Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 556: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on concerns raised in the third report by the Inspector of Prisons and Places of Detention that the Government has failed to invest in probation and other programmes to reduce recidivism; and his further views on the recent Amnesty International report finding that detention conditions do not comply with international standards due to the fact that they are overcrowded, lack adequate sanitation facilities and have insufficient education and employment programmes, that mentally ill patients continue to be held in prisons and that there is still no independent complaints mechanism for prisons as recommended by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. [23970/05]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The probation and welfare service operates under the aegis of my Department and has in the region of 430 staff and an annual budget of approximately €45 million. The objective of the service is to reduce re-offending and protect the public. It provides assessments on offenders to the courts and is responsible for the proposal and implementation of community sanctions. It also provides a probation service to prisons. My Department, through the service, provides funding to and works in association with 69 voluntary bodies in the provision of relevant services. The budget provision for assistance to voluntary bodies and their projects for the current year is €14.434 million.

The projects, which are made up of community groups and voluntary bodies, provide a range of services to offenders in local communities. I refer, for example, to pre-industrial training and education, offender management programmes, residential accommodation, drug and alcohol abuse treatment — intervention — awareness programmes, work with offenders in custody and post-release, as well as providing a vital ingredient of a focused daytime programme for those found guilty of criminal offences by the courts and placed on supervision to the probation and welfare service.

The effect is to make available to persons, as part of their supervision, access to intervention and facilities that might not otherwise be open to them because of their criminal histories. Many offenders fail to access or retain places in mainstream programmes or have become alienated from them, so they need the initial preparation of a positive learning experience from which they can move on to more specialised, community-wide services. For many too, particularly those released from custody, managed accommodation is vital to begin claiming social assistance, apply for training, commence employment, etc. With regard to the implementation of the Children Act 2001, Department of Finance sanction was obtained for an additional 30 staff for the probation and welfare service. Sections 78 to 87 of the Children Act 2001, which provide for a court-directed family conference convened by the probation and welfare service, were placed on a statutory footing with effect from 26 July 2004.

A pilot mentor project is due to commence shortly in the north Dublin area. The programme, located in the probation and welfare service office in Coolock, will serve as a model for the development of mentor — family support — orders provided for under sections 131 and 132 of the Act. Recruitment of staff for this new and innovative project has taken place with the employment of a co-ordinator and administrator. The programme will recruit volunteers who will act as mentors to young people who have been before the courts and are under the supervision of the probation and welfare service.

I understand from the Garda authorities that the policy of the Garda Síochána in respect of dealing with juveniles who offend is to consider the offender for inclusion in the juvenile diversion programme. The programme provides that, in certain circumstances, a juvenile under 18 years of age, who freely accepts responsibility for a criminal incident, may be cautioned as an alternative to prosecution. The Children Act 2001 placed this programme on a statutory footing and the relevant sections of the Act were commenced in May 2002.

The programme has proven to be highly successful in diverting young people away from crime by offering guidance and support to juveniles and their families. In the more serious cases, juveniles are placed under the supervision of Garda juvenile liaison officers, who are specially trained members of the Garda Síochána responsible for administering the programme at the local level. I am informed by the Garda authorities that in the year 2003, the Garda national juvenile office received 19,915 referrals, relating to 17,043 individual offenders, under the programme.

I have also been informed by the Garda authorities, which are responsible for the detailed allocation of resources, including personnel, that, as of 6 December 2004, there were 86 juvenile liaison officer gardaí and eight JLO sergeants working in the various divisions throughout the country. In addition, the national juvenile office has a staff of one superintendent, two inspectors and two sergeants.

Part 4 of the Children Act 2001 introduced the concept of restorative justice, specifically restorative cautioning and restorative conferencing, to the juvenile diversion programme. Essentially, these provisions provide for the inclusion, where appropriate and possible, of the victim, the juvenile's family and the wider stakeholding community in the process of diversion. To facilitate these innovative developments, most of the Garda juvenile liaison officers have now received training in mediation skills, with advanced training being provided to selected officers. Since the commencement of the relevant part of the Children Act in 2002, and up to the end of 2003, a total of 147 restorative justice events have been held. Early assessments indicate a high level of satisfaction from all those involved in the process.

In addition to the Garda juvenile diversion programme, there are in existence a total of 64 Garda youth diversion projects. These projects are a community-based, multi-agency crime prevention initiative which seeks to divert young persons from becoming involved — or further involved — in anti-social and-or criminal behaviour by providing suitable activities to facilitate personal development, promote civic responsibility and improve long-term employability prospects. By doing so, the projects also contribute to improving the quality of life within communities and enhancing Garda-community relations.

As the Deputy may be aware, recent years have seen a dramatic increase in the number of these projects, from 12 in 1997 to 64 at present, a process made possible, in part, by funding under the National Development Plan 2000-2006. The locations of the new projects were decided upon according to local needs by the Garda authorities, in conjunction with my Department. Funding of €5.471 million has been allocated to these and related projects in the current year. These programmes are responsible, in part, for the significant reduction in recent years in the number of under-21 year olds being sent to prison.

Unfortunately, some Irish prisons, no less than prisons in many other jurisdictions in the developed world, suffer from overcrowding and poor living conditions. These are matters which were of concern to me and the prisons authority interim board prior to publication of either of the reports referred to in the question.

My priority is to proceed as quickly as possible with the replacement of Mountjoy, Portlaoise, and Cork prisons with new modern prison facilities. These are major long-term projects which will take a number of years to bring to fruition. I have availed of a number of recent opportunities to apprise the House of the significant progress already being made in relation to them.

I do not accept that education and employment programmes in Irish prisons are insufficient by international standards. The reality is that the participation rate of more than 50% in prison education in Ireland is regarded as being high by international comparison and vocational training opportunities for prisoners, leading to accredited certification and marketable skills, is well on a par with what is available to prisoners in other jurisdictions. That is not, of course, to say that there is room for complacency. There is constant updating and review of prisoner programmes to take account of changing needs and opportunities. I might add that every effort is being made in the course of the current industrial relations situation in the prisons to minimise disruption to education and vocational programmes.

It is a fact that, as in other countries, persons with mental illness are committed to prison. In many cases, appropriate psychiatric care can be provided for such persons by visiting psychiatrists, including those from the Central Mental Hospital. What has been of particular concern to me is that prisoners who require inpatient psychiatric care are in a position to access such care within a reasonable time. In this regard, I welcome the allocation of additional funding to the Central Mental Hospital and the indication that a new 15-bed unit for the treatment of male prisoners is due to open in the near future and that the recruitment of 33 additional staff is under way.

The reference in the Amnesty International report to a complaints mechanism for prisoners refers to a recommendation of the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, CPT, that "complaints procedures should offer appropriate guarantees of independence and impartiality, and persons who may have been ill-treated should not be discouraged from pursuing a complaint". The position is that prisoners already have a number of options in making complaints to independent and impartial persons and bodies, that is, the prison visiting committee, the Inspector of Prisons and Places of Detention, the prison chaplain, the prison doctor, the Minister and the CPT. Prisoners also have access to the courts and may complain to the European Court of Human Rights. Where allegations of assault or ill-treatment are involved, prisoners are facilitated in making complaints to the Garda Síochána. There are no proposals to establish a further independent complaints mechanism for prisoners. For further information on this matter, the Deputy may wish to refer to page 19 of the response of the Government to the report of the CPT on its visit to Ireland from 20 to 28 May 2002, which is in the Oireachtas Library.