James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome everybody to the meeting. I will get down to business because a number of people are under pressure with different meetings taking place this afternoon. I hope those attending remotely can hear me. I will welcome the witnesses attending remotely shortly. People might like to check their connections.

Apologies have been received from Senator Martin. If anybody wants to bring other apologies to my attention, they are welcome to do so. Some members and witnesses are physically present in the committee room while others are dialling in remotely. They are all welcome to our deliberations.

I remind all participants to turn off their mobile phones or to switch them to flight mode as even though they may not appear to be interfering during the meeting, they can difficulties for the recording.

The purpose of our meeting today is to discuss the topic of anti-social behaviour. A number of organisations made written submissions and that list, as usual, has been whittled down to a number of groups which will make presentations to us day, and we look forward to that engagement.

Witnesses who are on the call are appearing virtually. Most, if not all, of them are in locations outside of the Leinster House campus. I ask them to be mindful that while we have made best efforts to cover all eventualities, there is somewhat of a grey area remaining in terms of hybrid participation and privilege. If they say something that may be dubious in regard to a matter, they should be particularly mindful that the usual rules of privilege they would enjoy when physically present may not be applied in full. The courts have yet to test that. Let us hope they never do. Members should also be aware of that when they make their contributions.

I will run through the witnesses attending, give some background information and take an opening statement from each of the organisations. The witnesses might raise their hand as I introduce them so that we can see who is who. On the call, we are joined by the following witnesses: Ms Kayleigh Canning, senior youth officer, and Ms Bernie Meally, south east regional manager, from Foróige; Ms Una Doyle, director of operations, and Ms Olivia Keaveney, assistant principal probation officer, from the Probation Service; Mr. Richard Guiney, CEO, and Mr. Gerard Farrell, director of operations, from Dublin Town; Ms Carol Hyland, project leader, and Mr. Thomas McCarthy, drug and alcohol youth worker, from Core Youth Services; Ms Molly Joyce, acting executive director, and Ms Sarahjane McCreery, senior policy and research officer, from Irish Penal Reform Trust; and Mr. Cormac Ó Donnchú, chairperson, and Ms Sonya Kenir, partnership co-ordinator, North Dublin Inner City Local Community Safety Partnership. The members of the committee will make themselves known as the meeting unfolds. I want to check that everybody can hear me. The sound appears to be travelling.

On a housekeeping note, which I am sure we are all used to at this stage, when people are not contributing to the meeting, they should mute their device to ensure we do not have background inference, and, when they want to speak, they should unmute their device so that we can hear everything they have to say.

I mentioned privilege already and members will be aware of the rules on privilege.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that may be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity, particularly if he, she or it is not present to rebut.

Members, where possible, should stick to the subject matter under discussion and not stray into ancillary matters. However, if there is a matter related to the subject, I will allow a little discretion, but we are present today for a particular purpose and it is important that we keep the discussion on topic.

We have organised the meeting in such a way as to allow maximum engagement and questions and answers. The time allowed for an opening statement by each party is somewhat short, at three minutes, but that will allow more time over the course of the meeting for engagement. There will be many opportunities for witnesses to say what they want. I will first call on a representative of each organisation to make an opening statement and inform each of those called upon when his or her three minutes is up. We will then proceed to the members. There will be a seven-minute block per member in which he or she can question and get responses from witnesses. We can go around the table a little, but when a member's seven minutes are up I will move on to the next member. This is effectively how we manage our business. It works quite well and it is fair to everybody. If needs be, if there is time and if questions remain, we can have a second round, whereby we will go through the whole process again in a slightly shorter timeframe.

There will be a couple of housekeeping matters to address at the end of the meeting but they are not for the witnesses to worry about. Members should note that we might have a very short private session at the end of the meeting to tidy up some housekeeping matters and so forth. I invite Ms Canning to make an opening statement on behalf of Foróige. She has three minutes. When the time is almost up, I will indicate that.

Ms Kayleigh Canning:

I thank the committee for inviting Foróige to speak today on antisocial behaviour. I am a senior youth officer with the best practice development team for Garda youth diversion projects, GYDPs. I am accompanied by my colleague Ms Bernie Meally, area manager for Foróige's south-east region and a member of the expert steering group for the recently launched youth justice strategy. Foróige is a national youth development organisation working with over 50,000 young people aged from ten to 24 across Ireland through a range of universal and targeted youth supports, including GYDPs. Funded by the Department of Justice, these projects seek to divert young people from entering or remaining within the justice system by providing a range of evidence-based, outcome-focused interventions. There are 105 GYDPs across the country, and Foróige manages over 40 of these.

In our experience, based on our targeted and universal youth services, there is a spectrum of behaviours displayed by young people that may be perceived as antisocial. These range from congregating in public places to deliberately causing disruption, harassment and intimidation. However, there is an important distinction to be made between antisocial behaviour and criminal behaviour, and it should be recognised that while some young people may engage in antisocial behaviour, this may never result in a criminal offence due to several factors, such as age, detection and reporting.

International research has identified risk factors directly related to criminal or antisocial behaviour among young people — for example, family circumstances or substance misuse — and we now have a clear understanding of these risks and other relevant community, geographical and socio-economic factors that contribute to youth offending. While crime patterns can differ depending on the locality, national trends indicate that young people engaging in offending behaviour in Ireland are typically males in their older teens who carry out thefts and public order and criminal damage offences. However, the age–crime curve demonstrates that while offending increases from late childhood and peaks in the teenage years, it tends to decline in the early 20s, and the majority of young people in Ireland who offend do not go on to reoffend.

In addressing antisocial behaviour, Foróige recommends the following: enhanced investment in the provision of universal youth work across the country; investment in research and evidence-based and targeted programmes and approaches designed to address the issues and needs underpinning criminal or antisocial behaviour, such as restorative practices and motivational interviewing; implementation of the youth justice strategy, prioritising nationwide GYDP service, early intervention, family support and inter-agency collaboration; the strengthening of youth justice policies and practices, taking account of age, maturity, disadvantage and diversity, which includes enhanced effective services for young adults aged from 18 to 24, recognising their unique stage of development; the enhancement of the capacity of all professionals working with young people at risk to engage appropriately and from a child-centred perspective, ensuring the voice of young people informs policies, programmes and systems; and the timely processing of young people in the justice system.

Foróige believes the recommendations will assist with targeting the behaviours, risks and needs underpinning antisocial behaviour among the youth population. We thank members for taking the time to listen to our statement today. Ms Meally and I would welcome any questions they may have.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Excellent. I thank Ms Canning. She came in on time, which was nicely done. We now move on to Ms Keaveney, who is to make an opening statement on behalf of the Probation Service. She has three minutes.

Ms Olivia Keaveney:

The Probation Service is part of the Department of Justice. Its primary purpose is to assess and manage people who have offended and are subject to supervision in the community. Those referred to us have committed offences across a wide spectrum of crimes. On any one day, the service engages with 9,000 offenders in the community and up to 2,000 persons in custody.

The Probation Service provides those subject to supervision with individualised structured supports in their community to address the factors contributing to offending. Our core aim is to motivate people to change and help them to increase their ability to change while facilitating improved opportunities for change. While each criminal justice agency makes a unique contribution, no single agency has all the answers. We work in partnership with the wider statutory, community and voluntary sector. The Probation Service is a community-facing organisation. Annually, we fund over 60 community-based organisations to support our work. Services provided include education, addiction support, mentoring and outdoor pursuits, among others.

Antisocial behaviour impacts severely on businesses, communities and individuals. While those we work with are, in the main, people who have committed offences, a central focus of our work is addressing the impact of offending on victims.

In considering the specific issue of antisocial behaviour, while there is no agreed or shared definition of the term, it tends to capture a range of behaviours that cause harm and distress to individuals and communities.

There is a lack of relevant data and research on antisocial behaviour in the Irish context, yet we know there is no single cause. Causes include educational disadvantage, unemployment and adverse childhood experiences. Relevant factors include gender, age, family environment and peers. The biggest challenge is breaking the cycle. An effective response has multiple strands, including direct work with individuals; awareness of the family and social context; adopting a cross-sectoral response; and building community capacity and solutions.

In working with individuals, we use evidence-informed practices and interventions to address the underlying causes of offending. Change can be difficult to sustain, and there is a high risk of relapse and reoffending. We regard restorative justice interventions as an integral part of our work with offenders. Effective and meaningful collaboration is critical. An example of this is our involvement with the joint agency response to crime, JARC, initiatives.

Providing opportunities for the community to engage with the service is an important feature of our work. Our volunteer mentoring schemes comprise an example. Working with community activists and leaders is another important feature of our approach. For example, we are involved in the antisocial behaviour forum and the community safety partnership pilots, which prioritise local community concerns and topical issues such as knife crime.

Probation work, done well, makes a significant difference. It adds value to the criminal justice response and ultimately contributes to safer communities. I thank the members. We look forward to taking their questions later in the session.

Mr. Richard Guiney:

We thank the committee for inviting us to meet with it today. We are pleased to participate and hope that our contribution to the discussion will be considered beneficial. Dublin Town is Dublin city centre’s business improvement district. It was established in 2008 following a vote of ratepayers in the core Dublin city centre district from Parnell Street to St. Stephen’s Green. Our role is to improve footfall and business within the city’s commercial core on behalf of our 2,000 business members, 85% of whom are consumer-facing and engaged in either the retail or hospitality sectors.

We pay tribute to the ongoing and tireless work of the Garda Síochána, which is very much appreciated by the business community. However, we recognise that many of the root causes of antisocial behaviour are beyond the control or jurisdiction of the Garda and therefore require inclusive multi-agency responses. While Dublin is a safe city by international standards, it has suffered from poor perceptions of safety for some time. This unease is evident in press reporting and consumer surveys. These consumer surveys reveal very poor perceptions of Dublin when compared with other international cities. We believe that it is now time to address the underlying issues constructively and comprehensively. The most effective way of addressing antisocial behaviour is to replace it with pro-social behaviour. To achieve this, local communities, be they business or residential, should be included as part of the solution and in co-ordinated responses.

Over the past ten years, we have witnessed successful interventions aimed at reducing antisocial behaviour. Our experience is that when such initiatives come to an end, the issues tend to arise again. However, such successes give us confidence that we have it in our power to improve community well-being and the city experience when we apply greater consistency to our structures and approaches. Examples of successful interventions in Dublin include the Better City For All process. This independently chaired, multi-stakeholder programme was an effective mechanism for identifying, considering and addressing the majority of issues pertaining to drug-related antisocial behaviour. Dublin Town would strongly support the re-establishment of such a mechanism.

We further believe that the principles of crime prevention through environmental design, CPTED, should be deployed more systematically throughout the city. Some of these principles are basic, such as increased lighting provision, while others, such as the constructive use of laneways for residential and other engaging purposes, would require planning. We also need to eliminate dark recesses and improve waste management and street presentation in order to enhance the sense of security among the public.

Legislative enhancements could assist in creating a more welcoming environment. The Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 2011 could be tweaked to provide greater protection for the public. However, greater success will be achieved by considering non-criminal sanctions. My colleague Mr. Gerard Farrell, who is attending today, has worked with restorative justice in the Probation Service and has found this to be a rewarding exercise. We also believe that there is scope for enhancing antisocial behaviour orders and using them not only to address difficult behaviour but also to provide supports which could assist those involved in addressing their underlying challenges.

Once again, we thank the committee for inviting us to attend and we look forward to engaging with it further to consider the often complex issues arising.

Ms Carol Hyland:

I thank the committee for inviting me and my colleague Mr. McCarthy to speak today. Our service was established in 1986 in response to the heroin epidemic that ravaged our city. Since then, we have continued to work with families and young people who engage in and are affected by drug misuse, antisocial behaviour, early school leaving and unemployment. These are often deep-rooted in intergenerational issues. Our funding comes through the local drugs task force and the City of Dublin Youth Service Board. Many of our young people suffer adverse childhood experiences. When we tackle the puzzle of antisocial behaviour and the connection with young people, what is rarely mentioned is that young people can equally be the victims and perpetrators of this behaviour. Psychologists and child therapists have also told us that all behaviour has meaning. What is this meaning? Is it that children are just badly behaved or are there more underlying issues at play? In our experience working with children and young people for many years, it has become apparent to us that children are inherently good. However, internal factors such as psychological issues and genetics, along with external factors such as childhood traumas both inside and outside the home, their interaction and lack of interaction with services, poverty and multiple existential disadvantages have an influence on children as they grow and develop.

In addition to these factors, services located in the community, which are best positioned to work with the needs presented by these young people and have a relationship with them and their families, are hugely under-resourced. Capacity remains a central factor in the level of intervention these young people receive and can often determine if the measures taken are preventative or an intervention, where both are clearly a necessity. As Ms Canning mentioned, we also worked with restorative practices and we take a trauma-informed approach when working with young people, particularly in terms of antisocial behaviour. I thank the committee for listening to our opening statement. We have a lot more to contribute and are open to any questions throughout the meeting.

Ms Molly Joyce:

I thank the committee for its invitation. The Irish Penal Reform Trust, IPRT, welcomes the decision of the committee to address the issue of antisocial behaviour in detail, as well as the opportunity to feed into this process. The IPRT is Ireland’s leading NGO campaigning for rights in the penal system and the progressive reform of Irish penal policy. Our core message is that a penal system that protects and promotes human rights, equality and social justice, and relies upon prison only as a measure of last resort, will contribute to safer communities for everyone. We will focus on three key issues in this brief opening statement, namely, the underlying causes of antisocial behaviour; the need for a whole-of-government response to antisocial behaviour; and the need for community-based and restorative responses to such behaviour.

On the underlying causes, antisocial behaviour is an issue of great complexity which is often characterised by multiple layers of disadvantage. That point has already been made this afternoon. Research in Ireland has linked antisocial behaviour to issues such as socio-economic disadvantage and marginalisation, a lack of adequate guardianship, poor supervision, issues engaging with school, and alcohol and drug use. The importance of further research in this area cannot be overestimated. Our first recommendation is therefore that further and ongoing research on the backgrounds of individuals caught up in the criminal justice system be conducted and routinely published so as to support targeted, best practice interventions and support for people at risk.

The second point is the need for a whole-of-government response. The links between antisocial behaviour and socio-economic disadvantage make clear that solutions do not lie solely with the criminal justice system, but instead require a whole-of-government response. The State should accordingly approach the issue as one that stretches across a number of Departments. This approach has been embraced to a certain extent by the Government but might require legislative action. Our second and third recommendations are that a positive statutory obligation be imposed on all relevant agencies to co-operate in respect of a child identified as being at risk, and also to co-operate around prisoner release from prison.

On the need for community-based restorative responses, the IPRT is clear that purely punitive responses to antisocial or criminal behaviour, such as increasing penalties or introducing harsher sentences, are unlikely to be effective in preventing or reducing such behaviour. This is evidenced in part by CSO data, which highlight that prison does not work to deter people from reoffending, especially with regard to young people and those involved in more low-level crime. Responses that focus instead on the underlying root causes of antisocial behaviour are more likely to be successful in preventing and reducing this behaviour.

Our fourth recommendation is for investment in existing interventions that have been shown to work, such as the bail supervision scheme and restorative justice projects. Our fifth recommendation is that the Criminal Justice (Community Sanctions) Bill 2014 be progressed without further delay, and our sixth recommendation is that the commitments in the youth justice strategy for pilot programmes for the extension of diversion measures to 18- to 24-year-olds and youth joint agency response to crime pilot be progressed.

I thank the committee for its invitation to attend today’s session, and its attention to these important issues. My colleague Ms McCreery and I are ready to respond to the committee’s questions as best we can.

Mr. Cormac Ó Donnchú:

I am the independent volunteer chairperson of the Dublin North Inner City Local Community Safety Partnership and I am joined by our co-ordinator, Ms Sonia Keniry. We thank the committee for the opportunity to be here today. We have detailed in our written submission our views on the topic of antisocial behaviour and how it currently presents in the area of north inner city Dublin.

We have outlined a number of strategies which may be considered by this committee in addressing the issue, in particular, review of judicial procedures, legislation, and judicial and community engagement. We are happy to discuss the content of our written submission further with members, but for the purposes of this opening statement I wish to outline the structure and intended role of local community safety partnerships in addressing matters of local community safety.

The concept of community safety is about people being safe and feeling safe in their communities. The new community safety policy is intended to ensure communities are safer and feel safer by making community safety a whole-of-government responsibility and priority, with a focus on prevention and early intervention. Community safety in the most complete sense requires the proactive and ongoing input of a range of public, community services and, importantly, local residents and cannot be met by any single State agency or voluntary organisation alone.

The landmark policing, security and community safety Bill will provide for this key principle from the report of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland, that preventing crime and harm and making our communities safer does not rest with An Garda Síochána and the Department of Justice alone. Rather, it will be best achieved as a whole-of-government responsibility, with Departments and agencies responsible for health and social services, education authorities and local authorities, the Garda and the wider community all working together. The new Bill will achieve this by establishing innovative local community safety partnerships to develop local safety plans tailored to the priorities and needs identified by communities. The partnerships will replace and build upon the existing joint policing committees and will provide a forum for State agencies and local community representatives to work together to act on community concerns about antisocial behaviour.

The goal of the partnerships is that all relevant State bodies and voluntary organisations will work together effectively, in partnership with the local community, to prioritise and address issues in their area. Three local community safety partnerships are being piloted in Dublin’s north inner city, Waterford city and county and Longford county. These pilots will run for 24 months and are subject to a robust independent evaluation. The learnings from the pilots and their evaluation will be taken into account and will be applied to the national roll-out of the local community safety partnerships throughout the country.

Membership of the partnership pilots include residents; community representatives, including representatives of youth, new communities and the voluntary sector; business and education representatives; and representatives from relevant public services in the area, including the HSE, Tusla, An Garda Síochána, the Probation Service, the local authority and locally elected councillors. As residents and community representatives are central to identifying problems and solutions for their local communities, the partnerships have a 51:49 split in their favour on the committee. Each local community safety partnership pilot is also supported by a full-time co-ordinator and an independent voluntary chairperson.

Each partnership is hard at work addressing local issues and working on developing a local community safety plan tailored to their area to guide future actions and interventions. The plans will identify issues most in need of prioritisation, ensuring actions taken are strategic and effective. They, along with the actions taken to address their content, will also serve as templates for the work of future partnerships.

I thank the committee again for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the local community safety partnerships and antisocial behaviour, and I look forward to continuing to actively support collaborative progress towards achieving a safer society for all. Ms Keniry and I would be delighted to engage in that conversation as we proceed.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Ó Donnchú completes the opening round of opening submissions from all the organisations here. I thank all representatives for those. We also received their written submissions, which will form part of the report. Any group that did not come before our committee today but sent submissions in writing will also be factored into the report we will produce at the end of this engagement. I will open the floor to questions from members.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank our witnesses. There is a significant range of knowledge and experience in front of us and the time available does not really do justice in trying to learn from that knowledge and experience.

I wish first to focus on two areas. When Ms Keaveney talked about probation issues, she mentioned restorative justice and restorative practices. Will she give us more information about what has been done in that area and what has worked well that we are currently doing? Has the State ever invested properly in restorative practices? The idea of restorative justice has been talked about a lot, but it is never really something that gets the money needed for it actually to work. I would expand that question to the other services here. From their experience, have we meaningfully tried restorative practices? What can we do to improve that?

Policing is one part of the solution, but it is also one part of the problem, particularly as regards kids on the street who have entrenched views of the Garda that are not very positive and entrenched views within the Garda of the same kids that are also not very positive. Both groups will happily call each other "scumbags". Essentially, there is an othering and an "us and them" mindset. Policing can be part of the problem as well. I would love to hear some of the experiences of Mr. Ó Donnchú in working with the police in trying to undermine that othering and "us and them" mindset, or in new forms of policing. Community policing gets talked about a lot and has had some success. Part of this is about the learnings the committee can take into the policing, security and community safety Bill.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Which witness would like to respond to that?

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We could start with Ms Keaveney, followed by the others, in regard to the restorative justice piece.

Ms Olivia Keaveney:

The Probation Service has a number of directorates, including the director for operations, and we have an established restorative justice and victims unit. Our deputy director for operations has accompanied me today. She has a broader view in terms of the restorative justice brief of the service and I will ask her to come in on this question.

Ms Una Doyle:

My colleague referred to probation practices and restorative justice. We see restorative justice as an integral part of probation practice. In terms of the investment, in response to the direct question asked, in recent years we have invested in continuing professional development for our front-line probation officers for the delivery of restorative justice interventions as part of their work in both assessments for court and case management, working with people who are referred to us. I refer to both adults and children in that regard.

The Children Act provides for a family conference, which is very much in the ethos of looking at a restorative model of practice. In any of our work with young people referred to us, and annually we would get about 500, we would always seek a restorative intervention, be it at report stage or during a supervision order. Similarly, we would do so with adults, as I said. As a community-facing organisation, we fund in excess of 60 community-based organisations nationwide, three of which are dedicated restorative justice services. A number of our other community-based projects either deliver restorative justice services on our behalf or engage in restorative practices as part of the value base and culture they are trying to display in terms of the work they do with the young people on their books.

Restorative practices and restorative justice in particular speak to repair the harm caused by offending. That is one of the key themes that has come through in the presentations this morning - including the relevant stakeholders in the solution. Restorative justice does this. It has benefits for the offender in terms of developing empathy, understanding and knowing the consequences of his or her behaviour. It also holds him or her to account, but it does so in a very safe and structured manner.

Similarly, restorative justice done well enables victims of crime to feel that they have a proactive and positive role to play in a very safe way in responding to the harm that was caused to them. That has a ripple effect in the context of the community. That is also very important in developing those practices and responses.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do Foróige or Core Youth Services want to share their experiences?

Ms Kayleigh Canning:

I would echo the points just made by the Probation Service. There has been significant investment in restorative practices for the Garda youth diversion project, GYDP, network, funded through the Department of Justice. The best practice development team, my team, has worked with Ulster University to develop a bespoke restorative practices model that is being implemented across the Garda youth diversion project network. It is at the early stages of implementation but the investment is there. It will focus on some of the formal processes but really embed an informal restorative ethos across the GYDP network. As the Probation Service said, it is about instilling those restorative values in the everyday practices of the Garda youth diversion project from the informal up to the formal processes.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have we time for a very quick answer from Mr. Ó Donnchú on policing?

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ten seconds.

Mr. Cormac Ó Donnchú:

We have done some serious practical work on community gardaí and trying to build relationships directly on the ground. We are producing an interactive map across our partnership to name the community gardaí to try to build that relationship at a grassroots level. The Deputy raised three particular issues around addressing the issue. The first is resources, then there are transfers and the longevity of individuals to build relationships. There is quite a lot of transfer of individuals within the force which is also somewhat down to resources. The third issue is the perception internally in An Garda Síochána of the role of community police. That is an issue that we think some work might need to be done around.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone. Deputy Costello will have an opportunity to come in again in the second round.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My first question is for Foróige. I know the wonderful work it does on the ground along with organisations such as Youth Work Ireland and around catching people who may fall through the net. I know the benefits of these organisations particularly in rural communities. That is my experience.

Prior to the pandemic there was difficulty in getting volunteers for Foróige and similar organisations. Has that resolved itself? Have we work to do in encouraging volunteers? In my home town of Ballieborough the Garda and other volunteers set up a Foróige and we had a huge response from young people. There were 125 young people looking to sign up. Our biggest difficulty then was getting volunteers to run the organisation and ultimately it did not continue because of that. Will Foróige comment on that?

Mr. Ó Donnchú gave us a very good briefing on the local community safety partnership pilots. I am delighted to see that one is in a rural joint policing committee, JPC, area like Longford. How long are those pilots running? He said that they would run for 24 months and then there would be robust reporting on them. I think the JPCs are very effective and important in constituencies and communities because they have input from the Garda, education, young people and the local authority and all those at the coalface of dealing with antisocial behaviour. Does Mr. Ó Donnchú have any further thoughts on the role of community policing in antisocial behaviour? My experience would be that in the past ten years or so we have seen that community Garda presence vanish. That was to the detriment of society and communities. I see them becoming more visible in communities again and more resources being put into that but my feeling is that we need additional resources put into it. The benefit to the Garda, communities and young people is great.

Mr. Ó Donnchú also briefly mentioned education representatives. I assume we are not only talking about the Department of Education schools but also our ETB schools and Youthreach schemes which have a part to play in responding to antisocial behaviour.

I have a broad question on antisocial behaviour for the Dublin organisations. Do we have a particular issue in the city centre? Is it being policed adequately?

Ms Bernie Meally:

On the first question about volunteers, Foróige engages approximately 5,500 volunteers a year to work with more than 50,000 young people. The majority of the young people engagement is done through volunteer-led services, whether that be Foróige clubs or Big Brother, Big Sister. We also have volunteers engaged with our very targeted services. Those volunteers are highly skilled in working with young people, supporting them to build skills and capacity. Another important thing is building their connections to their community. That is particularly relevant in what we are discussing today because if you have young people who have a safe place to hang out in their community and they feel connected to the other adults in their community and have a space to experiment, learn, grow and develop and to engage in educational as well as recreational programmes, then they are less likely to go on to be involved in antisocial or criminal behaviour. We are hugely indebted to our team of volunteers who support youth work across the country and not just in Foróige. A huge number of youth work organisations depend on those volunteers. Throughout the pandemic, so for the last two years, a large army of volunteers has continued to support young people during one of the most difficult times they or we have experienced. They have engaged in digital services and supports with young people and have been a lifeline for many.

Recruitment is always a challenge. We are now about to go back out to the communities. Some clubs and groups have taken a bit of a pause and some have lost volunteers for various reasons during the pandemic but we are embarking on a national campaign to try to raise awareness of our organisation and the value of volunteering. We are having a great response so far. People will see a lot of ads on social media and advertising locally and nationally calling out for volunteers. It is a really important element of universal youth work in this country which has huge benefits for preventing -----

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is Ms Meally saying there is no problem with recruitment and Foróige can get volunteers?

Ms Bernie Meally:

No, I am not saying there is no difficulty but that we are about to embark on another recruitment campaign. It is always a challenge.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Specifically, what is creating the challenges?

Ms Bernie Meally:

You are looking for a person who, with the very busy lives we all have, is willing to give up a number of hours a week. We are looking for more long-term commitments rather than short-term commitments. That can be a challenge for people. We are all busy. We have families, jobs and other responsibilities. You are asking people to give up their time. Within youth work, you are asking people to have a particular interest in young people and to be engaged. You are looking for people with a specific set of skills and sometimes it can be quite daunting. Not everyone is comfortable with teenagers. Some people can feel intimidated and find that quite challenging. A large number of supports is put in place by organisations such as Foróige and similar youth work organisations to train volunteers to the highest standard, to ensure safeguarding of young people and to ensure that there are really good and interesting programmes relevant to the needs of young people.

There are always challenges, but we have a presence in more than 500 communities throughout the country. There are always people within a community who are willing to engage. It is about trying to motivate others to come along and engage with the right people at the right time.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all the contributors for attending and for all the work they do on the ground. Dealing with all these issues is a very hands-on job. Turning first to the IPRT, I was struck by the data on the Oberstown detention centre campus, where the trust has identified that of the children's experiences in the centre, 31% had experienced a loss of parent, 41% had experienced issues of mental health, 71% had experienced substance misuse, while 57% had a lack of engagement with education. The interconnectedness of all that is probably the big issue that goes to the core of much of this. If we were to examine that, we would probably find that many of the reasons people end up misusing drugs and so on relate to chaotic and difficult life circumstances they are in, poverty of ambition and a sense of hopelessness regarding their circumstances and the community in which they live. All those issues are very much interconnected.

I might direct my next question at our guests from Core Youth Services, given its emphasis on substance misuse. What connection is there in that regard? Having spoken to people at the coalface, I know an awful lot of problems result from people who have addiction problems, and there may be mental health problems as well. They often end up inappropriately in the justice system, including in prison. That is not a good outcome and it compounds their problems. How can that be resolved and how can we change that?

The Probation Service does great work and I commend it on that. How many probation officers are there in the country? How under-resourced and understaffed is the service? In my experience, the issue is significant.

Ms Carol Hyland:

On the issue of young people engaging in substance misuse and how these addiction problems and mental health issues can lead to antisocial behaviour, through the work we have done over the past 30-odd years, we see young people from a young age heading towards a life of criminality due to substance misuse. We are embedded in a community where there is a history of drug misuse. Young people now use drugs and alcohol at a much younger age, and to fund their drug habits and fit in, they engage in antisocial behaviour. There is a great deal of peer pressure on the young people we are currently working with to engage in antisocial behaviour. There is peer pressure on them to get substances and continue with their habits. Moreover, they tend to have poor coping mechanisms. These young people, in some cases, come from dysfunctional families and there may be mental health issues within the families. They will have learned poor coping methods throughout their lives. They will have experienced trauma and their way of coping with that is to misuse drugs and alcohol.

I might hand over to Mr. McCarthy, who is our drug and alcohol worker. He will have more to say on this matter.

Mr. Thomas McCarthy:

I echo what Ms Hyland said. In areas such as ours, the illegal drug market needs to be considered as a precursor to young people becoming involved in drugs and drug addiction. From the day a person is able to walk around here, he or she will be passing by people who are dealing drugs. It is a very difficult environment to be in and to stay away from getting involved in the drug market. That is particularly true when people see older people with a flashy lifestyle and a bit of money, with something about them. The young person may not have anything and may come from poverty, deprivation and addiction in the home. If there is addiction in the home, it tends to translate into the young people. That is not always the case but there is definitely a connection.

It takes a long time for young people to see how bad it is going to get when they start using drugs as a young teen. They do not see it and they cannot hear the warnings. There are just not enough workers on the ground to support them through those choices. We work consistently with young people who use drugs but it is a significant challenge when the illegal drug market is all around them. Unless there is a better approach to how we deal with the illegal drug market in Ireland, little will change. We have been fighting a war on drugs for years and nothing has changed, so it will continue the way it is. Investing in our drugs services and in early intervention is vital.

Ms Una Doyle:

On the substance misuse issues that were referenced in respect of children detained at the Oberstown centre, sadly, we see similar figures in probation. We recently completed a survey of those subject to Probation Service supervision and, regrettably, eight of ten people have a significant substance misuse issue. The highest rate of substance misuse relates to those aged 25 to 34. There is a direct relationship between their offending and their substance misuse. We found that ranged between 48% and 53%. The first use tended to occur between 12 and 17 years of age, which would support the Oberstown figures. Two issues are significant in respect of the response. The peer group relationship is significant in regard to young people's engagement with substance misuse, and the gateway substances we tend to see are alcohol and cannabis. They are issues we all need to consider.

To return to the question on staffing figures, approximately 240 probation officers work at the Probation Service, along with an additional 40 senior probation officers. They are all front-line staff and managers working nationwide throughout our estate.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank our guests for their contributions. I am struck by the words we use when we talk about antisocial behaviour and its presentation within some communities. Everywhere experiences some levels or variations of antisocial behaviour but it is highly concentrated in some communities. Our guests have drawn a direct correlation to poverty, family and safety, but when I think of community safety, I do not think about it only in the context of those who say they are intimidated by others within their communities. I think also about those young men and women who are seen as antisocial and their safety. I would love to explore the degree to which people's perception of intimidation plays into the labelling of people as antisocial. It is relative.

In my community, one woman might be intimidated by 20 lads standing on a corner, whereas I might not be bothered by that at all. If that behaviour keeps being reported such that the lads hanging around are repeatedly moved on, young people will not have a sense of safety themselves or a sense of space. If you come from a community where Garda cars crawl around your estate all day, that in itself feels unsafe for young people and they will respond to that negatively, which can create very negative scenarios and relationships, such as those that have been mentioned.

That in itself feels unsafe for young people. People respond to that negatively, which sometimes creates the negative situations and relationships we have spoken about.

Will Mr. McCarthy talk about the importance of youth work, the intervention of youth work and the advocacy for young people who may be seen as antisocial in the development of all the forums we have spoken about? What do these young people see as safety? How does Mr. McCarthy, as a youth worker, engage with young people and how can the relationship with the Garda be improved? We speak to community gardaí but it would be silly to imagine that community gardaí respond to calls. There is only one community garda in each geographical area. It is usually other gardaí, not the community garda, who intervene and move people on. The relationship with the community garda can be as special as we like but the issue is the Garda institution and how it intervenes.

I ask Mr. McCarthy to speak on the importance of support and addressing some of the class issues that result in antisocial behaviour, which is different from criminality. We need to make that distinction.

Mr. Thomas McCarthy:

I thank Senator Ruane. She has asked a lot of questions.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. McCarthy can say whatever he thinks appropriate. I trust him.

Mr. Thomas McCarthy:

The Senator started off on the issue of perception. I will tell a short story. One day at a meeting in the area, a person who I will not name but who wears a professional hat said that a young person was in the middle of a field talking to another young person and the two must have been doing a drug deal. I know the two young people and neither of them is involved in drug dealing. Just because two young people were talking, they were assumed to be having a conversation about drug dealing. That is the perception that some people have. To get into a class argument, the person in question was from a middle class background and had experience in working in the community but probably did not have experience of living in or coming from that type of community. That is just one example.

The Senator also mentioned police interaction. Police are in our area quite often. At certain times when they get a load of overtime, there are more police in the area than at other times. For a short period, a couple of things happen. First, if there is any antisocial behaviour going on, it reduces a little. However, what happens when gardaí come into the area is that all young people are tarred with the same brush. As a result, young people who are not involved in antisocial behaviour are also targeted by these gardaí and their interactions with them can be quite negative, although that is not always the case. From a very young age, the first interaction of young people with the Garda can be terrible. We have been told countless stories by young people about how they have been mistreated, brutalised, abused, ridiculed and physically attacked by gardaí. Such behaviour would get me fired from my job but is acceptable when a garda does it. We find it unacceptable in this youth service. That is a short description-----

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Mr. McCarthy speak to the reduction in the age of those the youth workers are working with? At what age do youth workers begin working with young people in communities?

Mr. Thomas McCarthy:

We are funded to work with people aged from ten to 24. We need to work with people younger than that for various reasons. By the time we get them into the centre and work with them, much of the behaviour is already entrenched and we end up fighting for the rest of their teen years. Puberty, in particular from the age of 12 to the age of 15 or 16, is an incredibly difficult time. It takes years of work to build a relationship with young people. Good youth work happens when that relationship is ongoing, has been consistent over a period of time and we know the families, the parents and the kids from when they were young. I do a lot of street work so I get to know the smaller kids quite young because I see them on the street but we are not allowed to actually work with them until they are ten years old. I find it incredible that that is the case. To be honest, we do not have enough funding to be able to do that work with these young people, so it is a combination of not being allowed to work with them and not having enough funding to work with all the young people who present.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCarthy. I will ask the IPRT one question while I have time. Previous reports indicated that there was a disproportionately high number of young people aged between 18 and 24 in prison. This suggests that intervention supports at an early stage are either absent or ineffective. It follows on from what Mr. McCarthy said. Will either Ms Joyce or Ms McCreery speak to that?

Ms Molly Joyce:

I can speak to that and I will check whether Ms McCreery wishes to add anything. We have published a number of reports previously talking about the importance of the 18 to 24 cohort as a specific cohort that needs specific kinds of approaches. As the Senator said, that is a demonstration that early interventions have not actually worked. One of our reports, which I identified in my submission, is about the importance of identifying that the right intervention at the right time can make a real difference but the wrong intervention, and this ties in with the point the Senator made about wrong interventions, for example, bringing a young person into the criminal justice system or a young person having a negative interaction with the police, can cause a significant amount of harm. It can entrench that young person in criminality or in a criminal identity, which can then increase the amount of time the young person ends up within the criminal justice system and make it more difficult for him or her to break out of it. The way I would describe it is that the stakes are higher when working with young people and that the right intervention can have a really positive impact but the wrong one can have a really negative impact. I would be happy to share the report with the committee because it goes into more detail about the evidence base for that. I will check if Ms McCreery has anything to add.

Ms Sarahjane McCreery:

Ms Joyce covered the issue.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Pa Daly is next.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming in. While I am not surprised, it is slightly depressing that many of the problems I saw when I worked in the Children's Court 25 years ago and also in Oberstown are still occurring. The difference is that St. Patrick's Institution closed in the intervening time. I have a question for Foróige. The timely processing of young people through the justice system was one of its recommendations. What does it mean by that?

Diversionary mechanisms and early intervention were mentioned by Mr. Ó Donnchú. What are the best interventions the Probation Service has come across? What should be expanded?

I will touch slightly on what Senator Ruane said about the fear of crime, which is important. One of An Garda Síochána's core messages, which is not emphasised enough, much of the time by politicians, is that its job is to eliminate causes of crime as well as the fear of crime. What restorative justice programmes has the Probation Service seen that have worked well? Working in the courts I often found that ad hocor informal restorative justice worked quite well. For example, if there was a burglary or an assault, an introduction of the person who was charged to the victim often worked quite well. It eliminated the fear of the unknown if the person whose house was broken into could meet the person who had broken into it. They could get some sort of communication going. Where has the Probation Service seen that working well?

I thought the IPRT's third recommendation was very good. It relates to placing a positive statutory obligation on the agencies to co-operate around prisoner release. Time after time in Kerry, I saw people released from prison who had been suspended from the housing list. The council's obligation to house them was met by putting them into a hostel with other people who were taking drugs or drinking. They had no chance of escaping from the reasons that had put them into prison in the first place if they were put back into that environment. What does the Probation Service suggest in that regard?

We see long waiting lists for therapies, psychologists, etc. Ms Hyland of Core Youth Services spoke about services in the community. What services does she mean and how can they best be resourced and expanded?

Ms Bernie Meally:

I will respond to the Deputy's first question on the timely processing of young people.

What we have seen is that quite often when a young person has engaged in a criminal act, that case will not go before the courts for a number of months, if not years. By the time that young person faces the consequences of his or her behaviour, his or her circumstances may have changed and he or she may not remember the act or the issues or needs that led to him or her being involved in that particular situation. That makes it challenging for any youth justice agency that is engaged with the young person to support him or her to change behaviour. These young people have many risks and needs in their lives. If time has moved on and things have changed dramatically, it can be difficult to support them to reflect on their behaviours, to understand how and why they engaged in that behaviour and to formulate strategies to deal with them more appropriately in the future. In the past, we have seen a number of young people brought to court at the age of 18 for offences committed while they were under that age. That is also very problematic. For us, a more timely processing of those young people would have a much greater impact in terms of allowing them to address their behaviour appropriately and to change their behaviour.

Senator Ruane raised the age of intervention for young people. The new youth justice strategy recognises the need to engage with young people at an earlier stage in order to prevent an escalation of criminal or antisocial behaviour. GYDPs work with young people from the ages of eight to 11. There is a huge piece in regard to how professionals in the Garda or the Judiciary deal with young people appropriately. There is a piece in the new youth justice strategy around building capacity-----

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for having to cut off Ms Meally but I am conscious that a number of other witnesses want to come in. It is important that we hear from everybody. I note Ms Joyce, Ms Keaveney and a number of others have signalled. I am conscious that this is Deputy Daly's slot but I will allow a brief response from Ms Joyce.

Ms Molly Joyce:

I want to respond to the Deputy's point about the statutory obligation. It would strengthen inter-agency co-operation. Some really good work was done at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic but it has subsided slightly since then. It was a very concentrated period. As stated by the Deputy, this recommendation has been around for a long time so a statutory underpinning might help with getting it across the line and embedding it across the system. It occurs to us that Part 3 of the policing, security and community safety Bill might be an appropriate place for that because it speaks to a whole-of-government approach to community safety. That upcoming legislation might present an opportunity in that regard, but it will be a matter for the legislators to decide where it fits most appropriately.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am mindful that Deputy Daly's time has almost expired and a number of witnesses have not yet had an opportunity to come in. With the Deputy's permission, I can allow another minute or two for other witnesses to come in.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If all of my questions are not answered at this point, I can come back on them in the next round.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ms Keaveney, Mr. Ó Donnchú and Ms Hyland have signalled. I will allow a brief comment from each of them.

Ms Olivia Keaveney:

I thank Deputy Daly for his questions. The Probation Service has established a region specifically to work with young people who are before the courts. We fulfil the statutory obligations of the Children Act 2001, which it is important to say is very much in the spirit of diversion of young people at all stages away from the criminal justice system and from conviction and detention. We work directly with young people using a very individualised approach. Within that, we also engage with the family. To respond to one of Senator Ruane's questions, we also engage with siblings and we can signpost to appropriate services if there is a recognition that siblings in a family may be on the trajectory of moving into the criminal justice system. We would be in support of early interventions.

In terms of fear, that is an issue for young people. It can be perceived that they are up to something when they are simply passing the time. Some of the victimisation studies that were released by the CSO indicate that there is a perception that people in what are classified as disadvantaged areas are more at risk and that their safety is compromised by them being residents in those particular communities.

Mr. Cormac Ó Donnchú:

I will give some practical examples that may be of interest to members in regard to early interventions that we have come across in Dublin and are worthy of note. The first is the Early Learning Initiative run from the National College of Ireland which is involved in prenatal support for young women and detailed parenting support as the child progresses. It is worthy of closer examination by members. The second example is City Connects, my understanding of which is that it identifies all individuals attending primary school across a geographic area and does its best to connect the individuals with relevant services. It is a holistic overview of every individual in primary school. As I said, these are worthy of some further examination.

My final point is in regard to the point made by Ms Joyce that the local community safety partnerships will put interdepartmental engagement on a statutory footing. This will put a statutory obligation on other Departments to engage in community safety on a local basis.

Ms Carol Hyland:

On the long waiting lists and how we should resource them, we have found it really difficult to get young people into any other service. We believe that a multidisciplinary approach based in a youth service can only have a positive effect on young people. It is about creating an infrastructure around the young person in terms of youth workers, family support workers, drugs workers, counsellors, social workers, employability workers and sports workers. If the young person feels comfortable coming to the safe space that has been created, his or her behaviours in terms of antisocial behaviour can be challenged in a collaborative manner with all of the professionals who are needed to engage with the young person.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Keaveney, Mr. Ó Donnchú and Ms Hyland. The next speaker is Deputy Carroll MacNeill.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the witnesses for coming in. When listening to the stats from the IPRT, I was struck by how much they reminded me of research published in 2007 by the Association for Criminal Justice Research and Development in regard to young people in the Children Court. The study looked at 400 children in the Children Court at that stage. Although the language in it is slightly dated, it is exactly the same story. I am sure many of the witnesses are familiar with it. I will refer to some of the bullet points from the study. Young people who were before the Children Court were predominantly male, living in specific and recurring disadvantaged localities in each of the areas examined and were not in full-time mainstream education. Some 86% of those for whom education data were available on the District Court files had no engagement with mainstream education. By far the most common offences were road traffic offences, theft offences and public order offences. In the case of the public order offences, the circumstances were overwhelmingly linked to alcohol consumption. As in the case of current experience in courts, young people waited on average six months for their first court appearance. The approximately 30% who had a court appearance within a month and had their case concluded within six months had made, on average, eight court appearances in respect of each charge. This is a system that brought young children to the Children Court and kept them there for a period as they were brought before the court again and again.

It was notable on the files that one of the most common bail conditions applied by the Children Court at the time was not to attend at court 55, the Children Court in Smithfield, because it was apparent that young people were turning up too often, essentially, and were not in education. It was becoming too routine for them to be there. It is disturbing to hear that little has changed in that regard. On the other hand, it is very welcome to hear about the change to the Garda youth diversion programme, GYDP, and its opening up to children as young as eight, which is so important.

Having noted all of that, I want to ask about the impact of the pandemic on the operation of the GYDP. I apologise for arriving slightly late to the meeting and if the witnesses have already addressed this, there is no need to respond. One of my particular concerns about the GYDP is that when the office decides not to take forward a prosecution and insists on a welfare-based referral with Tusla, there is no oversight of how or even whether that is delivered. I would like to hear our guests' perspective on that. It seems to me that there is not much point in the Garda office deciding not to refer a child for prosecution because what that child needs is a welfare-based intervention while not having any certainty that such an intervention, whether it is anger-management, sexual therapy or some other referral that the child needs, actually happens and is effective or successful.

If we have time, I would also like to hear their views on the impact of the victim's directive on restorative justice programmes and about the application of an extension of the Joint Agency Response to Crime, JARC, to 18 to 24 year olds. Ms Joyce might be able to address the latter issue. I ask her to outline the practicalities of that. We may have identified young people in that age category who are committing a lot of offences but that is also the time of greatest vulnerability for them. It is essential that JARC be extended so that they get more supports throughout that period.

What I am really concerned about, if I am to get any responses today, is the follow-up on welfare-based referrals.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you Deputy. Are those questions directed at anyone in particular?

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe the witnesses from the Probation Service could respond on the oversight question but perhaps the community workers will have personal knowledge of people receiving welfare referrals which are followed up or not followed up.

Ms Olivia Keaveney:

The spirit of the Children Act sets out that matters of welfare should not come within the realms of the courts or the criminal justice arena and should be dealt with in the appropriate forum. What we have found is that the number of young people going forward to Oberstown is decreasing, which signifies that the Act is effective. In terms of the conferencing that the Deputy has referenced, there is a number of such opportunities available under the Children Act. One is family conferencing which the court can order us to convene and then we bring back a particular plan to the court which can be accepted.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry to interrupt but I have a very limited amount of time and that is not really what I am referring to with my question. I am talking about cases where there is a decision not to prosecute. It may not be relevant to the Probation Service. What I am concerned about is whether there is any evidence of oversight of Tusla in delivering the welfare referrals that were made as an alternative to prosecution.

Ms Olivia Keaveney:

As those young people may well be with the GYDP or the youth services, those witnesses may be best placed to answer the Deputy's question.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

Ms Kayleigh Canning:

I will come in there. We would not necessarily be aware of that level of oversight. In individual GYD projects, referrals are received from a number of different sources, one of which is the GYDP. An Garda Síochána might refer into the projects. However, if they choose not refer into a project, then the project would not necessarily have a lot of information on those young people because consent would not have been sought to share that information. That would be outside our level of knowledge in terms of the oversight from a Tusla point of view.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay, no problem. I will take it up Tusla directly. I just wondered if anybody in the sector had a sense of it. I invite Ms Joyce to respond on the JARC extension and the practicalities involved.

Ms Molly Joyce:

As we do not work in direct services, we would not have a view on the details of exactly how that is going to be rolled out. One point I would make though is that the youth justice strategy talks about a pilot approach. It would be really important to try to progress this as soon as possible and not let it sit for too long. The reason the youth JARC pilot is so important is that it is about addressing those young people who are engaged in the most serious type of offending. Feedback we received previously from those working the GYDP is that there is a sense that the most difficult to reach young people are not being picked up by the GYDP in all cases. Obviously, many people on this call would be able to speak to that in more detail but that is something we have heard. It is important that the pilot is actioned so that we can target our interventions at those who really need help the most and who are potentially going to cause the most harm if they are not engaged with.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Pringle is next.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This has been a very interesting discussion so far. Perhaps I am naive or simply wrong but one of the things that strikes me is that we seem to be having a Dublin postcode discussion. It seems that antisocial behaviour only happens in certain areas and that those are the areas that come into contact with the Probation Service and the Penal Reform Trust. If I am wrong, I would be grateful if the witnesses said so, but as I understand it, antisocial behaviour happens in all communities. It happens in middle class and well-off communities as well and has an impact there too. Statistics have been quoted here about people who come into contact with the criminal justice system but people in middle class and well-off communities largely do not come into such contact. How realistic are those figures in that context? Is it an issue that cuts across all communities?

Ms Sarahjane McCreery:

First, I want to come back to a comment made earlier by Senator Ruane on perceptions of crime and community safety. Someone also commented on moving from antisocial to pro-social behaviour. That is the real issue and Deputy Pringle is correct in what he says. In some areas, antisocial behaviour is not considered antisocial; it is considered regular behaviour by young people. They are hanging around in certain areas mainly because there is nothing else for them to do. That was particularly true during the pandemic. It is the case that where there are high concentrations of drug use and drug-related crime and we see young people hanging around on corners, there is a perception that they are, automatically, engaging in antisocial behaviour. This, coupled with over-policing of these areas because they are hot spots for drug selling, means that young people naturally come in contact with the police. There is definitely an issue with certain areas being over-policed but under-protected. We need to move away from over-policing areas and increasing policing resources towards changing the type of policing, which everyone has referenced today.

On the restorative piece, restorative practice does not have to be limited to those engaged in antisocial or criminal behaviour. It can also be effective before that happens. Residents who have the perception that young people are engaged in antisocial behaviour might just need to build up a relationship with those young people, have a dialogue with them and discuss what is really going on. This is where local community safety partnerships can play a vital role, given that 51% of such partnerships are made up of community members, which is brilliant. How many of them are young people who are just harmlessly hanging around on street corners because they have nothing else to do? It is about engaging those young people in the process and having that dialogue. That will automatically reduce the perception of antisocial behaviour and as a result, young people will be less likely to be engaging with the police. It will have a ripple effect. It is important to make sure that the voices of young people are included and that the restorative piece happens.

Ms Una Doyle:

I will respond to the question on antisocial behaviour being a beyond the Pale experience for communities. If I have time, I would like to come back to the impact of the victims' directive on restorative justice, which is a very important piece we all need to be very mindful of.

What tends to happen with antisocial behaviour is reporting and newsworthiness tends to land the story and the experience in the significant urban hubs, namely, Dublin, Cork and Limerick. That said, if we went to any community throughout the country, we would see they are experiencing antisocial behaviour at different times and in different patterns than might be experienced in the cities. As a national service we have a network of offices with 40 locations nationwide. I assure the committee that the District Courts and Probation Service are quite busy across the board in all those locations, which just shows the impact of that behaviour on people. The issue of fear in rural communities is also quite significant. It is different from the urban experience but is no less significant for the people who perceive themselves to be under threat or at risk of harm. We should not undermine their experience. Antisocial behaviour in different parts of the country may be experienced differently but is there nonetheless. Certainly, we know anecdotally that weekends, starting on Thursday and going through to Sunday, can have a significant impact across communities. That is also quite an important point to remember.

I will come back to the impact of the victims' directive on the restorative justice piece, which follows on from the last contributor. The EU directive on victims and, in particular, the provision of restorative justice has been transposed into Irish legislation. In that context, the directive very clearly states that it is affording and safeguarding the rights of, and protections for, victims in the criminal justice system. That is a very important point for all of us whether we are working with younger or older people, with those in communities or with people who feel separated from their community. The victim experience of the criminal justice system in particular is something we have to be very mindful of. That legislation brought in two very important things. One is about consistent, professional practices and engagement with victims throughout the process and their rights to be protected in that regard. Second, on restorative justice, the EU directive is very clear in stating that where restorative justice provision is available it must be delivered to the highest standard and to best practice and delivered by trained competent staff. That is a very important point for all of us. We have to ensure that our interventions are not inadvertently causing extra harm for victims or secondary victimisation elsewhere.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The two Core representatives are offering to speak. I ask one or both of them to come in and I will then go to Mr. Guiney.

Mr. Thomas McCarthy:

I will pick up on the issue of perception. Senator Ruane asked me a question earlier that I do not think I answered. It has been talked about a little more during the meeting. People are drinking in the city centre every weekend. I am sure there are hundreds of arrests; I do not know the numbers. There are loads of broken cars and windows and people who get beaten up and end up in hospitals and so on. It happens every weekend and is never reported but if one incident happens in an area like ours, it is all over the newspapers. There is a perception of antisocial behaviour in certain areas that get scapegoated for it.

I will mention that 99% of the time, if somebody walked by a group of young people where I work, absolutely nothing will happen. Young people on the corner are not involved in any antisocial behaviour 99% of the time. If they were playing sports and people walked by, those people would not be scared. The point I am making is that young people are hanging around on corners because they have nowhere else to go. They are either in their gaff on a PlayStation or on the corner with their mates. They do not have anywhere else to go. In Dublin city, more and more space is being taken for housing, businesses and hotels. Every time a little space is taken away, it means less space for young people to have a place to go and the more they will hang around on corners in areas where they become a nuisance to other members of the public. I would like to talk more about this when I have a little more time, if someone else wants to ask me about it.

One of the things we need to think about when we build cities - I am just talking about Dublin because I work there but it could apply throughout the country - is the need to recognise that we build them for people and not for builders, not for people to profit from and not for hoteliers. We are building cities for the people who live in them. In cities and urban areas in particular, and I am only speaking about urban areas because I work in them, there is no space, infrastructure or resources for these young people who are getting condemned and scapegoated across the media and throughout our country. That needs to be talked about a little more. That is all I wanted to say about that.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is great. I thank Mr. McCarthy. He is right that it is about Dublin city but it also concerns every other large town and conurbation in the country. That point is well made. I will go to Mr. Guiney. I am conscious that he has not had a great opportunity so far to contribute and I want him to have his time as well. We have, in effect, just completed the first round of members. I am conscious Mr. Guiney has not contributed an awful lot during the meeting. He is welcome to make his points now if he wishes.

Mr. Richard Guiney:

I thank the Chairman. What Senator Ruane had to say about perceptions of safety was absolutely spot on. In Dublin city centre, we do not have the kind of levels of crime there are in other cities, yet people do not feel safe. For example, we do not have the levels of knife crime that are in a number of UK cities or the gun crime that occurs in other cities. We have been very conscious of why it is people do not feel safe. Why do we have very low perceptions of safety? One of the things we did during the Better City For All process was to look at people who are very vulnerable. As Senator Ruane said, young people are not consciously engaging in behaviour they believe to be intimidating. They are not engaging in criminal behaviour but they are behaving in a way that instils a degree of fear or anxiety in others. Better City For All was about addressing the needs of people who, for various reasons, find themselves on the street in congregated settings. In the city at present a lot of very good work is being done by voluntary groups, but it is not integrated into the overall supports and addressing the needs of people be those addiction or mental health issues. Those services exist and can be better co-ordinated. There is more to be done in the space of what we were trying to do with Better City For All. We can achieve a lot in assisting people with their needs and addressing those perceptions of safety held by the wider community.

The engagement between the Garda and communities has been mentioned a few times. There was a small areas policing initiative a number of years ago, which we found to be incredibly effective. That was where members of the Garda were assigned a specific location in the city. The same principles were also applied in the north-east inner city. People got to know a garda in that community Garda response. We found that was very effective in addressing many low-lying issues on the ground and engaging with people who were behaving in a way that was instilling anxiety in others. I would like to see more being done with that kind of community Garda approach. We found it to be incredibly effective.

More generally, if we can focus on some of those overall solutions, we will get a lot out of the processes. We do not live in a society that is as dangerous as other locations. We can certainly match the general levels of safety and well-being if we just make those correct interventions.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Ward has just come in from the Chamber. I will give him the opportunity to put his questions if he wishes.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry I had to step out. I wanted to make a couple of acknowledgements. I have been following the debate online. I welcome the massive breadth of experience and expertise before us. I also welcome the fact that many commentators said this is not an issue for a single agency, body or group to solve.

Everybody must come together to solve antisocial behaviour. It is very easy sometimes when we talk about this in the abstract to ignore just how pervasive and damaging antisocial behaviour can be to individuals, obviously, but to communities and societies as well. I congratulate everybody for the work they do to help us move towards a resolution of this issue.

I particularly acknowledge the Probation Service, which I have cause to deal with in my day-to-day life. I do not think it could possibly get enough resources. I know that things are tight but it does excellent work with the various people who come before the courts and benefit from liaison with its officers around that country. I particularly want to acknowledge that.

A number of speakers mentioned restorative justice measures. I must say that restorative justice has been shown to work really well, not just because it works for the individual who has committed the offence, perhaps, but particularly because it works for the injured party, victim or person who was subjected to whatever criminal activity it was. We do not put enough focus on it. It seems to me to have dropped off the radar slightly. Much of the focus on restorative justice has fallen into the lap of the judge of the day, whoever he or she may be. Some judges are very proactive in pushing restorative justice solutions. I know one who is now retired who was very good at always laying that out. I am conscious that Ms Joyce is here from the IPRT as well. We shared a discussion on this at an event at University College Dublin recently. Is there a role, and I do not know whether it is with the Department of Justice or any of the witnesses' agencies, to push that restorative justice agenda with the Judiciary? What training is available for judges as it stands?

I know the IPRT particularly champions the notion that custody or prison should be a last resort. I agree with that, particularly when we are talking about these types of offences. Although they can do enormous damage, it is also behaviour that can be addressed if we come at it from the right angle. In the same way that the Children Act 2001 provides an obligation for the Judiciary to consider all solutions other than custody first with regard to this kind of behaviour, I worry that maybe the Judiciary has not got enough training or information with regard to the restorative justice solutions that are available. Is there a role for some agency to push harder to provide judicial training or equally, provide training to barristers or solicitors who are working in the criminal courts? Does anyone have a view on that?

Ms Molly Joyce:

I am happy to jump in with a quick observation on that. I thank the Senator for raising the issue. The key agency that comes to mind is, of course, the Judicial Council, which was recently established. I know there was a report today or yesterday, which I have not had a chance to look through, identifying some concerns about the resourcing available for judicial training. That will obviously be an issue. Judicial training will be absolutely key. That seems to be the most obvious way in which we can potentially address the gap the Senator has identified in respect of actually providing judges with training about the options available and the reasons restorative justice might be more effective than sending someone to prison.

In addition, the sentencing guidelines and information committee is part of the Judicial Council. It has started some really good work in terms of building research in the area of developing sentencing guidelines. Again, something that could be explored through that work is whether restorative justice measures could actually be included. Certainly, we do and will be advocating for the principle of prison as a last resort to be embedded within any sentencing guidelines going forward. That is probably the key agency but someone else might have some additional input on that.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does anyone else wish to respond?

Ms Una Doyle:

I will come in if that is okay. I thank Senator Ward for the endorsement of the work of the Probation Service. It is nice to hear.

Building on the response I gave the Senator's colleague earlier regarding victims of crime and the impact it has had on restorative justice here in Ireland, one of the things it has done is open up and broaden the debate on restorative justice. A debate and conversation that probably would have been in the realm of community sanctions within criminal justice has now actually opened up to a much wider discourse in terms of other stakeholders, including the community. That is really important.

Much work is going on in the background at the moment in terms of looking at how we might further develop our restorative justice services and interventions. When I say "we", I am not exclusively talking about the Probation Service. We are one organisation that would see restorative justice as an integral part of our work but there are other organisations too, such as our colleagues in the Garda Síochána, etc., and the direct provision some of the projects provide. That is also important.

I am not sure if people are familiar with a working group called Restorative Justice: Strategies for Change, RJS4C, which is looking at strategies in relation to the promotion, pushing out and development of restorative justice, and how we might approach things differently in that space. Again, I think potential developments are coming down the track in that regard.

From a probation perspective, we have developed our restorative justice and victim services unit. Although it is a small unit in headquarters, it has a key function in providing the leadership and connectivity around best practice in restorative justice interventions, which actually stems out nationwide to all our offices and in turn links in with the Judiciary. Obviously, different judges have different preferences in terms of options available to them. Certainly, however, much has been done around education and information sharing and working with the Judiciary around that. Yet, there is much more to be done. It is certainly a space that will grow. There are interventions from the perspectives of the various stakeholders, whether it is the offender, the victim or the community, that yield benefits for all and is cost-effective.

Without getting too much into anecdotes, something came up around people's perceptions of harm, etc. We had an experience where we held a restorative conference that featured a young man who had stolen a car from an elderly couple. In the process of the conference, the young man learned that the car was technically that couple's legs for going to their various appointments. He then began to empathise. He could see his grandmother in the lady who was there. Similarly, from the perspective of the couple whose car was stolen, it was really important that they heard that it was random. People who are victims of crime often worry that they are a target. They worry that they were deliberately focused on when the reality, while not excusing the behaviour, is that it could have been any car. They needed to hear that to know there was not some particular vendetta or targeting going on. Those are just some of the examples or flavours around the restorative justice interventions we can see yielding benefits for all concerned.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Doyle and Senator Ward. That now concludes our opening round. There is an opportunity for members to come in a second time if they wish. It is not compulsory but anyone who wishes to make a second comment can do so. Senator Ruane was keen to get in again. Other members may indicate if they wish to speak.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The recurring theme of restorative justice has come up and it is kind of widening out the conversation from the antisocial piece because restorative justice is obviously not only related to that level of crime. When we speak about restorative justice, obviously it is really important to meet the needs of the victims. For me, however, restorative justice is also about the rehabilitative aspect and recidivism. We are inclined to focus on the victims in that conversation but if we all have the same agenda, say, for communities, then it is also about that healing aspect of the rehabilitation and reintegration of the offender.

Should we have a targeted body or branch of the justice system that looks entirely at restorative justice in order that it is being implemented as a broad concept, principle and policy? I have worked with young men who have done some of the harshest of crimes, moving beyond antisocial behaviour. Some of them have expressed their want, I suppose, to engage in a restorative justice practice. They might mention it to their parole board when they are up for parole. It will always be a victim's choice whether to do that but having the option is important. It never seems to go anywhere, however.

Is there also a role for parole boards? Where do they go with questions like that if somebody in the criminal justice system asks to engage in a restorative justice practice? What are the steps for somebody to engage in a restorative justice practice? Are they clear? How are they followed up on? How are they engaged in from a practical perspective?

Anyone who feels that he or she can contribute to that is welcome to.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is open to the floor.

Ms Una Doyle:

I thank Senator Ruane. She is absolutely right. Opportunities for restorative justice interventions for those who are convicted and imprisoned should be, and are, available. In my comments thus far, I focused very much on what is available within the context of the community because we are talking about antisocial behaviour and that tends to display in the community. Certainly, we have experience of and engaged in restorative justice interventions with people who are in prison who have committed offences some time ago and have served a significant part of a prison sentence, and that has involved victim-offender mediation. That is available and it is being delivered through the Prison Service with ourselves.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Doyle.

Ms Sonya Keniry:

I am co-ordinator with the Local Community Safety Partnership. I wanted to come in on restorative justice, as it is obviously the topic of the afternoon.

Some of the difficulties with restorative justice might be that there is a long lead-in into it. It is a voluntary process and those who have survived a criminal event might not want to come in initially. A lot of work needs to be done to support them to come in to a restorative event. Equally, a young person might need a lot of work to encourage them to participate. However, if both parties become involved, it is a win-win situation for both.

I understand the Senator's concern to concentrate on young people who are involved in the perpetration of some of these events but it is kind of a circular process for people that they can come in and go out of. If the heat is taken out of the scenario for the community, it takes the pressure off the youth, and that is a win-win.

The Senator was wondering about where young people gather in groups. We are new to the community. The community safety partnership is up and running eight or nine months; I am there approximately three. Anybody gathering in groups is a cause for concern for people coming into our office and telling us what is going on. I refer to anybody who they perceive themselves to be possibly at risk from. It can be new nations, it can be the Roma community, it can be groups of men who are gathering and, of course, it can be youth. People who perceive themselves to be in a particularly heated scenario will identify risk wherever they see it, whether that be right or wrong.

Small area policing is ongoing. We have a map that will identify individual community gardaí across the north inner city so that if a community member wanted to reach out to that community garda, the community member could do that.

We are anxious to support restorative practice. It can go beyond the restorative event itself. For instance, intergenerational communities can be supported to come together in a collaborative way so that they learn more about each other and they take some of their concerns about each other out and talk about them and allow that to dissipate and for communities to move on. The more that we engage in dialogue with different sections of the community, the hope is that the community would move on in a more effective way together.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Keniry. I call Deputy Martin Kenny, who has a second round slot.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, I will go back to the restorative justice, which is an interesting topic. The data from the IPRT mentions the very high levels of reoffending, particularly among younger people, in Ireland. I wonder is there any comparative data for people who have engaged in the restorative justice process in respect of that. I suspect that there would be a much lower rate of reoffending because of the nature of that. I wonder how much study and work has been done in respect of that.

Mr. Guiney spoke about the fact that we generally live in relatively safe communities and yet we have this perception that they are not safe even when they are. I have spoken on numerous occasions to people who work in Dublin city centre, perhaps in the night-time economy, who leave a bar after a shift late at night and have to make their way home. There may not be a taxi close by. They feel fearful trying to get to a place where they can find a taxi. There is a sense, while I absolutely respect that we know it is relatively safe compared to many other cities in the world, that if people have a perception of not being safe they are not safe in themselves. We have to respect that. One of the big issues that comes up in this regard is that they do not see local gardaí in the area. They do not see the patrol car. They do not feel that they are protected in that way. The small area policing is part of that but, particularly in that late-hour scenario and after dark, in the public transport services, DART stations, Luas stations and such places, there are similar issues where people feel unsafe. We can say sometimes it is unwarranted but, at the same time, there are incidents that people will point to which will give them clear verification of the reason they feel unsafe. We cannot be blind to that. We need to make sure that we have adequate policing in place so that people have that sense of security as they move around, particularly late at night or in the evening.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Deputy want to take feedback from the floor?

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would welcome feedback, particularly on the restorative justice issue.

Ms Molly Joyce:

I do not have any figures on the reoffending rates of people who have engaged in restorative justice. In our submission, we cited the 62% of people released from prison in 2015 reoffending within three years. The comparative figure for people for that period who had engaged with probation was 49%. Therefore, it was lower. Unfortunately, I do not have a breakdown of exactly what engagement that was with probation services. It may be something that the Probation Service can pick up. It certainly is something that I can look into further and come back to the Deputy on. It is important to see whether we can show the impact of restorative justice. It is something we would be interested in exploring further.

Mr. Richard Guiney:

I certainly would not underestimate the importance of how people feel. We are trying to encourage people to spend their time in Dublin city centre and if they do not feel safe, that is a significant issue for us.

We can look at things such as the crime prevention through environmental design, CPTED, principles, that I mention earlier, which is basically how we lay out our city and use more innovative ways of instilling a degree of comfort in people. That has been used effectively in other cities. They are something well worth investing in.

Operation Citizen was addressing some of the issues in terms of the Garda presence on the street but we can always do with more gardaí, particularly at night. What we saw before the pandemic was an increase in the evening and night-time economy, and perhaps a decrease in the daytime economy. In all our emergency services and all the services we provide, including the transport the Deputy mentioned, we need to look at providing more at night. That is the where, internationally, the trend was going before the pandemic and we assume it will kick off again as the pandemic recedes. It is an important part of the overall economy that we address the needs of people, as the Deputy rightly pointed out, not only who are patrons of venues at night but who work in those venues. They deserve services such as night transport and they deserve to feel safe when they come out of their place of work.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to flag that we have a small bit of private business to transact after the witnesses have concluded. I call Deputy Carroll MacNeill.

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While I stand to be corrected, I believe the restorative justice programme for young offenders was suspended by the GYDB precisely because of the difficulty with the interaction with the victims directive. Can anybody confirm if that is the case? No. I think it was about the protection of the child - the victim. I thank the witnesses for coming in and for their contributions.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all Deputies and Senators for their contributions. Most of all, I thank the representatives from all the associations and the individuals who appeared before the committee today. I also thank all those who made submissions in writing. We will consider the findings at a subsequent meeting. We will review the engagement today and what we took from it. We will then produce a report to be launched in due course. That will contain all the submissions in their raw form as appendices. It will also contain whatever conclusions we draw from the engagement. I thank the witnesses for their participation. We normally publish all the opening statements on the committee website; I presume that is agreed by all.

We will go into private session now to discuss some internal housekeeping matters. The witnesses may wish to log out. I thank them again for giving of their time this evening.