Committee for Justice

OFFICIAL REPORT (Hansard)

Safer Communities Directorate: Department of Justice, Forensic Science Northern Ireland

9 June 2016 NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY

Committee for Justice

Safer Communities Directorate: Department of Justice, Forensic Science Northern Ireland

9 June 2016

Members present for all or part of the proceedings: Mr Paul Frew (Chairperson) Mrs Pam Cameron (Deputy Chairperson) Mr Alex Attwood Ms Clare Bailey Mr Doug Beattie Mr Roy Beggs Ms Michaela Boyle Mr Declan Kearney Mr Trevor Lunn Mr Pat Sheehan

Witnesses: Mr Anthony Harbinson Department of Justice Mr Steven McCourt Department of Justice Ms Karen Pearson Department of Justice Mr Stan Brown Forensic Science Northern Ireland

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): I welcome to the Committee Anthony Harbinson, director of the safer communities directorate; Karen Pearson, deputy director of the protection and organised crime division (POCD); Steven McCourt, acting deputy director of the community safety division; and Stan Brown, chief executive of Forensic Science Northern Ireland (FSNI). You are all very welcome. I advise you that the session is being recorded, hopefully, by Hansard and the transcript will be published on the Committee web page in due course. I am not sure who is starting off: is it Anthony?

Mr Anthony Harbinson (Department of Justice): Yes. Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to brief the Committee on the work of the Department's safer communities directorate. With me this afternoon, as you have already mentioned, are three deputy directors: Karen Pearson, who has recently taken up the role leading our protection and organised crime division; Steven McCourt, who leads our community safety division; and Stan Brown, the chief executive, as you mentioned, of Forensic Science Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, my colleague Rosemary Crawford, who leads our policing policy and strategy division, is unavailable this afternoon. I am sure that it will not be too long before she has an opportunity to be here before you, given the importance of the work that is done within that particular division.

The work done within the safer communities directorate is vital. The whole ethos behind everything that we do is about keeping people safe. I will touch on some of the work areas, but there are many more that I will not have time to explore in any depth today. Any of my colleagues and I would, of

1 course, be happy to come back at any stage to cover any area that you would like to go into in a little bit more detail. I also extend an invitation to the Committee to come along and visit the new forensic science laboratory at Seapark and indeed any of the other facilities of the many sponsored bodies that we look after. I am sure that they would all love to have a visit from the Committee at some stage.

The safer communities directorate has responsibility for the resourcing, policy and legislative framework for policing, forensics and community safety. We are also responsible for the coordination of the implementation of the DOJ elements of the Fresh Start Agreement. We are obviously working closely with our new Minister of Justice, and her agenda will set the direction for us as we move forward. Today, I would like to outline what we do in broad terms across the three divisions and FSNI. As the Minister's agenda develops, we will of course work closely with the Committee to make sure that you are up to speed on the work that we do as we go forward again.

First, I will look at the policing policy and strategy division, which is headed by Rosemary Crawford. Its primary aim is to manage and maintain the tripartite policing accountability arrangements between the Department, the Policing Board and the PSNI. It is essential that all three elements of the system work together well and effectively to achieve our shared aim of promoting public confidence in policing. Significant time and effort is devoted to ensuring robust oversight and governance of not only the Policing Board and the PSNI but a considerable number of the other bodies that operate under the wider policing system. This includes the Office of the Police Ombudsman and a number of smaller but important bodies providing services to the wider policing family, such as the Police Rehabilitation and Retraining Trust, the Northern Ireland Police Fund and the RUC George Cross Foundation. The division also sponsors the Probation Board, the Prisoner Ombudsman and the independent monitoring boards for prisons.

Some areas of this division's work that will be of particular interest to the Committee in coming months are, first, that the previous Executive approved the first stage outline business case for the Northern Ireland Community Safety College project. This set a clear strategic direction for the project and a sound basis for moving forward. The agreed preferred option will see the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service develop the site at Desertcreat and the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Prison Service refurbishing and extending existing facilities where appropriate. Updates will be provided to the Committee at appropriate stages as this project progresses.

Secondly, now that the primary legislation is in place for governing the work of the Prisoner Ombudsman, the next stage will involve developing the necessary supporting regulations, which will be presented to Committee in due course. Our aim is to have the statutory footing fully in place by April 2017. Thirdly, a number of legislative consent motions (LCMs) that may be required to extend to Northern Ireland certain provisions of the Policing and Crime Bill, which is being taken forward by the Home Office, will have to be considered. These include, among other things, dealing with issues such as cross-border powers of arrest, maritime hot pursuit powers by GB forces into Northern Ireland waters, and retention of DNA and fingerprints of those convicted outside Northern Ireland. We consider these LCMs to be necessary to address gaps in the existing statutes that apply to Northern Ireland.

Fourthly, we are keen to enable the provisions in the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013, which set out a new regime for the retention of biometric material taken by police in connection with the investigation of a criminal offence. This is necessary to ensure compliance with a European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruling, but this must also be balanced with the need to ensure that important evidential material, which may subsequently be beneficial to any organisation investigating legacy issues, is not destroyed and therefore put beyond the use of the criminal justice system. It will not be possible to resolve this issue until the wider political decisions in relation to addressing the past have been taken.

Finally, within this division, we plan to bring forward for the Committee's consideration, before summer recess, proposals to update the list of qualifying offences. These are serious violent, sexual and terrorism offences. Given their serious nature, it is possible in certain circumstances to retain biometric material — that is DNA and fingerprints — for longer than would normally be the case. The list of qualifying offences dates back to the Crime and Security Act 2010 and therefore needs updated just to keep in touch with modern developments.

Chair, I now turn to the protection and organised crime division, which is headed by Karen Pearson. POCD provides a focus for protection- and security-related issues, including the coordination and implementation of the DOJ elements of the Fresh Start Agreement. The division has strategic responsibility for policy in relation to organised crime and supporting the work of the multi-agency

2 Organised Crime Task Force, as well as developing measures to help tackle human trafficking and modern slavery. They also support the work of the voluntary search and rescue organisations, handle appeals against refusals of firearms certificates and deal with aspects of explosives licensing and legislation. POCD is also responsible for ensuring that there is an effective and efficient state pathology department in Northern Ireland and for specific projects to tackle avoidable delay in the justice system.

The Fresh Start Agreement will also be of considerable interest to the Committee. This presents us with an opportunity to look at new ways of tackling paramilitarism and organised crime, and it is positive to note the commitment to the Fresh Start Agreement in the draft Programme for Government. The DOJ has been tasked with leading and coordinating the implementation of the commitments in section A, although they sit across a wide range of Departments. We will play an important role in the development of an Executive action plan. The report by the three-person panel, as you know, was published on Tuesday, and an action plan will now be drawn up for consideration by the Executive.

The cross-jurisdictional joint agency task force established under the Fresh Start Agreement is now providing a joined-up operational response to organised crime across both jurisdictions, building on the very good levels of cooperation that already exist. It has already seen and set key priority areas and has carried out operations targeting both rural crime and child sexual exploitation.

We are also making good progress in working in conjunction with partners across both the statutory and voluntary agencies on tackling human trafficking and modern slavery. New robust legislation is in place, and the PSNI has established a dedicated human trafficking unit. Work is well advanced on the development of a draft human trafficking and modern slavery strategy for 2016-17, which we plan to share with the Committee later this month.

In addition to the areas that I have already mentioned, Karen is our lead in helping to ensure that the Department is committed to tackling avoidable delay in the justice system. This includes reform of the committal arrangements and statutory case management regulations. There are two further areas of work that I would like to highlight within Karen's remit, as I suspect that they may be of interest to the Committee. These are firearms and vehicle immobilisation on private land.

The third division is the community safety division, which is headed by Steven McCourt. The division has responsibility for community safety and for the support of victims of crime, both regionally — Northern Ireland-wide — and in local initiatives that are being taken forward by smaller groups.

One of the key priorities for the Department is the delivery of the community safety strategy, with the progress reports coming to the Justice Committee annually. The division will also have responsibility for contributing to a number of the indicators set out in the draft Programme for Government and action plans associated with the various strategies, including the five-year victim and witness strategy; the stopping domestic and sexual violence and abuse strategy; coordinating the Department's response to the recommendations arising from the Marshall inquiry into child sexual exploitation; and the removal of peace walls under the Executive's Together: Building a United Community strategy.

In addition, the division is also responsible for exercising delegated ministerial responsibility on a range of public protection issues, including the recall of licensed offenders to custody; casework associated with mentally disordered patients with statutory restrictions held in secure hospitals; provision of advice concerning the management of dangerous offenders under public protection arrangements; and the management of the contract for electronic monitoring of offenders in the community.

Going forward, there will be issues with which the Committee will want to be closely engaged, so I will run through a few of those, if I may, to bring you up to speed on them. They include support for victims and witnesses of crime — here the main issue will include a new witness charter, which, I understand, the Committee will consider at its meeting on 16 June; a pilot for the cross-examination and re-examination of vulnerable and intimidated victims and witnesses in advance of trial; progression of the registered intermediaries scheme; and a new victims and witnesses action plan.

Perhaps one of the most important areas, and one that the Minister has made clear that she wishes to see as a priority, is the need to address domestic and sexual violence and abuse. Work in this area will include consideration of the introduction of the offence of domestic abuse; a domestic violence disclosure scheme; domestic homicide reviews; and the development of guidance for the implementation of a domestic violence protection notice and protection order pilot scheme. In addition, we are developing, under a problem-solving-justice approach, an enhancement of the

3 domestic violence listing arrangement in Londonderry Magistrates' Court through the introduction of a pilot perpetrator programme.

Another area of concern is in relation to the community safety strategy, which is due to expire in 2017. Work will have to begin soon to scope out the development of a new approach that takes account of the changed environment over the last five years, including the development of policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs), local government reorganisation and community planning. The Department is also continuing to work with the Home Office and other stakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the new UK-wide legislation on psychoactive substances, which commenced on 26 May. We have also established a new programme board to give strategic leadership to the interface programme. One of our key priorities is to develop, through that board, an outcomes-based collaborative approach amongst statutory partners to enable us to create the conditions necessary to remove the peace walls. Finally, within Steven's remit, we are taking forward a review of parole commissioner rules, and we will ensure that this Committee will be closely engaged in that process as we move forward.

I will now turn to FSNI, which is an executive agency of which Stan Brown, as we have mentioned, is the chief executive. FSNI supplies services mainly to the PSNI and also to the Public Prosecution Service (PPS), the Police Ombudsman, the State Pathologist's Department, the National Crime Agency (NCA), HMRC and other smaller bodies. The agency has implemented a transformation programme, over the last three years, involving a new laboratory, a new case management system, advanced DNA technology and process re-engineering.

Over the last year, a priority target for me was the delivery of the new forensic science strategy. This was agreed by the previous Minister in March 2016. It covers forensic services as a whole, whether provided by FSNI or in-house by the PSNI, as well as the needs of other key stakeholders but particularly the PPS. The priorities set out in this strategy are to ensure the optimum delivery of forensic science in Northern Ireland; to confirm that impartiality and objectivity remains fundamental to service delivery; to ensure proportionate adherence to quality assurance from crime scene to court; and to build and maintain effective working relationships among the key stakeholders.

Governance structures have been established in an action plan to deliver the strategic objectives that are being developed. This will require partnership working right across the criminal justice system. Its successful implementation will ensure that the Northern Ireland justice system has access to timely, quality and cost-effective forensic services. It will support the delivery of faster, fairer justice from crime scene to court and, hopefully, build customer satisfaction and public confidence. Last month, we began a roll-out of proportionate forensic reporting (PFR) across the scientific disciplines in FSNI. This work is due to be completed by the end of December. Stan and Karen can perhaps take questions on that or provide a briefing separately if you require.

I hope that all of that has been a useful summary of the current set of issues, and I thank you for your patience. The directorate covers quite a range of work areas.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Thank you very much, Anthony. I was giving you latitude because the operational chart in the members' packs shows very clearly the role, remit and gambit of the directorate. Anthony, there was no problem that way.

On page 15 of the first day brief, the last point is on the Probation Board:

"The Division will also review the status of the Probation Board".

What do you have in mind with regard to that review, and how wide-ranging will it be? What options are being considered?

Mr Harbinson: We have not commenced that process yet. The idea was to look at the fundamental structure of the management of the probation service. At the moment, it is a non-departmental public body (NDPB). It has its own management board of up to 15 board members who oversee and run it. We just want to check if, in this day and age, that is the best structure and operating model for probation, or whether there are other options such as becoming a next steps agency, integration with the Youth Justice Agency, for example, or any other option. It is to make sure that it is fit for purpose going forward for the next 10 to 15 years.

4 The Chairperson (Mr Frew): If you were to pair it with the Youth Justice Agency — you can see logic in that type of move — it would mean that the Probation Board would move from the safer communities directorate to reducing offending. Would you bring the Youth Justice Agency the other way?

Mr Harbinson: To be honest, it is one playing field. Sometimes, we play on it with separate teams, but we are all trying to do the same workload. It does not matter where it sits, in reducing offending or safer communities, as long as it is the right model, doing the right job, giving the best service to the community and helping offenders not to reoffend going forward.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Would it be better to have those two directorates as one directorate? Would there be much saving?

Mr Harbinson: There would be a saving at the highest level, at a director level. The difficulty is that the reducing offending directorate also covers the work of the Northern Ireland Prison Service, which is a very big chunk of the work there. It is about whether those two areas together would be manageable. A few years ago, I had responsibility for reducing offending. It moved into the new reoffending directorate, because we felt that aligning it more closely with the work of the Prison Service would achieve the best outcome in trying to reduce offending going forward.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): I note that page 26 of the first day brief states:

"The introduction of legislation regarding specific organised crime offences will help to target the offenders behind organised crime."

It goes on to talk about the assets recovery community scheme. This might be a question for Karen — if I am right, it is part of your new role. What timescale do we have for the introduction of such legislation?

Ms Karen Pearson (Department of Justice): I suppose that you have also noted that there is a recommendation along those lines in the Fresh Start panel report.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Yes.

Ms Pearson: That is our starting point. They want us to look at a wide variety of jurisdictions. The panel was particularly interested in some offences that they have in Scotland but which we do not have. So, we need to do a review. We need to find a legislative vehicle. At the moment, the Minister is still thinking about the type of legislative programme that she wants, and precisely when. The first thing is to have a wide-ranging look at different jurisdictions, with particular regard to Scotland, and what offences they have.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): I will read on. The brief also states:

"We also plan to conduct a review of the Assets Recovery Community Scheme in order to ensure that recovered criminal assets can be effectively used to fight crime and the fear of crime."

At the minute, if I am right, that pot of funding goes, via the PCSPs, to community groups. In my constituency, it is for equipment for local boxing clubs, football clubs and that type of thing.

Mr Harbinson: It goes to a wide range of areas. First, the money is split in half between the statutory agencies. Half of it goes to the police, the court system and the PPS etc. The remaining balance is used within the community setting to help reduce crime and the fear of crime. The PCSPs are one of the main vehicles we use to get that money out to the appropriate areas. It has gone to everything from providing canoes or equipment to boxing clubs to the much harder end of tackling crime, head on, in a much more front-line way. It is used for a range of purposes.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): You will probably hear me echo this over the coming months. I am a great believer in a community champion — someone like a football or boxing coach or manager who can actually influence young people like no one else can, certainly not the police or a suit. It would be somebody who can speak to them at their level. They respect and understand that coach or manager. I look for ways to help community champions with funding. The assets recovery community scheme could be one way of getting that funding to him or her very quickly. Whether it is through the current

5 format of PCSP funding, even for equipment, it is still assisting that community champion. Are there any thoughts in the Department of trying to help those people?

Mr Harbinson: We do help those sorts of programmes. We have funded programmes like that. The difficulty is that the funding is not meant to be permanent. We normally use the money to help people set up and develop such schemes, but they have to become self-funding after a short period. So, yes, money does go into those areas, but it really is to get them going initially. Then, hopefully, other funders will come in and make them sustainable going forward. The worst thing is to start something and then finish it a year later. That sends the wrong message out to the community.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Absolutely. The Justice Committee at the tail end of the last mandate brought up the issue of vehicle immobilisation and asked the Department to review its policy and legislation on that. I think that I am right in saying that Northern Ireland is the only place in the UK where you can still get clamped — to use the blunt term. Do you still intend to take that review on and see what comes out of it?

Ms Pearson: It is something that we are briefing the Minister on, Chair, because we know that you will be writing to us very soon to see where the Minister is on that. We just need a little bit of time to take the Minister through the background, because it has had quite a history, and she needs to take her own view.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you very much for your presentation. I have just been reading at page 37 of the pack about the further measures to address domestic and sexual violence and abuse and the key priorities. I know, having heard directly from the Minister, that she is very passionate, as I am, about addressing domestic abuse, violence and sexual violence — that whole massive area. I am delighted that she sees this as a priority, and I am confident that she will do whatever she can to help us continue to fight the battle against domestic violence in particular. Could you tell us what work has been undertaken on the proposed offence of domestic abuse?

Mr Steven McCourt (Department of Justice): A consultation finished at the end of May on introducing an offence of domestic abuse and on a domestic violence disclosure scheme. At the moment, we are in the process of collating the responses into a summary document, and we will come back to the Committee on defining the way forward. The offence that we are looking at is controlling or coercive behaviour, which mirrors what has been recently introduced in England and Wales. We hope to come back to the Committee in the very near future on that point.

Mrs Cameron: That is positive. I look forward to that coming back to the Committee and getting some hard and fast proposals on the table to look at.

Mr Lunn: I will just go back to the assets recovery money. I take it that the money that goes to the PCSPs from that fund is channelled through the Policing Board.

Mr Harbinson: A committee takes bids. We use the PCSPs to encourage bids to come in through them, and then, once they come in, the decision is made by a group that I chair. It does not go through the Policing Board. The money that goes to the PCSPs to run their operation goes through a joint committee with the Policing Board.

Mr Lunn: As an ex-member of the Policing Board, it seems a bit odd to me that you are dealing directly with PCSPs when the Policing Board has oversight of them.

Mr Harbinson: Yes.

Mr McCourt: It is a joint committee of the Department and the Policing Board that has the supervision and oversight of PCSPs. The policy aspect of PCSPs is more Department-focused. The Policing Board in many respects is focused on the policing aspect, particularly on confidence in policing through the running of the PCSPs and on the financial aspect as well. The community safety agenda is very much driven by the Department, obviously jointly with the board.

Mr Lunn: You mentioned the Community Safety College in your presentation, Anthony. I see it is listed as an achievement, which kind of makes me smile. Is it really an achievement? I wonder how much it has cost so far. How much of that cost is not recoverable and has been a waste of money?

6 Mr Harbinson: I think the achievement was getting the first stage of the OBC1 completed, agreed and signed off. Now we are in the process of taking it forward and spending money. I do not think any of us would deny that it has not been as successful as we would like. Certainly, its original concept has shifted quite dramatically. Yes, there was land bought; we still own that. There was work done on the preparation and development of a single facility for all three services, and there has been some expenditure on that. There is a process now for trying to recover some of that going forward, but I agree: it has not been an outstanding success.

Mr Lunn: Presumably, the facilities at Garnerville are going to have to be extended and redeveloped. Is the site suitable for that sort of development? Are the police satisfied that they can make the best —

Mr Harbinson: Actually, it is the police that suggested that that should be the next approach because of the way they have changed the training and development of police officers.

What will happen to the Desertcreat site is that the Fire and Rescue Service will it take on and develop it for itself. The police are quite happy to take the money that is now available to develop the Garnerville and Steeple sites and make them more fit for purpose than they were.

Mr Beggs: Thanks for your presentation. In the Carrickfergus area, we have a community facility in a disadvantaged area. Along with work with other agencies, it can be quite inspiring by allowing the community to make progress where there has been very weak community infrastructure. In particular, there was the building relationships in communities (BRIC) programme that the Housing Executive ran. My question is on the use of asset recoveries. How are you ensuring that there is the sustainable model you talked about and that it is not just a one-off, where whatever you put in is simply abandoned? How are you liaising with the other Departments and, indeed, the councils so that there is stability moving forward and that investment is good value not just for one year but for many?

Mr Harbinson: That is why we asked for bids for the ARCS money to come in via the PCSPs, because, hopefully, through the PCSPs you get the input of community and council to the projects that they then put forward to us. We then assess the projects on a matrix that looks at how they score against the impact they are going to have on reducing crime and the fear of crime, how are they going to go forward and what the sustainability is. There are some one-offs, like buying canoes for a youth club or youth centre to go forward, but it is the work they are going to do with those children that we look at to see how it will sustain that and take it forward. We try to balance all those aspects, but certainly at its heart, it is about reducing crime and the fear of crime. That is the overriding issue that we look for in every bid.

Mr Beggs: Is the process linked to community planning in any way, which is the new role that is going to councils?

Mr Harbinson: The PCSPs should, hopefully, be a vital tool in community planning, which has, as you say, gone to the councils. I will let Steven touch on this, as it is his direct area.

Mr McCourt: The Department is linked to the community planning partnerships within the 11 councils, and we are very much promoting the message that, in the safety aspect of those, the council should build in that we fund the policing and community safety partnerships that undertake the strategic assessment of crime in their area. It is about utilising that as much as possible in delivery to enhance the community plan working alongside other statutory bodies. So, the answer is, yes, we are linked in on community planning.

Mr Attwood: Thank you for your presentation. I have a series of very quick questions, some of which you might not be able to answer and some of which might be beyond your directorate.

First, the BBC programme recently on missing migrants suggested that two or three had gone missing and had potentially been trafficked. Subsequently, there was some information that there might have been up to eight. Do you have a sense of the true figure? Critically, what more can be done to ensure that unaccompanied children or families who come into Northern Ireland are not at risk from those who are probably waiting for them in an attempt to traffic them?

Ms Pearson: I think that probably crosses a couple of departmental boundaries. Maybe I could write to the Committee to say what the arrangements are for children on arrival and then say what the

7 Justice angle to that is. We have a very strong approach to human trafficking within the Department. We work with operational agencies to understand the risk. I would like to get behind those figures for you.

Mr Attwood: This is fine. Given the uncertainty about the numbers, given that children have nonetheless been trafficked and given that this touches upon your directorate, I expect that some urgent work has been done over the last three or four weeks to ensure that any future risk is reduced.

Secondly — this might be beyond your directorate — is there any update on the paper that was tabled at the Executive by the former Minister on money for inquests? That did not get over the line. Is there any update on re-tabling that paper on an approach to the British Government to release moneys for inquests?

Ms Pearson: I think you have David Lavery after us.

Mr Attwood: Right; I am getting ahead of myself, then. He is forewarned now, so he had better have a good answer.

Thirdly, has there been any money drawn down from the Fresh Start budget line for NCA/PSNI moneys to deal further with organised crime?

Mr Harbinson: I chair a cross-departmental group that is responsible for looking after the bids for those moneys. We have had a number of bids come in. We have approved some expenditure from that already. Hopefully, it will work its way through June monitoring to be approved. Yes, there is a bid in from the PSNI, but there is no bid from the NCA.

Mr Attwood: The NCA is clearly beyond your competence, although I think we should write to the NCA to see where it is with making a bid. Here we are seven months after A Fresh Start and — whether it has presented a bid, we do not know really — as far as we are aware, not a penny has been drawn down by the NCA. We are only now at the stage where the PSNI has done that. The point I am making is that this has just given those with assets, current or historical, seven more months to rabbit them away and hide them in places where they cannot be accessed. I do not think that, seven months after budget lines were proposed, that is very encouraging.

Ms Pearson: May I add something to that? The money available this year has been available from 1 April. Small amounts of money have been spent against that line so far. We have a bid from the PSNI that we are looking at, and we will have to have discussions with the NCA as well. Nothing has been ruled out. I absolutely take your point that the earlier that we can allocate the money, the earlier it can be spent. It is a big pot of money over a five-year period, and we are only really a couple of months into the financial year.

Mr Attwood: I appreciate that, but the criminals have been forewarned, and those involved in organised crime on this island know full well how to deal with that.

I will ask you two final questions. Is it the intention of the Minister, following her and the Executive's consideration of the matter, to provide an update to the Committee on what Justice will do arising from the recommendations of the panel? Has there been any consideration by the Department of those matters that were agreed by the Irish Government Cabinet last week, when the Justice Minister of Ireland tabled proposals for the Irish authorities and the CAB in particular to go after assets of even €1,000?

Mr Harbinson: At the moment, we are in the process of developing an action plan in response to the three-person panel. Once that action plan is developed, obviously, it will drive a series of work that will go forward. Karen, is there anything you want to mention on that?

Ms Pearson: 'A Fresh Start' says the Executive will publish an action plan before the end of June, and there is a ministerial commitment to do that. We are working on a cross-departmental basis now to put together a document to respond to the panel report. If we meet the timetable, and we are very hopeful we will, that will be available at the end of June or early July. I have no doubt that the Committee will call the Department to talk about the actions that fall to us. I suppose it is interesting to note that it is a report that goes much wider than Justice, and it is very welcome for us to have help from other Departments in this space. We hope the Executive document will be seen as having

8 something for everyone, but clearly some actions will fall to Justice. We will be very happy to come back.

Mr Attwood: I look forward to seeing that. The wider point, though, was that the Government of Ireland and their agencies have had, relative to the agencies in the North, enormous success in going after organised crime to the point now that they think they have to escalate the response to go after even those who might have assets of €1,000. The point I am making is that I think we need to learn from them and from the recent interventions of Minister Fitzgerald on that. You can consider that, or maybe not, in the context of their response to the panel report.

I do not think this is in the papers, Chair, and it might be beyond Anthony's competence, but my final question is this: did we get any update from the permanent secretary on the question that he was not able to answer last week on Justice's input to the processes being led by Health on multiple child abuse victims outside the institutions?

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): That is still ongoing. We are still waiting on a response.

The Committee Clerk: We have written on it.

Mr Attwood: You might remind the permanent secretary.

Mr Harbinson: I will. Just to touch on your previous question, I think we are looking at all jurisdictions to see how best we can tackle paramilitary and organised crime, organised crime being the focal point, because paramilitaries are using it as a way to gain and generate funds. We have, as you know, through the PSNI and an Garda Síochána, established the cross-border task force, which is specifically looking at and targeting this sort of work going forward.

Ms Bailey: Hello, and thank you for your presentation. I am going back to where you talk about addressing domestic and sexual violence. You say that you work in conjunction with the Department of Health. In the key achievements, you talk about the domestic and sexual violence helpline. Can you tell us who runs that helpline?

Mr McCourt: The helpline is run by Women's Aid.

Ms Bailey: Do you know how much funding is put into that helpline?

Mr McCourt: Yes. There is a tripartite arrangement on the helpline between ourselves, the Department of Health and the Housing Executive. The Department of Justice's contribution to it is £110,000.

Ms Bailey: Can you give me a sense of numbers? Do you know how many people are affected by domestic and sexual violence in Northern Ireland?

Mr McCourt: I will certainly come back to the Committee on the specific numbers on that for you and on the uptake of the helpline, if you would find that helpful.

Ms Bailey: That would be great.

Mr Harbinson: One thing I would point out is that I think everyone involved in the system accepts that there is underreporting of these crimes, and actually, whilst it may look bad to see that statistics have increased, that is what we are pushing for: to get more people to come forward and report these crimes. We know that there is significant underreporting.

Ms Bailey: I am well aware of that. That is why I would be interested to see how many are coming forward and to see that increase happen. It would be good. I come from that sector background.

How long has the Rowan centre been open?

Mr Harbinson: It has been open for around three years.

Ms Bailey: Does it have a management board?

9 Mr Harbinson: It has a management structure. It is jointly funded by the Department of Health and the PSNI. It is an excellent facility, and I encourage anyone who has suffered any sort of trauma or abuse to use it.

Ms Bailey: Do we get annual reports from the centre? Is there any requirement for it to produce annual reports?

Mr Harbinson: I am not aware of us getting them. We can certainly write to ask and let you know.

Ms Bailey: Excellent.

Lastly, the consultation on the sexual violence abuse strategy has just closed. Do you know how many responses you received?

Mr McCourt: Do you mean the consultation on the strategy?

Ms Bailey: Yes.

Mr McCourt: The strategy has been published. That was in the last mandate.

Ms Bailey: I am talking about the consultation that just closed.

Mr McCourt: On the domestic abuse offence and domestic violence disclosure scheme?

Ms Bailey: Sorry, yes.

Mr McCourt: I think there were in the region of 42 responses. As I said to the Chair, we hope to come back to the Committee very shortly to give you the summary document of responses.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): That will be a vital piece of work going forward. The Committee is very interested in that. To recap, Trevor asked about Desertcreat. If the Ambulance Service is taking that on —

Mr Harbinson: It is the Fire and Rescue Service, not the Ambulance Service.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): OK. Does that fall within the remit of DOJ?

Mr Harbinson: No; the Department of Health.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Will it take it over and off your books, so to speak?

Mr Harbinson: It was a joint scheme between the Department of Health and the DOJ. The outline business case suggested a separation, with the Fire and Rescue Service taking over the land and building a facility for itself. The most important thing it misses in Northern Ireland is a burn house, and it seems like an ideal site for that.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): But would DOJ have no interest at that point?

Mr Harbinson: No. Although there will always certainly be joint operations between the police and the Fire Service in different training facilities, no, Desertcreat would become a Fire and Rescue Service facility.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): If there is no interest, does that lift the burden off DOJ financially?

Mr Harbinson: The burden was always a shared one. Because it was a Programme for Government initiative, a large pot of money was already indicated as being available for it. The money that is now available will be split between the Fire Service, the police and the Prison Service to develop their own training initiatives.

10 The Chairperson (Mr Frew): On a point Alex made about the bidding for money from Fresh Start, which is all new money as far I know; maybe —

Mr Harbinson: Yes, it is.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): — apart from where there is a split 50:50 between the Executive and Whitehall. From memory, there is £10 million for tackling paramilitary activity, £12 million for a shared future, £30 million for organisations to bid for and, off the top of my head I think there is £150 million for the PSNI.

Mr Harbinson: There was the security funding, which was always coming. That has come to the PSNI for several years. It is mentioned in the document. The money we have been looking at directly for tackling paramilitarism within Northern Ireland under Fresh Start is £10 million per annum for five years. So, there is £50 million of new money to specifically deal with those areas.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Surely those would have to be specific programmes.

Mr Harbinson: Yes. People will bid for that money, and that will have to go through the Executive for approval.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Has the Department got any ideas on tackling that at this point, or were you waiting for the three-member panel to report?

Mr Harbinson: A bit of both. We have funded those issues that were directly mentioned in a 'Fresh Start Agreement'. For example, there is money for a media campaign launch to tackle organised crime to make people aware of the problem and how we handle it. There is money set aside specifically in Stan's area for forensic equipment. We have bids in from the police for work they want to do going forward, which is in the areas Alex was asking about in identifying who has that money and the best way to tackle them.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Explain again the relationship the DOJ has with the National Crime Agency in this theatre.

Mr Harbinson: There is no specific relationship in that way. However, the Minister chairs the Organised Crime Task Force, of which the NCA is a partner. I chair the Organised Crime Task Force strategy group, which all the law enforcement agencies, including the UK-based HMRC and NCA, sit on. That is a way of trying to make sure that all the law enforcement agencies are working together and coordinated. They may decide to make a bid; it depends on whether it fits within the Executive's remit to be able to fund certain parties or not, whatever the case may be. If they are in Whitehall, they might be asked to bid against money in Whitehall.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): I would like to know exactly what that money is for, how far it can go and whether it is appropriate for it to be used in that way when maybe it could be funded from Whitehall.

Mr Harbinson: Those are issues that, I think, still have to be determined and worked through. The approach we are taking at the moment is to take bids from Northern Ireland, Executive-based and funded organisations and bodies, as opposed to money from Whitehall Departments. We have not had any bids from any of the Whitehall Departments at this stage. If we were to ask the NCA or the HMRC to do some work on our behalf, I think it would be legitimate to use the money to fund that. But, again, that has to be decided at Executive level.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): You pre-empted my next question. I was going to ask whether there is a mindset within DOJ that looks at what needs to happen and who is best placed to deliver that — that is the NCA — so then DOJ would actually entice or ask the NCA to —

Mr Harbinson: That is certainly possible going forward. We have to look at who are the best people to tackle organised crime and specific aspects of it and to make sure that we are all cooperating and coordinating. It is a response between the three Governments: the Northern Ireland Executive; the UK Government; and the Irish Government. We want to see all the players coordinating their efforts to tackle the issue.

11 Ms Pearson: Recommendation C5 in the panel report points towards NCA and HMRC being funded from Whitehall, but we should not close our minds to the fact that, if we needed them to do something that fits within our strategy, there is money there. As Anthony said, we still have to work our way through the governance and finance issues for this, but we very much hope that the Executive document, when it comes out, will say something about the money arrangements.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Recommendation C5, the one you refer to, states that the UK Government should

"resource the NCA and HMRC to appropriately prioritise intensive work to tackle all organised crime linked to paramilitary groups of Northern Ireland".

Yes, you are on the ball; very good. You should push that one.

Alex, do you want to come back in?

Mr Attwood: I have just one point. Is the environmental crime unit of the NIEA still not part of the group that you chair?

Mr Harbinson: It is part of the group the Minister chairs, which is the wider grouping of the Organised Crime Task Force.

Mr Attwood: Is it a member of the group that you chair?

Mr Harbinson: No. The subgroup comprises the direct law enforcement agencies, but it has come along to that when it wants to bring specific —

Mr Attwood: If the environmental crime unit is a direct law enforcement agency, how does that sit? Is it operational? Do the police come and assist it when it goes on raids? The environmental crime unit went on various raids to the biggest illegal waste dump ever in the history of these islands, which is two miles outside Derry. The police went with them. If it is operational and initiates legal proceedings and so on and so forth, why is it not sitting on your group?

Mr Harbinson: There are —

Mr Attwood: I know what you are about to say, but why is it not sitting on your group?

Mr Harbinson: There are a number of smaller such agencies, including the Food Standards Agency and the people on the veterinary side who tackle illegal veterinary drugs. They join the meetings when it is appropriate. They have joined that meeting.

Mr Attwood: When it comes to the environmental crime unit of the Northern Ireland Environment Agency and given the scale of environmental crime, do you not think it is big enough or important enough to be a fully fledged member of the subgroup that you chair?

Mr Harbinson: It is on two of the subgroups that we chair but not specifically on the group that I chair. It is on a number of the working groups. Any time it has an issue it wants to bring forward, it has complete access to do that.

Mr Attwood: And the response when that happens is what?

Ms Pearson: Recommendation C6.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Very good.

Ms Pearson: C6 recommends that we think about bringing it into the joint agency task force, which is obviously not the OCTF. I think that, while we are considering that, it would be timely to think about how best we engage with that organisation.

Mr Harbinson: There is a specific subgroup that looks at waste crime, and there is one on financial crime. They sit on both groups.

12 Mr Attwood: C6 leads to the next stage.

Mr Harbinson: It does.

Mr Lunn: Just for clarification, Anthony — sorry to go back to it again — does the Chief Constable have a separate fund of a similar nature to the assets recovery community scheme, or am I getting confused?

Mr Harbinson: The Chief Constable has a number of funding streams for community groups and work that they fund directly, but not through this scheme.

Mr Lunn: Can you give us any idea of the size of this scheme? What kind of money are we talking about?

Mr Harbinson: Usually, there is in the region of £1·5 to £2 million — it goes up and down — of which half goes on combating crime and fear of crime.

Ms Boyle: Thank you for your presentation. Apologies in advance if this question was asked when I had to leave the room. You said that one of the Minister's priorities would be domestic violence and sexual crime. You also touched on the domestic homicide review, Mr Harbinson. Can you explain in detail to me, as a newbie on the Committee, what that structure is?

Mr Harbinson: I will let Steven answer that.

Mr McCourt: I was hoping that he would not pass that to me. We will be coming back to this. We are about to commence work that will look at introducing a domestic homicide review. In effect, it is setting out guidance on how statutory agencies can come together to learn from unfortunate incidents of domestic homicide. We are about to initiate that work, and we will come back to the Committee with a framework that we intend to take forward and introduce.

Ms Boyle: Will you be speaking to stakeholders and the like?

Mr McCourt: Yes.

Mr Harbinson: It is really about trying to develop it to see what should be included and how we build it. Hopefully, there will not be many such homicides, but we want to learn from each of them to help to prevent future incidents.

Ms Boyle: Is there a template in England, Scotland or Wales that you would be pitching for?

Mr Harbinson: Very much so.

Mr McCourt: It does not necessarily read directly across to the various frameworks that we have here. We will learn from the England and Wales experience and translate that to build our own framework from scratch.

Ms Boyle: Is there a time frame, or maybe it is a bit early to ask you that?

Mr McCourt: I am hoping that it is a matter of months not years.

Mr Harbinson: It is an urgent issue that we are taking forward.

Mr McCourt: I would hope to come back to the Committee around September or October.

May I add something to my earlier comment on the stats for domestic violence? Forgive me. The annual report that we publish on the community safety strategy has a section on domestic violence that I want to draw to members' attention. From a high level, in 2014-15, the PSNI statistics are 28,287 domestic abuse incidents recorded. That is, on average, 77 incidents a day. There were six murders with a domestic motivation, accounting for over 37·5% of all murders recorded by the police.

13 There were 2,734 sexual offences, 449 sexual offences with a domestic motivation and 737 offences of rape. Obviously, that is broken down further in the layout, but that will give you an indication.

Mr Harbinson: We will send you those detailed figures.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): I have one further question. No other members have indicated that they wish to ask a question. Finance, of course, is a massive issue for any directorate in any Department, but it is very clear from looking at the budget lines for the DOJ that the core has taken the hit this year. You would argue that there is not much left to cut. If there are more funding cuts in the future years of the following budget, you are looking at front-line services. Are you looking now at efficiency savings in all those boards to try to glean something?

Mr Harbinson: To be quite honest, we are looking at every single line of expenditure to see how we could put it into other programmes if cuts come from the Executive. Last year, for example, the PSNI took a cut of 5·7%, but, in the core Department, we were taking cuts of up to 22%. There is only so far that we can go. This year, cuts to the policing family have been held at 2%, while the Department has taken about 7·5%. Finance really is on the radar. The permanent secretary is very keen that we constantly look and review to see where we can make efficiencies in every aspect of the work that we do.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Would you be bold enough to consider ideas on — these are buzzwords, of course — preventative spends and invest to save? There may be an upfront investment, but it will reduce budget lines and burdens in the long term.

Mr Harbinson: We have done that already. This is the third year of the early intervention transformation programme, which goes across a number of Departments, to which we have contributed £700,000 per annum for the last three years. We are also encouraging people to see where their doing something different might lead to a saving — maybe not for them but for another body in the criminal justice system. We are asking people to be as imaginative and creative as they can. It is also about looking at partnership working and where we can share resources. The Youth Justice Agency and the Probation Board, for example, are working very closely together to share facilities and some of their hard resources.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Safer communities and reducing offending are two of the directorates, and I know that the Prison Service is in among that. What sort of savings would be made if the Department were to be reduced from four directorates to three?

Mr Harbinson: I honestly could not tell you. I do not have those figures to hand. Even if you reduce directorates, it is about whether work actually ceases. Wearing my accountancy hat, I would say that, if it does not, you are just saving a couple of bodies at the top. The real benefit comes through closer working together. You can sometimes get the same result simply by working together more smartly. The permanent secretary is looking at the issue and considering it. As I say, I do not think that anything is off the table at this point.

Mr Kearney: I have two questions, Anthony. One is in relation to the community safety strategy and the specific references to the hate incidents practical action (HIPA) scheme and the crime advocacy scheme. Will you elaborate a little on that for me and indicate whether particular measurements have been introduced on the reportage of that to date? Additionally, which bodies sit on the new programme board for the removal of the peace walls? Could you also elaborate a little on what is meant by:

"to enable us to create the conditions necessary to remove the peace walls"?

Mr Harbinson: Both those areas are in Steven's remit, so I will let him take them.

Mr McCourt: I will deal first with the hate crime side. We, alongside the PSNI, fund an advocacy service for victims of race, disability and LGB and T hate crimes. Those individuals are embedded in various organisations to liaise with victims and provide support services for them. On the hate incidents practical action scheme, we, alongside the police and the Housing Executive, run a scheme whereby, if there has been an incident in somebody's home, we, on police advice, will come along and provide protective measures in the home of somebody who has been the subject of a hate attack. They are low-level protective measures, but that in essence is what the scheme does.

14 I will touch now on the peace walls programme and the agencies that sit on the programme board. A programme board was brought together in February to look at the peace walls programme. It goes across the Executive programme board, with Anthony as the SRO, and focuses on creating those necessary conditions. It is very much about working and engagement at community level so that communities feel that they are in a process in which they could feel confident that they would be able to address the issue of peace walls. At the moment, the community viewpoint is very much that the peace walls are the symptom, not the cause. Unless the Executive address the causes, it is difficult for communities to have the confidence to take that step to look at removing peace walls.

The communities' viewpoint is that it is much more than just a safety issue: in many of the communities where the walls are sited, there are high levels of deprivation and health and education indices that are much worse than anywhere else. What we are trying to achieve in seeking that community engagement is to look at economic, social, community and physical renewal aspects. However, it is not just a Department of Justice issue; it is a cross-Executive issue. It is not necessarily about seeking additional funding but about using funding more wisely and targeting particular areas and pressing community concerns.

Mr Harbinson: Money comes, for example, through the good relations programme board, T:BUC, Urban Villages and all those areas. We are trying a cross-departmental group to bring it together so that we are working more smartly to get the right aims. Obviously, under T:BUC, we have a target of 2023 to remove all such interface barriers. We are working on that, but, as Steven rightly says, it is about community confidence. We have to build community confidence and deal with those contested spaces as well.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Thank you very much. Stan, we did not talk much about forensics today, but we will get to you, do not worry.

Mr Harbinson: Please take up the invitation to come down.

Mr Stan Brown (Forensic Science Northern Ireland): Yes. You are all very welcome indeed.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Thank you.

15