Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am in and out of two committees that are meeting at the same time. My apologies if I have missed important points but I cannot attend both meetings simultaneously.

I wish to follow up on the questions of Deputy Catherine Murphy in respect of the Garda diversion programme and the JLO scheme. I have an interest in this as I was on the section 44 committee from 2015 to 2019. It was a valuable insight. I really admire the work that Colette Quinn and others do in that section. To my mind, it is a quasi-judicial office of significant importance where one is making decisions about children's lives and whether they go through the criminal justice system, but also whether they are getting appropriate welfare-based interventions An Garda Síochána has identified they need. I have a concern in this regard. This is important in terms of cost in an ongoing way because if these interventions can be identified and made appropriate at this stage, it can have significant effects. I acknowledge the issue raised by Deputy Catherine Murphy but my understanding is that where a decision is made not to prosecute and that what is necessary is a welfare-based referral, that may take the form of anger management interventions or sexual awareness interventions, for example. Those responses are largely Tusla-based or with another agency, such as addiction-based responses. Deputy Bacik and I were in the Dóchas Centre and in Mountjoy on Monday as co-convenors of the penal reform group. The two big issues identified as being faced in both communities were addiction and mental health. Difficulties in respect of training and education for those who were going to engage in that were preceded by an urgent need to deal with both those issues. My concern is that I am not sure how much visibility An Garda Síochána has in respect of the follow-up to those welfare-based referrals. Is it getting reports back that the young individual or child had access to the referral and attended it and what the outcome, if any, has been? I am not sure whether it is the job of the Garda to have that information but it seems to me that if a quasi-judicial decision not to prosecute is being made on the basis that a referral is what the child needs, it should have the information in some way. We have always argued that there should be a Tusla presence in the Garda youth diversion programme to provide for a seamless link between the programme office and Tusla to make sure the Garda is able to satisfy itself that those referrals have been completed. I ask Mr. Harris to address that issue. Is my question clear?