Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY 94 sex offenders across the country who are being monitored under the conditions of a supervision order after being released from prison.
Judges in Ireland have the power to sentence sex offenders to a period of supervision following their release if they believe the person could pose a continuing threat to the community. It is usually in excess of a year.
Around 1,000 sex offenders are obliged to notify local gardaí of their address when they move into the area and to tell them at any stage if they are leaving. However post supervision orders go a step further.
Terms of post-release supervision may include that an offender attend specified psychological counselling or other treatment. Gardaí can also apply to a judge to stop an offender from attending certain places such as schools, play-grounds or even nightclubs.
Numbers in your region
In response to a recent parliamentary question from TD Denis Naughten, Justice Minister Frances Fitzgerald revealed the numbers of sex offenders currently being monitored across the country.
Unlike in some other countries, members of the public in Ireland are not entitled under the law to view the sex offenders register or to find out where in their area offenders are living,
No repeat offending
These offenders are monitored by the probation service which says the work of the probation officer “focuses on the offence committed and its implications for public safety, helping the offender to see the past offending behaviour as a problem, and developing strategies and supports to ensure there is no repeat offending”.
If a sex offender fails or refuses to comply they are liable to a class fine or to imprisonment for a maximum of 12 months, or both. Though Naughten also requested figures for non compliance with these supervision orders, the minister said these were not “readily available.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
There’ll be no shortage to the UK quota I’ll bet
@Jeff Nolan: there has been, that’s why instead of the recommended three to four week interval between doses it’s been extended to 12 weeks. Chief medical officers in the U.K. said vaccine shortages was main reason for the longer vaccine schedule.
@EillieEs: my understanding is that they have enough vaccine but they want to show how many people vaccinated statistics so they are giving it to double the amount of people first and second vaccinations much later. There have been no headlines in the uk of 60% reduction in vaccine for uk. All of their headlines say that the reduction is for the EU.
@Jeff Nolan: EU s main allegiance is to Pfizer who are making profits on vaccines. Astra Zenica is not for profit and is in fact prioritising India and other poor countries in conjunction with WHO.
@Tony Lyons: it’s 2 doses. The Johnson vaccine is 1 dose
@Tony Lyons: You are wrong. In trials they gave one dose followed by a half dose. Two doses have been found to be more effective and they are supplying this vaccine on the understanding that each person receives two doses. This is why there is a shortage in supply.
@EillieEs: That’s the Pfizer vaccine they are spreading out. I read that AstraZeneca is manufacturing the Oxford Vaccine in the UK for the UK market In Melbourne for the Australian market, India for that market & beyond because they have vast manufacturing capacity & Belgium & Holland for the EU. The EU should just ask for their money back from AstraZeneca if they feel let down & wait for Sanofi to whom they have placed orders for 300 million doses @ $10.50 a pop & lets not forget they haven’t even approved the Astra jab for emergency use yet ;-)
@Tony Lyons: no, it’s 2 doses. Johnson & Johnson are bringing out a vaccine which will be just 1 dose
@EillieEs: they further extended to 24; weeks and medical people not happy as could mess up the protection to people
@Jeff Nolan: AZ had promised that they will deliver the original amount that was promised.. I o w there is no shortage but they wanted to deliver to other countries. There not to be trusted and the EU can better deal with Pfizer from now on.
@EillieEs: wrong answer
@Joe Thorpe: well said Joe
@Eileen O’Sullivan: eu financed it to the tune of £450 million.
@Jeff Nolan: Best vaccine is nicotine and vitamin D.
That would be a very interesting contract to see. Hopefully not too much wiggle room for AZ and lots of penalty clauses.
@Seán O’Loughlin: It wont let me post an appropriate comment to that porkpie
@Joe Thorpe: BBC reporting has been hilarious. When things are going well it’s “Oxford AstraZenica”, all of a sudden it’s “The AstraZenica vaccine – with research from Oxford university”. Shpinnnnn.
Let’s hope the Johnson and Johnson vaccine is soon approved by the US and the EU shortly after. It only requires one jab, and does not require the same storage requirements of the Pfizer vaccine. This vaccine will be the game changer.
@Teresa O’Halloran: yeah but it has lower efficiency so should probably be used on the younger people in society and use the others for the more vulnerable
@Teresa O’Halloran: its the same type of vaccine as the AstraZeneca one.
@John Purcell: ok. If that’s the case then, we are back to square one.
@NotMyIreland: really? I didn’t know that. Bummer.
@Jason Walsh: that’s great. Love a freebie.
@John Purcell: a quick google tells me the clinical data are not in yet. Where’s your source?
@Eugene Norman: I think you are correct. That data is not yet released.
I’d rather the vaccine production to be carried out properly without undue pressure, this kind of rhetoric from EU leaders may lead to shortcuts being taken, dangerous game.
@Mark Malone: how would you propose pushing the pharmaceutical companies to adhere to their contracts so, particularly if money was paid up front to allow production capacity to be increased? You can’t expect the EU to be jumping up and down with joy instead
@Mark Malone: shame on the EU leaders for standing up for its citizens after AZ happily took the tax payers’ money to upgrade their production and meet the demands as per the contract and failed to do so.
@Mark Malone: they had no problem taking the EU’s funding, so they should have no problem delivering what they agreed in the contract.
Pharmaceutical production process doesn’t have shortcuts, you are either producing a vaccine or you are not…
@David Van-Standen: scaling up product from lab or clinic scale to commercial scale isn’t easy and can face a number of unforseen setbacks and issues that often aren’t seen until the first batch is made. Any number of things, be it the chemistry when moving to plant scale produces lower expected yields, supplier issues due to Brexit, validation issues, material impurity causing issues with quality, process deviations, quality control issues, plant workers/automation software over/under charging a vessel/reactor with too much of a solvent or chemical in error damaging a batch, engineering issues, the list goes on.
No doubt the hundreds of talented people working tirelessly to get this product made safely, compliantly and within the time frame the top brass promised is commendable.
@Derek: except that’s not what the EU seems to think. That would be a satisfactory response from the company. The EU says the response from the company was not satisfactory. It doesn’t take much reading between the lines to work this out: the EU thinks it’s not getting what it paid for and therefore some other country or countries are.
@D Mems: u assume. U are assuming.
@Derek: Quality and safety would always be number 1 but if that were the case why were AZ not communicating with the e.u on the issue from the outset and all the way through the process
I can understand from a validation point of view in that unforeseen issues can occur with mass production but again the e.u are right as the answers are unacceptable especially after pumping in billions to ramp it up and as a customer they have the right to know why AZ have not adhered to their contract
@Mark Malone: Reading between the lines it seems the EU are not buying the “production issues” excuse and are of the opinion that the vaccines are actually being produced in quantity but are promised to higher bidders. Think back to the early days of the pandemic and all the issues around PPE supplies. Cargo plane pilots with stories about EU bound PPE cargos about to be loaded on their planes but then vans turning up full of US dollars and the cargo being switched to US bound flights. America was basically paying cargo handlers to steal the supplies.
@James Grant: The EU may have pumped billions into the vaccine race but they didn’t pump billions into AstraZeneca they simply paid up front for the lowest priced candidate. Production for the EU deliveries is being done inside the EU so i dare say if the EU goes at them AZ will in turn go after their producer in Belgium.
@Mark Malone: they just want a more clear answer. Basically they want to know if it is indeed manufacturing issues and not favouritism.
Astrazeneca/Pfizer just deliver what u promised/contractually agreed u would and do your job, enough with the setbacks on this pandemic
@Hugo Bugo: Agreed. And they are delivering what they promised to the UK.
@Mairead Jenkins: I beleive the UK supply is being manufactured by Oxford Biomedica in Oxford, England an Wockhardt in Wrexham, Wales
Apparently they are using the chemicals needed to produce orders for others who are paying more. It isn’t a simple production issue, they are selling the product to the highest bidder
@ChuckE: Ball locks.
@Dermot Sexton: if that wasn’t true then why are the EU unhappy?
@Eugene Norman: the statement opened with “apparently”. If there was proof rather than ball locks talk then it would have been given
@ChuckE: What really happened is the UK made an order and contract first then Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands done the same a few weeks later calling it the vaccine alliance, the EU got upset and said it was their job then made them cancel the contract and the EU renegotiated the contract which took over 2 months putting them further back in a que but they want it now, the other problem is the EU still have not approved the vaccine.
So the EU wants to bully a company whose product it still hasn’t approved for use. The EU bureaucracy has publicly raised doubts about this vaccine when the UK authorised it’s use and then delayed approval while other countries began to use it. Like any company supply to its customers with existing supply chains in place will get priority. It’s no use the EU trying to make Astra Zeneca the bad guys – it’s the EU that has shown incredible incompetence.
@Sara Davis: only U.K. and India are using it. It looks like Europe’s manufactured doses which have been paid for went to the U.K., hence the suggestion today that vaccines manufactured in Europe stay in Europe
This NOW is what sovereignity is all about. Germany has bought direct so did UK and neither flouted or broke any eu law which allow member states to do that in c are of emergency but apparently the commission objected to govt here getting supplies from elsewhere , UK , and govt obeys and what is TD doing they are not holding govt to account to the DAIL and their constituents,
@Mary Ward: Dear ould pal, jolly ould pal one for the road?
There is absolutely no way that rich connected folk are paying these very reputable (cough) companies over the odds to jump the queue. No way that’s happening at all.
Imagine we were an independent country in charge of our own policies.. Oh well.
@Valthebear: Of course, Ireland would have so much more leverage on Pharma companies on it own .. FFS!
@Paul Harrison: Sure they all pay the tax man here
To a large degree ‘Big Pharma’ appears to have the EU over the proverbial barrel on this one and both sides know it. I see this as simply the EU grandstanding for public consumption full well knowing there’s very little they can do to improve the situation. It looks good in the media though…
Have lost all confidence in AstraZeneca, there’s been dodgy news about them since the beginning, hopefully Pfizer will step up without any more delay.
@Hotirish: nonsense
Another cost of membership or more cost of the loan to ireland and the treaty that commission can hold over govt head NOT APPROVED BY DAIL until loan paid back that control sulloy of vacine to the Irish people . Hw do we know , cos we dont , what type of deal made between commission and suppliers , We dont even know and will never know f the are paid and enif money in the eu to do it ? Nor do we know how much eu is charging us for it ? And dail to whom govt account . ZERO
@Eugene Norman: Grow up and learn. By god u have not a clue what u are talking about. The European Stability Mechanism Treaty make the austerity terms of the loan to ireland the Irish people an international agreement made by M Noonan and the head of the Euro Area States by which M Noonan Agreed that the EU Commission will monitor performance of the terms until the loan is paid back . Not one cent of principal is paid back . Beliieve u me man believe u me U are paying and paying big for membership of the EU. It is becoming a very very expensive e club. As i said even under eu law a member state can buy direct a vacine if there is an emergency. The UK did it . Germany is doing it . The commission said no to the govt doing it . The govt is towing the line . Do u really think our minister are going to do that unless they were afraid of a more powerful lever bing pulled and it is that loan . That treaty not ratified by dail .
@Mary Ward: Are the pubs back open?
@Mary Ward: nah, you made a bad point and badly made there.
@Mary Ward: EU agreed substantial discounts on vaccine prices which any single country would not be able negotiate on their own. So that could be the cause for pharma companies delay shipping to EU and they want to verify
@Massimiliano Gallo: LOL.. AztraZeneca are selling the vaccine at cost, where on earth do you people get your information from????
Another failure of the commission!
Why wasn’t this emergency approved by Ireland at the beginning of January and we could have got some stock in? We can’t stand up for ourselves and do what the commission tells us. The EMA was taking so long to approve the vaccine that Astra Zeneca probably got fed up waiting and sold it to other countries
This vaccine appears to be the game changer in terms of ramping up the programme. Will be interesting to see how this affects the rollout of the programme but I fear it could lead to significant delays well past the “September” target. A serious blow
@Adam O’Connor: other vaccines are also on the way
@Eugene Norman: nonsense
@Eugene Norman: nonsense , they haven’t even approved its use yet
Good luck with that. Most of the vaccine is made in the UK with India likely to play a huge role as I understand it.
The EU had no issue burying developing countries when it along with 4 other countries bought up half the vaccine supply for 2021 (for approx 13% of the world population) and ordered less than was needed (even now about half as many doses per person as UK and Canada) so I have zero sympathy.
Why are they bothered with a vaccine with so low effectiveness, its cheaper……!!!!
Surely there are quite a few manufacturing facilities in Europe that could manufacture it if given composition. It’s been done in India.
The pfizer vaccine has about 50-55% efficacy after dose 1 and can increase to about 94% after 2nd dose. Some studies in israel (ref BMJ) put pfizer vac as little as 33% efficacy after dose 1. The moderna vaccine has approx 70% efficacy after 1 dose increasing to +94% after second dose. Astra zenica is hard to find evidence on efficacy but allegedly provides 70% after 2 doses. But ongoing studies suggest it could be as high as 90% All these vaccines are 2 shot vaccines whereas the Johnson & Johnson vaccine provides 70% with just one dose. So all in all i believe its more of an economic strategy. I could be wrong!! There are many other vaccines on the market these days that have a low efficacy. The shingles vaccine being one. Only a 55 – 65% efficacy.
The EU has made a right balls of this… https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations
The vaccine does not need to be approved for administration to ensure delivery. AZ are contractually obliged to deliver the agreed amount of doses in the set time frame. Failure to do so should see the EU throw the legal book at them. It has been paid for up front approved for use or not.
The Brits are at it again
@Anto H: would you like a ham sandwich?
If you cant trust big pharm who can you trust
What really happened is the UK made an order and contract first then Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands done the same a few weeks later calling it the vaccine alliance, the EU got upset and said it was their job then made them cancel the contract and the EU renegotiated the contract which took over 2 months putting them further back in a que but they want it now, the other problem is the EU still have not approved the vaccine.
have your say