I met with the Garda National Vetting Bureau in Tipperary town about two months ago. I went down there to get an update from the bureau, but also to communicate some of the concerns Deputy Ward and other Deputies have expressed to me.

It is important to point out that the vetting bureau of An Garda Síochána received over 6,330 vetting applications in 2025. The current processing time for 85% of those is eight to nine working days. For the majority of applications, it manages to produce an outcome in very short order. There are obviously some improvements that could be made. One thing I mentioned at my meeting with the gardaí in the vetting bureau is that we should allow for transferability of vetting. A person who has been vetted to coach a GAA team should be able to then move over and coach a soccer team without having to get vetting done again. Much of that can be done by the organisations themselves, such as the sporting organisations. The Teaching Council has a very good mechanism whereby it permits transferability of vetting from one school to another and the vetting moves with the teacher when they move across the school.

There is also an issue in respect of wet signatures and whether online signatures would be permissible. There was concern expressed to me by An Garda Síochána in respect of that. From its perspective, one reason for delays is that sometimes individuals have been abroad for several years. That can give rise to significant delay because the bureau is dependent on getting information from abroad. That is an understandable reason for there being a delay, but it is important to point out that, as I said, over 630,000 applications came in last year, and the bureau processed the vast majority of them very promptly.

I am surprised the number is as low as that. I welcome the fact many of them are being dealt with in under ten days, but that does not accord with the anecdotal accounts being given to me. I do not know whether there is prioritisation within the system. There should be, because some of the applications are time sensitive. As regards the issues the Minister has raised, we can see in other jurisdictions that there is a central register, for example, with a rolling account for any individual that can be checked immediately. It should not be up to individual organisations like the Teaching Council or sports clubs to set up transferability. That should be done centrally.

It is very important that the recommendations from the Garda vetting review group bring an effectiveness to Garda vetting that means it will be operable and will work, particularly for volunteer organisations. When there is a significant delay in vetting, it discourages volunteers and makes it difficult for sports clubs to get the coaches in to teach the underage teams and things like that. Let us ensure we put in place measures that make vetting work for our communities, as much as anything else.

One of the consequences of being a public representative is that people only ever come to us when they have issues of concern. They are never going to come to us and say, "Deputy, that is a fantastic vetting process. I managed to get a response within eight days."

I am conscious that aspects of the current vetting system result in a highly segmented process. It should be updated to ensure the burden of seeking vetting disclosures, particularly on volunteers and organisations working in their communities, is minimised to the greatest extent possible while maintaining the necessary high standards. Further to the work carried out by the Garda vetting review group, steps are now being taken to implement key changes to the process that will ensure it remains robust and effective, while improving the service to customers.

In practice and subject to a general requirement that vetting be renewed every three years, it is envisaged that this will mean that when a person is vetted for the work they will be, or are likely to be, involved in as part of their employment or volunteering within identified risk categories, the person will not be required to repeat the process if they were to move to another role within the same risk category.

In respect of operability, renewals and things like that, the Minister mentioned the Garda having a difficulty with online signatures. We have to get over that. If we have a situation where this Government is proposing, for example, online age verification using certain existing ID systems, surely we can also do that for vetting.

I recognise there is a problem with waiting for news to come back from abroad where somebody has lived abroad. Is there something we should be doing at European level to implement a co-operation agreement between countries in the European Union to speed up that process? I am also conscious that, in the vetting process, a letter is sent to every Garda district in which the person lived and the Garda has to wait for information to come back. Is there a way of streamlining that?

In response to a parliamentary question I put to the Minister in February, he indicated improvements to the vetting system might require legislation. Can the Minister clarify whether that will be primary legislation or secondary legislation? Will it come before the House soon, or does he have any news on that?

It would be primary legislation. I will come back to the Deputy on that. It will not be coming in the very near future but it is something I am committed to doing. It will also require updated technical systems to support the revised approach.

When I was down in Tipperary with the vetting bureau, I raised the issue of the wet signature for vetting. Currently, the bureau does not accept digital signatures as their use presents security and integrity risks within the vetting process. I was told these include potential disputes over identity, intent and the possibility of document tampering. Garda authorities have also highlighted vulnerabilities associated with digital signatures, including identity theft and social engineering attacks, which could significantly increase the risk of impersonation. For these reasons, a wet signature is currently required to provide valid consent to the vetting process. While initial engagement can take place online, a face-to-face element remains necessary to verify identity and obtain handwritten consent.