Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move the following Further Revised Estimate:

Vote 24 - Justice, Home Affairs and Migration (Third Further Revised Estimate).

That a sum not exceeding €2,724,546,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Probation Service staff and of certain other services including payments under cash limited schemes administered by that Office, and payment of certain grants.

I have formally moved the motion, but I just want to recite exactly what is involved. A sum not exceeding €2,841,123 gross will be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31 December 2025 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration and of certain other services including payments administered by that Office, and payment of certain grants. The Estimate also makes provision for additional capital funding in respect of the international protection accommodation services, IPAS, and reflects the use of additional appropriations-in-aid to make payments under the criminal legal aid scheme and to victims of crime who have received awards from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal. This technical adjustment increases the gross ceiling by €10 million but does not impact the net level.

As Deputies will be aware, the programme for Government contains a commitment regarding the transfer of certain functions between Departments. On 1 August, following approval by the Government, responsibility for the Irish Film Classification Office, IFCO, was transferred to the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport and responsibility for the Property Services Regulatory Authority and the Property Services Appeals Board was transferred to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Housing. This is not quite the final element, but it is nearly the final element, of the transfer of function in the programme for Government for my Department. There will be one other minor transfer that will be effected pursuant to the criminal law and civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill 2025, which will hopefully be introduced this term. The Bills is necessary because, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be aware, under the Mulcreevy principle, I cannot use secondary legislation to amend primary legislation. Primary legislation will therefore be necessary for the final transfer functions.

Deputies will recall that the House has previously approved Further Revised Estimates to take account of these transfers. The most recent of these was in June relating to the transfer of the National Cyber Security Centre and responsibility for cybersecurity policy, transferring from the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications to my Department. Prior to that, a Further Revised Estimate introduced on 1 May 2025 involved in the region of 330 staff and 150 contractors, and a budget allocation of over €2 billion, moving from the Department of children's Vote.

The original Revised Estimate for my Department was approved on 1 April in advance of the commencement of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024, and the establishment of two new Votes for the Policing and Community Safety Authority and Fiosrú under the justice Vote group. Therefore, I am seeking the approval of the House for this Further Revised Estimate for the justice Vote for 2025.

With regard to the transfer of functions, the allocation for IFCO, previously the Film Censor’s Office, is transferring to the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport. The gross allocation is €832,000 and appropriations-in-aid are €840,000. I believe the House will agree that the activities of that office align well with the Department of culture.

The allocation for the Property Services Regulatory Authority and the Property Services Appeals Board is transferring to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The gross allocation is €4.25 million with appropriations-in-aid resulting from fee income for licensing active of €2.4 million. Again, these functions are aligned with the overall role and function of the Department of housing.

I will now proceed to deal with the capital funding for the purchase of the Citywest accommodation. This Estimate also makes substantial provision for additional capital funding in respect of international protection accommodation. I am pleased that €113.25 million is being provided in line with the decision of Government to purchase Citywest, a large former hotel complex and site in the outer Dublin region. This represents the first significant move in support of the Government’s policy to reduce reliance on the private sector and increase the capacity of State-owned sites. The full purchase price, including VAT, was €148.25 million and represents good value for the State. A sum of €113.25 million is the net funding requirement for the Vote, taking into account the limited existing capital allocation. The purchase of the property provided a unique opportunity to deliver a high-capacity State-owned accommodation centre in a strategic location within an accelerated timeline. The purchase will significantly reduce the current expenditure on State accommodation at this site and will mean that we will save more than €1 billion over a 25-year period. It will increase the value for public moneys now and for the future. The payback period on the purchase price is approximately four years due to the reduced running costs of a State-owned facility. The facility will also act as a cornerstone to the State's implementation of the migration pact in 2026, acting as a screening centre and border procedure location, as required under the new EU pact.

I will now turn to the criminal legal aid scheme and criminal injuries compensation scheme, in respect of which there are further allocations. I am taking this opportunity to provide additional funding for the criminal legal aid scheme of €8 million, and €2 million for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal. This is being funded from appropriations-in-aid, which are increasing by €10 million arising from immigration registration fees. From an accounting perspective, this increases the gross ceiling by €10 million but does not impact the net level.

As a result of the motion before us and as a consequence of the changes outlined, Vote 24 will have a budget allocation for 2025 of €2,724,546,000. I commend the motion to the House and ask it to approve the necessary financial arrangements that I have outlined.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

These Revised Estimates relate to several matters, including costs associated with international protection accommodation and the purchase of the Citywest Hotel, funding for criminal legal aid, and the criminal injuries compensation scheme agus ba mhaith liom aghaidh a thabhairt ar roinnt de na sean áiseanna seo.

While the justice committee had a very constructive engagement with the Minister yesterday, it should be put on the record that there is a long way to go in addressing the costs associated with the provision of IPAS accommodation. Tá go leor ceisteanna le freagairt fós agus tá an iomarca airgid á caitheamh fós. There needs to be a thorough examination of previous IPAS contracts signed. The Minister argues that contracts were signed under pressure due to the number of those in need of accommodation in the IPAS system at that stage. However, I contend very strongly that this does not remove us from the responsibility to ensure there is accountability and probity in how public money is and was spent. People have become millionaires through the provision of IPAS accommodation and have built companies solely for this purpose. We have to ask how companies secured contracts for what were sometimes eye-watering amounts, including where they had little or no record in the provision of such services. While the Minister argues that he is making changes, the reality is that a record figure of more than €120 million was paid for IPAS accommodation in July alone.

That is the latest month for which figures are available.

The Minister mentioned at the committee that there is now a rate card with regard to what will be paid for IPAS accommodation. He also signalled that this will not be made public. I am strongly of the view that the lack of transparency that was at the heart of spending on IPAS accommodation allowed that system to get out of hand. There needs to be more transparency and accountability. There also needs to be engagement with communities with regard to the location of IPAS accommodation. That includes cases such as the purchase of the City West Hotel, where State-run facilities are being developed. We all support the concept of State-run facilities, but that does not mean we neglect our responsibilities to engage with communities on matters that affect them.

I am aware the Minister has a large number of items on his agenda; however, I would put it to him that many things are still taking far too long to sort out. While there is an increase in these further Revised Estimates with regard to criminal legal aid, nothing has been done to sort out the crisis with respect to access to civil legal aid. I welcome the publication of the review of civil legal aid, but it should not have taken three years to complete. I have also welcomed proposals to increase eligibility thresholds though there are now serious questions about whether what is proposed is adequate. While implementation of many of the recommendations in that report will take some time, there are things the Minister needs to do without further delay. There needs to be urgent action regarding the fact that many people - and I am particularly talking about women trying to get barring orders in respect of abusive partners - are unable to secure civil legal aid representation. That is because of the level of the fees that are paid, which has remained unchanged since 2012, and the structure as to how those fees are paid. This has resulted in a situation that I brought to the attention of the House previously whereby those who have been granted civil legal aid certificates cannot find solicitors to represent them because fewer solicitors are taking on this work. The impact of this is that some people who are trying desperately to escape domestic violence situations are locked out of access to civil legal aid. That is unacceptable.

Recommendation 22 in the report to which I refer that report states:

An immediate review of the Legal Aid Board's capacity to administer the current Civil Legal Aid Scheme should be conducted by the Department ... in consultation with the Legal Aid Board.

The report recommends that this review should examine the Legal Aid Board's ability to recruit and retain in-house solicitors and sufficient external expertise and look at the salaries of current and future in-house solicitors, private practitioner fees and counsel fees. Has the review been initiated? If not, why?

The Minister will recall that I have raised with him on a number of occasions the issue of the adequacy of the criminal injuries compensation scheme and the lack of progress with putting it on a statutory footing. The Minister admitted during the discussion on the Revised Estimates at the committee in June that the fund gets exhausted early in the year, with people who endured serious injuries forced to wait until the following year for compensation in respect of serious and life-changing criminal injuries.

We welcome the additional allocation in the Revised Estimate today, but the scheme needs to be reformed, put on a statutory basis and properly funded. The Minister referred to the case of Blanco v.Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal, and the implications of that case with regard to what victims of crime can be compensated for. Arising from the case in question, a number of other cases have been referred to the Criminal Courts of Justice and a response is due in the coming months. The case to which I refer was taken by a man who, despite having received very serious life-changing injuries and a loss of earnings, received just €645 in compensation four years after a violent assault. While there is a broad agreement that the scheme needs to be properly funded and placed on a statutory basis, it is disappointing that the Minister indicated to that justice committee that this might not happen this year or even next year. That is not good enough, and it is also not good enough to say, as was said at the committee, that people will eventually get their money. Of course, that is the very minimum they should be entitled to but we also need to get to a point where the Minister is in a position to make a commitment that this scheme will be properly funded for 2026. I would appreciate it if the Minister could outline whether he intends to bring such a proposal forward in the context of budget 2026.

Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What strikes me reading through the Estimate is how little ambition the Government is showing when it come to targeting vulnerable young people, tackling domestic violence and living up to our obligations on prisons and immigration. Once again, we are presented with tables that look busy on the page but that fail utterly to meet the needs of the people who depend on a functioning and fair justice system.

On youth diversion, Vote 24 sets aside €33.2 million for youth justice interventions this year, up from €30.5 million last year - an increase of €2.6 million. The latter amount represents the cost of a few consultancy contracts in any other Department. We are told it will support 4,600 young people nationwide. That is the total ambition of Government, namely 4,600 places in a country where tens of thousands of children are growing up in poverty and where youth workers tell us daily that they are at breaking point.

In the context of the so-called early intervention for eight- to 11-year-olds, 767 children are targeted for this year. That is 767 across the whole country, which is less than the enrolment of a single primary school in some areas. Why is early intervention capped at 767 places? Can the Minister name a single county where every child who needs diversion actually gets it? What is outlined appears to be a ration book as opposed to a youth justice strategy. If we believed in prevention, we would double capacity and make diversion a right, not a privilege as it presently stands.

The allocation in respect of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence will increase from €54 million to €61 million, but this is no step change. We are still talking about just 170 refuge units nationwide. How can the Minister stand over that when the Istanbul Convention says Ireland needs at least 500 units? We are also talking about just 307 men completing behaviour change programmes. Does the Minister really believe that 307 men in programmes is an adequate response in a country of 5 million people? Perpetrator accountability is a public safety work. At this scale, the allocation barely scratches the surface. Where is the recognition that violence is moving online? Survivors are stalked, tracked and harassed through their phones, yet not a single euro is earmarked for tackling cyber stalking, spyware or image-based abuse. Why is there no budget line for online violence?

On prisons and probation, the pattern repeats in our prisons. There is money at the back end of the system but nothing to prevent the harm in the first place. The Dóchas Centre is at 141% of capacity. Limerick Prison is at 128% of capacity. If these were schools or hospitals, inspectors would shut them down. When it comes to prisons, however, overcrowding has very clearly become a policy. The Department has set a target of 3,000 prisoners in programmes at a time when more than 5,000 people are actually in prison. That is simply cooking the books. Why is the Department hiding behind the figure of 3,000 when the true population is almost double that? Meanwhile, the Probation Service has a 90% success rate but it is consistently outspent in the context of prison beds that fail every day. Why is the Probation Service still being starved will overcrowded prisons get funding? Probation very clearly works; prison overcrowding does not. The recidivism rates give testimony to that fact. This Government funds failure and starves success.

On immigration, migrants are being charged millions in fees for registration, visas and citizenship. Families are paying thousands of euro to just stay in the country legally. How much will the State collect in migrant fees this year and how much of that will be reinvested in housing, early legal aid or integration? These fees are bankrolling bureaucracy and backlogs. Detaining people while they await deportation has become a practice. Despite the fact that this breaches international human rights, it is just accepted as a norm. Why is Ireland detaining people in breach of UN standards? Does the Minister accept that families are paying to finance their own exclusion? That is not integration; it is deterrence by delay.

The bigger picture is that these Estimates are about rationing services, not about building justice. Youth diversion is capped at 4,600 places when the level of need is so much greater. Domestic violence support is stuck at 170 refuge units in a threadbare way. We are not holding perpetrators to account. Probation, despite being proven to work, is starved of resources while prisons are overflowing. The immigration system is collapsing and falling far short of basic human rights standards.

Ours is not a justice system that is built on rights or safety.

It is a system designed to ration services, keep demand manageable and push the most vulnerable out of sight. We should be starting our Estimates with rights. We should massively expand refuge spaces, guarantee early intervention for vulnerable young people, invest properly in probation and build a humane migration system that is rooted in solidarity with and acknowledgement of the struggle that many people have had. Until then, these Estimates remain what they are today, tables of numbers that speak volumes about a Government that knows the cost of everything and, clearly, the value of nothing.

Alan Kelly (Tipperary North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is just a transfer of a number of functions and also capital in relation to the purchase of accommodation in regard to provision of accommodation for IPAS. I would make an observation in relation to it. As referred to by Deputy Carthy earlier, we had interaction yesterday in the justice committee in regard to value for money in the purchase of properties, which will be seismic but over will create greater value over a number of years, it is believed, given the ongoing volumes of people coming into the country. Will the Minister outline whether there are intentions to purchase similar types of properties, maybe not to the same scale but properties in other locations around the country? I read through the costings the Minister estimated for Citywest, which are seismic, but in comparison to what was going on before, there are savings. However, we also need to match that in relation to where other properties can be procured and ensure fair geographical distribution. I have asked numerous times and received a breakdown by local electoral area of where people are being located. I understand that this cannot be an exact science and that there are various different measures that have to be met. However, there is an imbalance in regard to where we are locating people in communities. I believe in the system and I want it to work, but it has to be fair. I am still not sure it works or is fair. I accept that there have been improvements and I acknowledge and commend the Minister on some of those improvements. Having said that, how do we ensure we have geographical balance, regional balance and community balance in this?

I respect the fact that the Minister cannot give out the weightings table by which decisions are made between when to give a provider a contract and when to buy another property, but it would be good to have some indication of the measurements by which these are made. Transparency is the Minister's ally here. There are serious concerns out there about how so much money has been spent with certain people and companies in certain locations. It cannot continue. I appreciate the fact that, when the Minister's predecessor was in office and during Covid-19, the number of people coming into the country was unprecedented. Checks and balances, the rules and everything else was up for question. The volume of accommodation that was required instantaneously was incredible. There was serious pressure. It was not acceptable as a country that we were left in that position, but the reality is we were. Now, it is different. Now, there is time for change and time to be able to create a form of rules and balances as regards how we spend this money.

I appreciate what is going on in terms of Citywest but I want to see it across the board for many reasons. For social reasons, I want the best for people who are coming into this country and who need and deserve protection. I believe their applications should be processed quickly, particularly where there are children. If they are not processed within a reasonable time, then we do not have an opportunity to remove them. We had that debate yesterday. However, we need to see some form of criteria that all of us in this House can stand over regarding how these decisions are made. If the Minister elaborated more on these observations in his reply, I would appreciate it.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the three Deputies for their useful contributions. Obviously, they were all present for the justice committee meeting yesterday where we covered much of the ground in respect of international protection accommodation services.

Deputy Carthy started with reference to the issue of IPAS. All of us here - Deputies Gannon, Kelly and Carthy and myself - agree that far too much money is being spent on accommodation for international protection applicants. My policy objective is to try to drive down the amount of money we are spending on it. It is not sustainable in the long run when we consider that, this year, we are going to spend €1.2 billion on IPAS. I would love to have that money available to deal with other issues that have been identified by Deputy Carthy, such as criminal legal aid, civil legal aid and the criminal injuries compensation tribunal, CICT.

In terms of the objective and as I said yesterday, the real driver of the cost of IPAS is the number of people within the system and the length of time they stay therein. I gave the statistics yesterday as to the number of people claiming asylum in Ireland, both prior to and during Covid-19. In the three years since then, from 2022 to 2024, we saw 45,000 people arrive and claim asylum. Our accommodation provision in IPAS went from 7,000 to 33,000 people who we are accommodating at present.

I note what Deputy Carthy said about people making a lot of money out of this. That is the case, but regrettably, because we do not have State-owned accommodation, we have to pay people to provide this accommodation. My objective is to try to ensure that we reduce the amount of money we are spending on it. That is why we proceeded with the purchase of Citywest. To answer Deputy Kelly's question directly, the State intends to make other purchases similar to the purchase of Citywest. I am conscious that we probably will not get a facility of equal size to Citywest. However, it is necessary that we purchase more sites so that I can achieve the policy objective, which is that, by 2028, we will have 14,000 State-owned accommodation units for those seeking asylum. I want to get there because, as I said yesterday, the cost of accommodating an asylum applicant in private accommodation at present is €30,000 per year. The cost of accommodating him or her in State-owned accommodation is €12,000 per year. There is a clear saving in providing State accommodation as opposed to providing accommodation in the private sector.

I note what Deputy Carthy said about criminal legal aid and civil legal aid. I am in negotiations with the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation with respect to trying to get further increases in the criminal legal aid sphere. There has been a well-motivated campaign on this issue, seeking full restoration of criminal legal aid fees. I am also conscious, however, of the limitations of the civil legal aid system that operates. I got the report and the minority report from Mr. Justice Frank Clarke and his committee. I cannot give any commitments in respect of it.

Regarding the criminal injuries compensation tribunal, Deputy Carthy correctly pointed out the significance of the Blanco judgment. The reason that man got such a small award of €645 from the CICT is that the compensation tribunal does not compensate people for pain and suffering. All one will get from the CICT is compensation for material financial loss. It is very limited in what it provides for. One of the cases being considered at present is whether there is an obligation on the State to provide compensation for pain and suffering. It potentially could increase the liability of the State hugely. Obviously, that has to be taken into account.

I listened carefully to Deputy Gannon, who spoke about youth diversion. We have excellent youth diversion programmes in this country. Later on this year or early next year, I hope to be able to say that we have rolled out youth diversion programmes in every part of the country. They do outstanding work. They do not get enough credit. It is the same case with the Probation Service. The Probation Service is an entity within my Department that does superb work.