despite the 465 projected retirements, the actual strength is 12,292, which is an all-time high. No amount of game-playing by others can gainsay that.
Get out the door.
I could read the exact text. Perhaps some members have not yet had their Weetabix.
I hope that the Minister does not have indigestion.
I anticipate that savings will amount to €10.486 million. They include €2 million as a result of delays by OPW in submitting invoices for work done on the maintenance of Garda premises. Since it has not been pressing me for payment, I have some spare money. They also include €7.986 million on communications and the balance of €500,000 on Garda SMI. Added to those, I am allowing for the transfer of €5 million from unanticipated receipts that came in under the appropriations subhead.
When these savings and additional receipts, which total €15.486 million, are offset against the additional expenditure of €47.186 million, the net additional amount sought in the Garda Vote is €31.7 million. That must be offset against the savings on other Votes, which is why we are seeking €13.7 million overall for the justice Votes.
As members are aware from our Estimates discussions during the past three years, my approach to budgetary and expenditure management in the justice and equality area is to maintain a focus at a macro level on the Vote group. I do this with the concurrence of the Minister for Finance because it enables me to make adjustments, should circumstances so warrant, to expenditure across subheads and across the five Votes. Garda superannuation is a major budgetary item on the Garda Vote; this year the spend will be €216 million. It is demand driven for the reasons I outlined earlier in that gardaí have considerable scope for personal discretion as to when they take superannuation. As such, it is difficult to predict at Estimates time what the likely outtum will be for the succeeding year. Had the pensions bill for this year not materialised to the extent that it has, however, the requirement for additional funding for the Vote group would in all likelihood not have arisen.
The net effect of this flexibility is, as I indicated at the outset, that the additional Exchequer funding I am seeking for the Vote group is €13.7 million, or 0.7%, of the total budget allocation of almost €2 billion for the group.
I commend this Supplementary Estimate to the committee and would be glad to answer questions on it.
Much of the extra money required relates to additional overtime for the Garda Síochána. I am not opposed to this if such overtime is necessary and is used effectively. One of the major reasons for the extra overtime, however, is that the Garda is so short of numbers. The Minister admitted that the strength of the force is only 12,292, approximately 1,700 short of the 14,000 committed to before the last election. Although he continues to beat the usual drum, there is progress in that he is at least admitting that the attested strength which was promised will not be attained until 2008. He is at last on song with the Minister for Finance.
The Minister may protest too much in this matter but let us proceed with the actuality of how to cope with the smaller numbers. We must look behind the figures. The Minister talks about nailing a lie regarding retirements. I do not recall anybody telling lies about this issue. Of the estimated 465 retirements for the year, 366 are voluntary. I presume this comprises gardaí who take voluntary retirement.
It refers to gardaí who are not obliged to retire.
They have reached 50 years of age but are not obliged to retire.
It may include a small number who have not even reached retirement age but who opt, for whatever reason, to retire. The bulk of the figure comprises those who are between 50 and 60 years of age.
That is fair enough. Should some assessment be made as to why such experienced members are not willing to remain with the force for a longer period? Whatever about the drumbeat regarding recruits and so on, experienced gardaí who are medically fit must have plenty to offer the force and the public. Is there a case for examining why so many leave before they are obliged to do so? Some type of study should be carried out in respect of this matter.
In regard to middle management, in particular sergeants and inspectors, at what age do inspectors retire? Is it at age 57 or 60?
Inspectors retire at 57 years and superintendents upwards at 60.
Inspectors are often promoted reasonably quickly but sergeants are absolutely essential from the point of view of the running of the force and will be more essential when all the young recruits are attested in due time. Is there a case for raising the retirement age for inspectors and sergeants to 60 years in order that there would be a better chance of retaining those involved in middle management layer for longer? This is a matter that should be considered.
The other issue that arises in regard to the use of the force is whether we are getting the best bang for our buck. I am thinking, in particular, of its availability where and when required. Approximately three years ago, after a pilot project had been put in place, a rostering system was eventually implemented in Cork, Limerick and Waterford. I presume the new system gives a superintendent a better opportunity to allocate members of the force as he or she needs them, when and where he or she believes they are needed. My understanding is that there was to be a follow-up pilot rostering project in Dublin. Will the Minister say what happened to this project in the metropolitan region? Why is there not a modern rostering system for the entire force? Would it not ensure better and more effective use of its members from the point of view of crime prevention and detection?
There are a couple of issues on the other side that I wish to raise, one of which is that of savings on the Garda side. I am unhappy to find that there are savings in the maintenance of Garda premises. While any savings are to be desired, I do not believe so in this instance as there are a number of Garda premises which are a source of concern. The Minister will recollect from his visit to west Cork that the Garda station in Dunmanway is a source of major concern. Rather than accede to savings under the heading of Garda premises, we should go out of our way to ensure as far as possible that any programme to bring Garda premises up to standard is accelerated. I, therefore, urge the Minister to adopt a more proactive approach to ensure moneys are expended to bring Garda premises up to standard because some of them are a disgrace. It is not fair to expect the Garda Síochána to continue to operate in such premises. Neither is it fair on members of the public who have to interface with it in such premises.
It is of some concern that there are substantial savings under the heading of communications and equipment. For once I am not making a political point but I really want to see the equipment of the Garda Síochána brought up to date. On the digital radio project mentioned by the Minister, I am aware something will be rolled out next year. We must take into account the fact that gardaí are operating with dreadful equipment. I will fully support anything we can do to accelerate improvements in Garda communications equipment which is now the butt of almost a standing joke among the criminal fraternity. Furthermore, although the PULSE system is now six years in operation, there are continuing complaints that it is not doing the job it was meant to do, a cause of continuing concern to the Garda. When I see savings under the heading of communications and other equipment, I am concerned that a sufficiently proactive approach has not been adopted to ensure the equipment used by the Garda is fully up to scratch.
I welcome the Minister and his officials.
Undoubtedly, what strikes one when looking at the Supplementary Estimate is the issue which Deputy O'Keeffe spent most time addressing, namely, the extra money spent on overtime payments, superannuation and so on. The figure for overtime payments and related travel comes to approximately €9 million, while the figure for retirement and extra superannuation payments comes to €13.7 million, making a total of €22.7 million, or two thirds of the Supplementary Estimate.
The Minister certainly got the Garda expenditure figures very wrong. It seems strange he should attend and say higher numbers of gardaí than estimated are retiring this year. Indications in respect of voluntary retirements in 2006 would surely have been given sometime during the current year. Is the Minister telling us we are facing a crisis? Figures of 99 and 366 almost give a 1:4 ratio retiring earlier than the due date. In other words, one in four gardaí is retiring before reaching retirement age of 57 years. Clearly, there is a haemorrhage from the force. The Minister is now telling us that the retirement figure is higher than anticipated, even though there was a higher than anticipated retirement rate last year and there has been a very substantial voluntary retirement level before the age of 57 years in recent years.
This begs the question of what is happening in the Garda. Will the Minister explain why two thirds of the Supplementary Estimate will go on overtime and superannuation payments? Clearly, the reason for the overtime payments is that there are not sufficient gardaí to do all the work. Operation Anvil will now involve overtime all the year round. Is that what the Minister is telling us? Operation Anvil began in April last year and was to continue until the end of this year but the Minister is now telling us it will continue into 2006. Accordingly, we will have a special operation continuing on an annual basis.
For the past three years the Minister has made a big issue out of saving money in the Prison Service in overtime payments. It was important to get the rostering system right. However, we are now going down the road of creating huge swathes of Garda overtime payments because, in the first instance, the numbers being recruited are not sufficient.
The sum of €292 million for this year is lower than I would have expected. Replies from the Minister to parliamentary questions suggest that the cost is approximately €365 million. Do we know the actual number of gardaí in the force? The sum of €292 million for the past three and a half years is only a fraction of what was envisaged. All of us expected the majority, if not all, of the 2,000 extra gardaí to be in place by now, particularly in light of the great fanfare by the Minister's party and Fianna Fáil in the election campaign and in their joint policy document issued thereafter.
The Garda Síochána is haemorrhaging those people with the most experience. They are leaving the force at a time when they have been promoted. As Deputy Jim O'Keeffe said, Garda sergeants and inspectors leave at the age of 57 but the rank and file are leaving rapidly. That issue will have to be addressed. There is no way of meeting and maintaining the target of 14,000 to which the Minister referred. It would be impossible to maintain in light of the level of voluntary retirements from the force. It is time the Minister came back to us with a more detailed explanation with regard to what is happening.
Imagine a supplementary budget appearing a week after the original Estimate, two thirds of which is for extra, unanticipated costs for the Garda Síochána in respect of retirements and overtime costs. That is not good enough. To say that everything is hunky-dory is to live in cloud cuckooland and is a refusal to face reality. The most alarming feature of these figures is what is happening in the Garda Síochána. Certainly we will pursue the Minister to give a better indication of what is taking place. It is not a question of trying to find the Minister out in respect of his not delivering on the 2,000 gardaí but of discovering why so many are leaving the Garda Síochána in the first instance and the implications of this in terms of senior management, supervision down the line, skills that were attained and that are being lost, and members of the rank and file who do not see for themselves within the force.
The cut-off point of 57 years of age is wrong because it is neither here nor there. It is too late for a person to do something else at that age. If a person intends to leave the force, it is better not to wait until he or she is 57 years of age and approaching the end of his or her career. It is easy to leave at the age of 50, when one has obtained one's full pension, or something close thereto, and when one would be eminently employable in the security business, which is booming. We know that the private security business is larger than the security forces — the Army and the Garda — under the control of the State. That issue must be addressed and the Minister, having surveyed the position, should provide a set of proposals or a Green Paper on the matter.
Additional funding has been provided for consultancy services arising from the putting in place of the infrastructure to increase the strength of the force to 14,000. I do not understand the need for more consultancy services to find out how that is to be done. If there is extra money, it should be spent on discovering why so many members are leaving the force.
It is extremely alarming to note a huge saving on the secure national digital radio project. The Minister told us in the Dáil only last week that this was well on stream and would be delivered in 2006. Is he now stating that it will not be delivered in 2006 due to savings of €7.986 million on the Tetra system? Are these judicious pairings of the original budget or is it the case that there has been a knock-on effect in respect of the delivery of the system? Are we, therefore, to continue to employ an outdated communications system that is devoid of security and inadequate in the fight against crime, particularly crime of the type that has been in the headlines recently?
I am not satisfied either with regard to the savings on Garda CCTV. I cannot understand how such savings could be made when people are crying out for its introduction. The Minister introduced a half-baked system of community CCTV last year, with a €1 million budget on foot of the failure of the Garda system of which no one seemed to be in charge. Applications seemed to go nowhere and nothing was delivered. Not only are we not progressing Garda CCTV as quickly as anticipated, we are saving money under this subhead. The Garda CCTV system has been around for the past six years and in each of those it has not only failed to be progressed as quickly as anticipated, it has not progressed at all. Why is it not delivering and why establish what has been termed a Mickey Mouse community-based CCTV system, the application forms for which require PhD skills to fill? The forms seem deliberately designed to prevent any poor community from submitting an application. This ridiculous state of affairs demonstrates a complete lack of commitment to CCTV delivery. To tell us that delivery is not progressing as quickly as anticipated is to use the greatest euphemism I have heard in a long time.
Will the Minister give us an idea of the money which was recouped from the sales of facilities in Shanganagh, Manorhamilton and Cabra? Was the facility in Cabra Everton House?
While it is easy to criticise the Minister——
What about the maintenance of Garda stations? Is there not an old Garda station in west Cork that needs some work?
I wish to record my appreciation for the Minister's opening in Bantry last year of a wonderful, state-of-the-art Garda station, which was long overdue. We had been waiting 20 years for it. The Minister also visited the much heralded station in Dunmanway, in respect of which there are certain legal problems. I am glad he has taken a hands-on approach to surmounting the legal difficulties that are delaying the modernisation of that station.
While I do not wish to stray from the Estimates, there are rural policing concerns to be raised. One old chestnut in west Cork is the refurbishment of the Garda station in Schull, which I hope, if possible, will begin next year. A matter of concern was put to me at a community meeting in Dunmanway recently. A GRA representative came out brazenly on that occasion to challenge the Minister and the rest of the Government on the state of Dunmanway Garda station. While that criticism was probably deserved, I was concerned to hear from a community activist that of the six gardaí attached to the station, not one lives in the town. A worrying trend has developed in places such as west Cork, where gardaí travel up to 30 or 40 miles to work. It used to be the case that gardaí in rural areas lived in local stations. In fact, two lived in the station in Castletownbere. I am not being critical of personnel and do not want my remarks to be taken up wrongly but during my lifetime only one superintendent was resident in my home town of Bantry. Superintendents come and go but most commute from as far away as Cork city, a 120 miles return journey. If we are to have community policing, in so far as possible, gardaí should live in the community they police. This confers a status on the village or town in which a garda resides.
Recently, I travelled up the west coast to County Mayo. The Minister and the Department deserve great credit for the work done in the reconstruction of Garda stations. I had occasion to visit the refurbished courthouse on Washington Street, Cork; it is a fantastic job. In fact, I heard a RTE journalist commending the aesthetics of the building.
I commend the Minister on the considerable success of the Garda Síochána in the seizure of drugs. Every week during the past two to three years the Garda has succeeded in confiscating and destroying substantial hauls of drugs, ranging from cocaine, cannabis resin to ecstasy tablets. It deserves our gratitude for its endeavours to tackle the drug epidemic.
I was getting worried that having said so many nice things about the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donovan might apply to join theProgressive Democrats.
I might be pushed out from my party.
I welcome the Minister and his officials. In the course of his address the Minister referred to savings in the prisons Vote arising from the reduction in overtime payments. Has the dispute in the Prisons Service been resolved?
I strongly support the concept of and strategic approach adopted in Operation Anvil. One must have sensible targeting of the major violent criminals because one needs intensive policing to deal with those involved in gangland killings. The murders in Clontarf are but one example of what has been happening in other parts of the city. It was a wake up call for many. I question those who have problems with Operation Anvil about their commitment to fighting serious crime. I am concerned about the 15,000 additional hours overtime, as we need a more consistent and planned response throughout the 12 months of the year to deal with the individuals involved rather than bursts of overtime willy-nilly. Will the Minister give serious consideration to making Operation Anvil a continuing programme and extending it to Garda divisions outside Dublin, as signalled in his address in which he stated he had asked the Commissioner to extend Operation Anvil to Garda divisions outside Dublin. That is a positive development. Which areas will be targeted? For example, will Kilrush and parts of Cork and Limerick city, where there are major immediate problems, be targeted?
It was proposed to increase the strength of the force to 14,000 but the Minister referred to the actual number in the Garda Síochána as 12,292. We all support the recruitment of additional gardaí to bring up to 14,000 the number in the force. Many people ask why they are not visible and where they are. That is the most frequent complaint we hear from people in constituency clinics, and we will have to face that reality. Despite our efforts to support and challenge the Minister regularly in the Dáil on the core question of the 2,000 extra gardaí, 12,292 is a large number to have in the State. I will try to be objective. I would like to know where they are and to ask about the management of gardaí regarding personnel. That is the complaint I hear on the ground. I can see it working in some areas where there are examples of good and efficient management and use of gardaí, particularly on a Friday and Saturday night in parts of Dublin's north side. They target specific areas at certain hours, such as chip shops and pubs known for trouble on Friday and Saturday nights. That is good management, but it does not happen throughout the State, and most complaints I hear concern that. It is a question of management.
Will there be significant money in future for community policing? That is the way forward when it comes to anti-social behaviour. I am sure most of us will have seen the "Prime Time" programme on RTE the other night. In parts of my constituency, that is the reality every day of the week. Many friends of mine must live that seven days and nights a week. It is absolutely disgraceful that people in wheelchairs ring me up from parts of my constituency where gangs kick in doors. When those people seek a response, they cannot get one quickly enough. We hear of the reality described by "Prime Time" every day. Most backbenchers will tell the Minister that, particularly in urban areas.
Will the Minister seriously consider putting extra funding into community policing? We all went on the trip to London, as did some officials of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We saw how they had 380 police in one station, 150 of whom were designated to work in the estates and blocks of flats. Of their eight-hour shifts, they would spend six or seven hours on the streets talking to people in the community. That is the way forward if we are to deal with a small minority engaged in anti-social behaviour and petty crime. However, one also needs Operation Anvil to get at the big guys. Will the Minister ensure he puts extra funding into community policing over the next 12 months?
I welcome the Minister and his officials and commend him on the investment in Templemore Garda College. We see there at first hand the money the Minister and his Department have put into future recruitment of gardaí and enhancing facilities. I remind the Chairman that the committee has yet to visit Templemore, which would be very worthwhile.
I would like to raise the PULSE system under subhead A5. I understand there is additional funding of €4.7 million for the system, but I am aware IT support is needed in all Garda stations, particularly the more modest ones in smaller towns and villages. I note the Minister refers to IT support for the Castlebar centre, but I hope such funding will extend to smaller stations. If gardaí do not have a computer in such stations, they must travel 20 miles to get information they should be able to access there. I hope it will extend further than simply the Castlebar centre.
I know the Minister has made strides regarding the radio system, and perhaps he might furnish us with a timeframe regarding when it will be in place for gardaí. It was recently welcomed by the GRA, something that we all echo. It is badly needed, and I would like a timetable for it.
One of the Minister's main aims regarding the enhancement of the Garda force and its conditions was to provide at least 600 to 700 civilians who would be specialists in forensics or could work as administrators to release trained gardaí for street patrols. I would be interested to know how far we have advanced towards that target of bringing in more civilians specialised in such areas to free gardaí to do the job for which they were trained. I am also interested in the recruitment of non-nationals. What percentage is the Minister seeking in the latest recruitment, which I understand is under way?
Under subhead A8, the Minister mentioned an increase in cleaning services. I hope some of this will be allocated to the Garda college in Templemore where staff are concerned, given the extra accommodation, that cleaning and other maintenance staff will be provided to undertake daily domestic duties.
The Minister mentioned an increased spend on clothing and accessories for the Garda. I am aware of the concerns of members of the force regarding the provision of stab-proof overclothes and bullet-proof vests. The vests they currently use are worn next to the skin and unhygienic in instances where they must be shared with colleagues. It is an issue of concern to the Garda Representative Association and one I hope which will be addressed in this Vote.
There are many questions to address. Several Deputies raised the issue of overtime. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe asked whether the moneys required for extra overtime implied there were insufficient numbers of gardaí. With the exception of the foot and mouth disease outbreak, the percentage of overtime payments in respect of basic and usual payments has always been of the order of 8% to 10%. It is not some huge sum of money that has escalated; it has traditionally been within a band of 10%.
Deputies contend there would be no need for overtime if there were more gardaí. However, it does not work that way. For example, a skilled detective who generally works a seven hour shift may be asked to work 14 hours per day for three weeks because the case on which he or she is working requires his or her attention for that period of time. Even if there were 1 million gardaí in a cupboard somewhere, one could not simply assign one of them to do the extra work the detective in question must undertake. The world does not work that way. That we in this House work very long hours is not an argument for having more Deputies. It is simply a reality that sometimes the job requires us to work 12 hours per day.
In the case of the Garda Síochána, I must pay members for the hours they work. I cannot rely on their goodwill. In a surveillance operation there cannot be a stream of gardaí going in and out of a hidden location where a baddie is under observation, with officers departing at intervals for meals. I must work in the real world.
A southsider would easily be spotted on the northside.
Professional policing always involves overtime and one must be willing to ask members of the force to put in more than the minimum number of working hours for sustained periods.
However, we are talking about additional overtime.
We are still within——
There is overtime and extra overtime.
——the band of 8% to 10% of basic pay. It is important to note that gardaí are entitled to overtime. If the Oireachtas requires members of the force to work long hours, they are entitled to the appropriate payment.
Deputies Costello and McGrath referred to the Prison Service. On becoming Minister, I discovered there was a high ratio of prison officers to prisoners, 1:1. Due to a number of factors, including work practices and agreements, manning levels, technology in the Prison Service and so on, the requirement to work overtime had effectively been mainstreamed. To run the Prison Service vast sums of money were required to be expended on overtime. I confirm to Deputy McGrath that the dispute is over and that by February the annualised hours system will be in operation in all prison institutions. I am very glad we have brought this about. While I am sure it was a bonanza for some prison officers, for many others the collective culture which required them to give up so much of their time to work a great many hours must have been soul destroying.
Has there been a saving on salaries as a consequence of this action?
There certainly will be. This year there has been the payment of a number of lump sums.
It goes down with the number of prisons.
The number of officers is the issue. While there will be a significant saving this year, I will not quantify it now. I imagine that when one removes annual pay increases and the like, it will be of the order of €20 million, if not €25 million.
Given the closures at Shanganagh, the Curragh and Spike Island, there have to be savings. They are three institutions which no longer have to be serviced.
That is not necessarily an issue as the officers involved were transferred to other institutions.
The cost of running the institutions is no longer borne.
I am talking only about payments to officers.
A number of Deputies referred to State pensions for gardaí. Having completed 30 years' service, gardaí are able to retire at the age of 50 years. Up to the rank of inspector, gardaí must retire at the age of 57 years and at higher ranks at 60. There is no haemorrhage from the force in that context. The number of gardaí now leaving, even if one averages it out over three or four years, is a function of the number coming up to the retirement band. For the last three years, between 3% and 4% have retired annually.
What has been the highest number so far?
The highest number was 478 in 2004. This year, we estimate the number will be slightly reduced at 465.
While the Minister will naturally provide a slightly reduced estimate, the numbers represent a very high ratio.
Was it 408 in 2004?
The number was 478.
How many of those were voluntary?
I cannot provide the Deputy with a breakdown now. It is important to understand that members of the Garda have an accrued right at the age of 50 years to retire if it suits them to do so. A number will consider alternative careers and decide at the age of 52 or 53 year on whether they should make the leap from the force or stick with it. It is a decision each garda has to make on personal grounds. While I wish to retain as many in the force for as long as possible to do useful work, I cannot make the decision for them. Deputy O'Keeffe may be interested to know that one of the factors which influences the decisions of gardaí is the State pension. If an officer has built up enough payments to a contributory pension scheme, he or she will get it on top of his or her Garda pension.
Do people seek advice? Do they have to make the decision before their 56th birthday?
That is correct. While I cannot deprive gardaí of this right or suddenly discriminate against them, if a garda wants to accrue sufficient contributions to obtain a full State pension at 65 years, he or she must think in his or her mid-50s about exactly when he or she should leave the force.
We should be confronting this issue.
That is an issue. Others make the decision to go at 53 years to take advantage of good opportunities to embark on other careers. These matters are very difficult to predict.
Will the Minister have someone examine the system? We want to retain gardaí in the force.
I do not wish to scare the GRA but I have thought about trying to determine a way to address the matter. However, it would require negotiation across Government and the consideration of interdepartmental implications. It is slightly worrying that there is an incentive for gardaí to leave the force to obtain the benefit in question. Of course, some wish to leave early for entirely psychological reasons to maintain control of their careers and lives. As they do not wish to reach a day on which they will be told they have to go, they leave two or three years early.
Has a questionnaire ever been circulated to establish the reason gardaí are leaving the force? Attractive employment opportunities have opened up and if members leave the force at age 50 years, they will have good pensions and the option of good careers. If they leave at 57 years, however, they will have left it almost too late to work again.
If I get an amnesty from the committee to conduct research on this issue and if I am not screamed at for employing a consultant——
We will allow one consultant for that work.
It is my intention — and it is contained in the directives the Garda Commissioner received this year — to establish the Garda reserve in 2006. One of the groups targeted will be that comprising retiring members. That leads back to a question raised by Deputy O'Donovan about members of the force living in the areas they police. It is my aim to have gardaí living in every area of the country. A Garda reserve force may be necessary to achieve that. Deputy O'Donovan is correct when he states that people travel distances of 30 or 40 miles to work. The day when a Garda sergeant lived above the station and when his wife acted as the unpaid telephonist while he was out on duty has long since passed. The fact that gardaí policing communities do not live within them has had an impact.
Another issue on which I could elaborate is, for example, the promotional cycle which leads to a certain amount of churning and which means that those at the inspector and superintendent level find themselves going through postings at a rapid rate of knots. This is an issue of concern to the Garda Commissioner. It was stated at the Morris tribunal that people are being posted to areas on a short-term basis. This is a difficult issue because it is easier to talk about the problem than resolve it.
Deputy Jim O'Keeffe referred to the need for a modern rostering system. A degree of flexibility is required in respect of rostering because certain kinds of activities are more prevalent at certain times. Road accident fatalities are a night-time occurrence. When I was going over the figures yesterday with the Commissioner and the assistant commissioner in charge of the road traffic corps, it was frightening to learn that in the region of 40% to 60% of deaths occur when the volume of road traffic is in the region of 3%. That must be taken into account.
Likewise, in regard to public order, in many rural towns there must be a rostering system that gives a sergeant——
The purpose of the roster is to give superintendents flexibility, which they do not have at present.
There is an inflexibility due to the fairly uniform system of rostering. Overtime is one way of circumventing the system.
Did the systems that were introduced in three towns after the pilot project improve the situation?
I will revert to the Deputy on that matter.
There was to be a follow-up and a roll-out in the Dublin metropolitan area.
There is a significant modernisation programme of Garda premises under which €120 million will be spent in a three-year period. Some Garda premises are in a very poor state. The conclusion I have drawn from visiting Garda stations, such as that at Castleisland and the old station — not the temporary structure now in use — in Dunmanway — is that the management of these projects needs to be improved significantly. What usually happens on projects is that the OPW, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the housing section of An Garda Síochána and — when a title or purchase issue is involved — the Office of the Chief State Solicitor operate as four separate agencies. It is not clear to me that we have had clear management responsibility whereby a single person is firmly identified as being answerable regarding a problem, so that if the station is not finished, it is his responsibility.
That man might typify that. The man to whom I spoke was made an offer five years ago, and it has still not been concluded.
In that regard, I can inform the Deputy that when I went there and saw the place and the piece of land over which the title issue arose, I said it must be capable of being settled.
When?
Within approximately four days of my return to Dublin, it had been settled.
It is not settled.
It is settled to my satisfaction.
I am not sure that the deal has been concluded.
I cannot force people to do deals.
They went back and looked for a larger piece of ground than before, so it is totally up in the air again.
The Deputy should not depress me.
Deputy Costello also raised many issues regarding overtime. I stress that overtime is as I have described it. It is not unusual, and it would be a very strange police force that did not operate with such a band of 8% to 10% of overtime payments. It would almost make the police force useless if the Commissioner and I did not have such flexibility, and we must fund it.
Deputy Costello also asked about CCTV. Next year, 2006, will be one of significant change. I agree with the Deputy that there was underperformance in the roll-out of promised CCTV projects. The Secretary General of my Department is the Accounting Officer, and the two of us have discussed this issue and are determined that 2006 will see a radical shift towards delivery and implementation of those projects. They were a little like aircraft stacked over Heathrow, not seeming to land that often, and that is one of the problems we face.
We wait with bated breath.
I hope I do not disappoint the Deputy. The community-based schemes are not a Mickey Mouse alternative, since they work well where they are operated. I have seen them in Limerick and Galway, and they constitute a useful complement to a Garda-operated system.
I can confirm that Everton House was among the premises disposed of. The other was in Leitrim.
What was the price?
I can furnish the Deputy with details of the Everton deal. It was decided to sell the property because it would not have been used as envisaged.
Section 4 of the Public Service Superannuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 provides that a person appointed as a new entrant to the Garda Síochána after 1 April 2004 shall cease to be a member on attaining the age of 55 years but may remain in the force until 60. For new entrants, the stipulation of 50 years has gone up to 55, and the stipulation of 57 has gone up to 60.
That is useful.
Yes, although it is far off.
It will not make an immediate impact.
I do not think that I will be in office when that comes through.
One lives in hope.
I wish to deal with the radio issue. A pilot scheme for digital radio in the Dublin metropolitan region was completed in 2003. The Garda Síochána presented a detailed business case to the Department for the system's extension nationwide. Following extensive discussions between officials of the Department, the Garda Síochána and the Department of Finance on the technical and implementation options of the business case, a decision was made. The Secretary General and I were very strongly of the view that the procurement model should be based on an outsourced service provision rather than buying a capital system from a provider.
This decision was based on a number of factors. Such an approach enables us to ensure the system works once it is installed. Where a capital outlay of €200 million or whatever is involved, there will always be the doubting Thomases who say the wrong decision was made. They will be fuelled by the underbidders and will suggest the system was defective from the beginning. One will be told money was wasted and that a better system could have been obtained for less.
The arrangement now in place is that the service provider must provide the system on an ongoing basis and must ensure it operates to defined service criteria. The tender documents will go to the marketplace in the coming weeks and roll-out will commence in 2006. It is intended that the successful applicant will be required to demonstrate on an interim basis that the system works. This will ensure that what is purchased will be rolled out at an early stage of the project and that we do not buy a pig in a poke. The capital sum available under subhead E1 was calculated on the basis that I hoped to have the contracts signed this month, during the current financial year. There was a slippage of two to three months on this, however, and it will now happen next year.
When will the system be operational? How long will the contract roll-out take?
I understand it will take some two years because coverage will extend from place to place. Following the Dublin metropolitan region, by the time we get to more and more places, in terms of population——
It will be some years before we reach Castletownbere.
I fully agree with the Deputies opposite that this matter is a priority. It is simply not good enough that the most secure means of communication for gardaí is via mobile telephone. In some cases, they have access to more sophisticated radio networks for smaller operations. In general, however, a secure system is not available to the Garda.
I thank Deputy O'Donovan for his kind remarks which I will pass on to the Commissioner and the Secretary General. He mentioned drugs seizures and Deputy Finian McGrath referred to murders in Clontarf. These are part of the same issue, a point I have made on a number of occasions. The availability of recreational drugs at parties in south Dublin cannot arise without the existence of people in west Dublin willing to shoot each other in the head. One cannot exist without the other.
Among those whom I recently heard described as the "commentariat" — the commentator class in our media — there seems to be a notion that somehow there are two worlds and that the capacity of people to do a line of cocaine at a party has nothing to do with a fellow having his head blown off elsewhere. It has everything to do with it and one cannot have the line of cocaine without the heads being blown off. That is the truth of it. That linkage must be brought home on a moral basis.
Such comments may not impress people at dinner parties in leafy areas such as Ranelagh.
It must be said, whether they are impressed by it or not. There is a type of schizoid approach to the effect that it is a person's own business if he or she smokes a joint and there is no concern for the chain of supply. However, the chain of supply must in the end be conducted by heavy financial interests who will kill to preserve their patch.
In regard to Garda numbers, I wish to put on record that the programme for Government included the objective to first complete the expansion of the Garda to the level previously promised, namely, 12,200. That is done and fully attested. That number does not include those in training.
I held a press conference in the Phoenix Park where I announced the expansion of the force. I set out a table indicating exactly when people would be recruited, the rate at which they would be recruited and circumstances in which they would be recruited. I set out when the attested and the training figures would reach 14,000——
The Minister changed the formula.
I did not. On the press release——
The retirements number was higher than anticipated.
The Minister will not get away with it.
I will provide for the Deputies a copy of the press release.
The Minister should not change the commitment made before the election.
No, it is exactly what I said. I remind Deputy O'Keeffe that he said this would not happen for 20 years.
At the rate at which the Minister had been recruiting, it would not happen. I want the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Let us get to the whole truth which is——
May we have one member at a time in order that all the remarks which are very important can be fully heard and written down?
If we look at the records, we will see that on 31 December 1994 the strength of the Garda Síochána was 10,838. Two years later the number had fallen to 10,818. Since then it has increased each year to the current figure of more than 12,200.
Did that happen when the last coalition was in office?
It did. I am shocked to reveal the statistics——
The old fly in the ointment is bet. There was a greater than anticipated number of retirements.
The accusation made was that Fine Gael did not make any false promises before the last general election.
I thank the Minister.
I raised a few issues, to which the Minister might reply in writing. He is getting carried away.
The Deputy raised a few important points, with which I will deal in writing.
Perhaps the replies in writing can be sent to the member in order that there will be evidence that the questions were responded to. I thank the Minister and his officials for attending. The next meeting of the joint committee will be tomorrow, 1 December, at 1.30 p.m. to consider the interim report on the murder of Seamus Ludlow. The sub-committee will meet at 2 p.m.