Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 170: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the difficulties and delays experienced by children's residential centres when seeking Garda vetting of staff from the Central Vetting Unit; and the steps he will take to ensure that the unit will have resources made available to it in order that it can conduct vetting of all adults working with substantial access to children, in particular the staff of children's residential centres, as a matter of urgency. [30698/06]

Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 241: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the fact that youth organisations are having to operate a vetting of job applicants via Garda intelligence, but there is as yet no statutory basis for same; and his views on whether the organisations doing so are indemnified against claims by aggrieved applicants. [30859/06]

Shane McEntee (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 246: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the average period of time it is taking for vetting potential employees in certain areas of activity including children's residential centres by the Garda Central Vetting Unit in 2004, 2005 and in the first six months of 2006; his views on whether An Garda Síochána has adequate staff resources to undertake the role; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30882/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 170, 241 and 246 together.

As a means of promoting the safety and security of vulnerable client groups, the Garda Central Vetting Unit (GCVU), in liaison with the Health Service Executive (HSE), formerly the Health Boards, has made and continues to make available criminal history vetting in respect of all prospective employees of children's residential centres.

In keeping with sound administrative practice, all vetting applications are processed centrally through the HSE for onward transmission to the GCVU, rather than at a myriad of local levels.

In recent months, new liaison mechanisms with the GCVU have been successfully implemented within the HSE. These include, most notably, the centralisation of the HSE's vetting operations, which allows for the development and concentration of expertise in the checking and counter-signing of vetting application forms within the HSE.

In 2006, the average turnaround time for processing valid vetting requests received by the GCVU has been approximately 4 to 5 weeks. This represents a marked reduction in processing times over recent years. By way of comparison, in 2004 and 2005, the average processing period for valid vetting requests was approximately 6 to 8 weeks. All client organisations of the GCVU are advised of the current processing time frame and have been further advised to allow for it in their recruitment and selection processes.

In order to facilitate the major, ongoing expansion in the availability of Garda vetting to a range of other employment sectors involving the care of children and vulnerable adults, staffing of the GCVU has already more than doubled in the past year, i.e., from 13 to 30 staff members. Existing staffing levels are adequate to meet existing demand, but they will be subject to continuing review as expansion proceeds.

The child protection vetting process involves the disclosure by the GCVU of criminal history information, not so-called soft information such as 'Garda intelligence', to the recruiting organisation, upon receipt of a written application which necessarily includes the written consent of the person to be vetted to the disclosure. The disclosed information should constitute only one factor in the recruitment decision, which at all times remains the responsibility of the recruiting organisation rather than the Garda Síochána.

Disclosure by the Garda Síochána is based on common law principles and is performed in accordance with the legal advices of the Attorney General. Recruiting decisions made by recruiting organisations, which, in part, may be based on disclosed criminal history information, are and will continue to be properly subject to existing employment and other law. Accordingly, the issue of indemnification does not arise.