Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 45: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform in light of the ten different community sanctions that have been imposed by the courts as part of the provisions of the Children's Act 2001, if these community sanctions are available nationwide; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43041/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy may be aware that the ten community sanctions listed in section 115 of the Children Act 2001, as amended, include a range of measures which would normally involve a level of supervision of the young person by a probation officer. These may include, for example, involvement of the young person's parents or attendance by the young person at a specified training course, residential supervision or mentoring. They also include restriction on movement order, which is effectively a curfew overseen by An Garda Síochána.

Young persons probation, YPP, is a specialised division of the probation service with dedicated resources to work with children aged 12 to 18 who come before the courts. It was established to implement the sections of the Children Act 2001 relating to young persons probation in conjunction with the Irish Youth Justice Service. The young persons probation division of the probation service was extended in 2008 to provide a national service from bases in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Drogheda and Sligo. This has allowed for the community sanctions to be made available nationwide.

It is important to note that the imposition of any particular sanction is a matter for the courts. YPP assists the court through making recommendations which outline the most appropriate community disposal for consideration, based on a full evaluation and risk assessment. At a local level managers and officers liaise with the sitting Judiciary and Courts Service staff in regard to the provision of community sanctions.

Information on sanctions imposed by the courts on young offenders is published each year in the annual report of the Courts Service. These reports are available on the Courts Service website and in the Oireachtas Library. The most recent such report is in respect of the year 2009. Related information is also available in the probation service annual report, the most recent of which is also in respect of the year 2009. This report is available on the probation service website and also in the Oireachtas Library.

Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his reply and welcome that these services have been extended nationwide. The implementation of anti-social behaviour orders has been a complete failure, with three handed down to young people over three years. That is one per year. Does the Minister feel the legislation relating to such orders should be reviewed as it is a failure? Will he give a commitment to review that legislation?

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Every piece of legislation is reviewed. If the Garda Síochána bring to my attention some unease with regard to any piece of legislation we will have a look at it with the Attorney General. In this regard, there are approximately ten community sanctions, including the community service order, day centre order, probation order, training or activity programme order, intensive supervision order, residential supervision order, a suitable person care and supervision order, a mentor family support order, a restriction of movement order - which is, in effect, a curfew - and a dual order.

With regard to ASBOs, there was a discussion in the House earlier and I beg to differ with anyone who suggests that because only three orders were granted, this is in some way an indication of a lack of success. Some 1,541 behaviour warnings have been issued by the Garda Síochána. The principle behind ASBOs is that of an incremental process in order to ensure as much as possible that children are not brought to court. The was to prevent them going to court under a criminal sanction and the graduated approach to ASBOs is to ensure they do not end up in court under another procedure.

Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept that. It is proper that young people would be dealt with in that way and that they would be given a chance. Three ASBOs have been handed down. Is it the same position with behaviour orders? Do the courts hand them down? How many community service orders, day care orders, day centre orders or training and activity orders have been handed down by the courts in this period? If so, what will happen? How will the Minister stop young people terrorising vulnerable old people in their homes? ASBOs are not having an effect and this activity is continuing.

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To suggest that ASBO legislation is the only implement used by the Garda Síochána to prevent people being interfered with in their homes or in regard to anti-social behaviour is not correct as there are other means. The question put down by the Deputy in regard to the ten community sanctions clearly indicates that this is another modus operandi in regard to intervening with young people who commit crimes.

The Courts Service annual report of 2009 states that 30 juvenile defendants were given community service, 280 received probation orders and a further 560 received non-supervised sanctions, which included fines, peace bonds and disqualification. However, when considering the effectiveness of community sanctions, a key issue is the number of detention orders given. In 2009, 405 defendants received a detention order compared with 537 in 2007, which shows a significant reduction in the proportion of defendants receiving a detention order. Some 16% of juvenile defendants received a detention order in 2008 compared with 20% in 2007. The probation and welfare service annual report of 2009 shows that a further 418 young people were given orders for probation supervision during deferment of penalty.