improving government service delivery to minority ethnic ... - NCCRI

(continued from previous page)
The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform released some data on the outcome of the first
recruitment campaign after these changes were introduced in 2005. 229 The data showed that a total of 8,462
people applied. 6,890, or 81 per cent, completed a voluntary survey in which they indicated their ethnicity.
Some 5,573 candidates classified themselves as “white Irish”. Of these, 4,066 sat the aptitude test with 2,679,
or 66 per cent, passing, making them eligible for the interview stage. The largest ethnic minority group was
the “Asian Chinese” community, represented by 602 applicants. Of these 463 sat the aptitude test with 101,
or 22 per cent, progressing to interview. 348 candidates described themselves as “white other”, meaning they
are white but not Irish. Of these, 146 sat the aptitude test with 57, or 39 per cent, passing and progressing
to the interview stage. 124 applicants described themselves as “black African”. Of these 45 turned up for the
aptitude test with two, or 4 per cent, passing and progressing to the interview stage. Five applicants described
themselves as “black other”, with four sitting the aptitude test and one progressing to the interview stage. The
final ethnic category was “Asian other”, with 153 candidates. Of these, 76 presented for an aptitude test with
10, or 13 per cent, proving successful and progressing to the interview stage.
229_Conor Lally, Figures
show ethnicity of Garda
candidates, Irish Times 8
February 2006.
The results suggest that a significant start has been made but significant statistical differences disparities
between the success rates of the various minority groups require further investigation; language difficulties may
be a factor.
Benchmarking
Benchmarking strategies comprise two components. In the first place, appropriate indicators provide the
essential baseline data which can be used to measure the presence of minority ethnic groups in any particular
sector as well as their levels of inclusion, socio-economic and cultural disadvantage, linguistic needs, and
any other relevant issues. Secondly, such indicators should be used in the formulation of mainstreaming and
targeting programmes in order to promote equality for such communities.
For reasons which have already been explained, this is an area where much remains to be done in Ireland.
Service provision for minority ethnic groups is not yet grounded in a system of formal evaluation, based on
hard targets and agreed indicators, backed by statutory force. Irish service providers are still largely reliant on
a complaints-driven approach in evaluating service provision. Such an approach necessarily conflicts with the
notion of measurable outcomes based on objective indicators and time-related targets.
This situation will undoubtedly change over time as the provisions of the NPAR are translated into sectoral
audits and action programmes, based on the identification of appropriate targets, indicators, timelines and
benchmarks. This process will requite a significant shift of in attitudes and forms of governance. In the case of
an indigenous minority, the Traveller community, local authorities were required to adopt fixed targets for the
provision of accommodation but some years after such provisions were put in place little action had been taken.
The lack of indicators and basic data is a pressing issue in virtually all sectors. For example, the Gárda National
Immigration Bureau have information on country of origin and immigration status but only immigrants from
outside the EU are registered as such information is not required for EU residents. Gárda HQ stated when
interviewed that the only information they collect is name, date of birth, gender, physical appearance and
nationality. In the schools, there is at present no nationally collated data on ethnicity at primary level and the
information available is rudimentary and unsystematic. Although it has been estimated that an overall figure of
approximately 6,000 pupils of non-Irish origin are enrolled in the primary system, this figure seems improbably
low. Better data is available for second-level enrolment, where numbers are more modest and needs are
arguably not as great. Within the employment sector, data is rudimentary and unsystematic.