Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 57: To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the timeline on the proposed upgrade of the ICT system for the courts as well as the appointment of approved persons as receivers in order to introduce the remaining sections of the Fines Act; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24927/11]

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy has noted, the majority of the Fines Act 2010 has been commenced. It is important to note that section 14 of the Act, which has been commenced, places an obligation on the courts for the first time to take account of a person's financial circumstances before determining that a fine is to be imposed. This provision means that no person should be sent to prison for default solely because he or she cannot afford to pay a fine.

Implementation work is continuing on two key sections of Act. Section 15 provides for the payment of fines by instalment. There are a number of practical and technical issues required to commence this provision. As the Deputy will appreciate, the current system of payment allows only for a single payment in respect of each fine to be made within a specified period and this payment is recorded on the court's IT system, the criminal case tracking system or CCTS.

In order to allow for a fine to be paid by instalments over a year or in certain circumstances for a longer period, it is necessary for the CCTS to be substantially modified to allow for the payment of instalments and to ensure that such instalments are accurately recorded and tracked. In that regard, I met with the Courts Service management and informed it of this Government's commitment to ensuring that payment by instalments is introduced as speedily as possible.

Arriving from that meeting, the Courts Service has put in place a structure to oversee the implementation of the necessary modifications. Unfortunately no such structure was put in place by the former Government. I am informed that, assuming the necessary funding is available, it will take approximately 12 months to complete the administrative and technical modifications required. I expect to receive a report, including implementation proposals, from the service by the end of next month.

Section 16 of the 2010 Act will require a judge, consequent on determining the fines be imposed, to make an order appointing an approved person, commonly referred to as a receiver, to recover the fine in the event of default. The Courts Service has engaged in some preliminary discussions with the Revenue sheriffs, who have relevant experience through their work in the recovery of outstanding tax liabilities on behalf of the State, with a view to sheriffs being nominated as approved persons and I understand this dialogue will resume in the near future. Some IT enhancements will be necessary in order to allow for the electronic transfer of recovery orders and data exchange with the receivers. I am informed this work will take approximately six months to complete. It will be done concurrently with that mentioned.

It seems likely that some minor amendments will be required to the 2010 Act to address some practical implementation issues, including the need to provide for some form of retainer payment for work undertaken in circumstances where a fine cannot be recovered. These are the timescales available to me. The Government is subject to these caveats and committed to implementing the remaining provisions of the Fines Act 2010 as speedily as possible.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister referred to section 14 in saying people who were unable to pay fines should not be going to prison, but, unfortunately, he knows as well as I do that that is not the case. It is unfortunate that implementation will take so long. What is the cost of introducing this system? Section 14 requires judges to take people's financial circumstances into account. As the Minister said, nobody who is unable to pay a fine should be sent to prison. That should be the message sent.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A considerable number of outstanding fines precede the coming into force of the Act. In those circumstances fines would have been imposed, with the alternative of imprisonment if they were not paid. That creates a particular difficulty because it is important to ensure people pay the fines handed down by the courts and that the integrity of the justice system is not undermined. In the context of current circumstances where court orders have been made without fines having been paid and there is no other means of recovery, unfortunately, prison remains an option for the time being. Of course, it is an option none of us wants to see used in unnecessary circumstances. I am very anxious, therefore, that this new system be put in place. It is regrettable that during the period when the Fines Bill was before the House, prior to its enactment, it seems the former Minister made no preparations of any description to put in place the necessary IT systems or programmes and that there was no forward planning to implement its provisions. That is where I found myself when we were elected to government and there was no funding available to me.

I will answer directly the question the Deputy asked me. It is estimated that it will cost approximately €400,000 to make the IT changes required. I hope to be able to secure this funding in 2012 during Government discussions on the Estimates for the new year.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept what the Minister said about undermining the justice system, but it also undermines this House when we pass legislation and fail to put in place the finance to implement it. That is regrettable and should not happen again.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I share the Deputy's view. Better forward planning would have ensured, as the legislation was going through the House, the arrangements were made to identify the appropriate IT changes required. It is unfathomable that the Bill was passed in 2010 and no financial allocation was made in 2011 to facilitate this occurring.