Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Bill and the Minister's detailed exposition of it. The Bill contains a number of important considerations which justify it. The Minister has outlined the cases where due to oversight or otherwise people are imprisoned if only for short terms for non-payment of a fine. We have a problem with prisoner numbers and overcrowding in prisons. We have the extraordinary figure revealed in the National Crime Council report that a total of 22% of all prison committals were for the non-payment of fines. In light of that the Bill is of fundamental importance.

The Bill has been a long time in coming. That is not entirely the fault of the Minister because the delay has existed for a considerable period. In October 1991 the Law Reform Commission published its first report on the indexation of fines. Various promises were made on a Bill to address indexation. In 1998 the Taoiseach of the day promised such a Bill. The excellent report of the Comptroller and Auditor General appeared in 2000. Much work was done also by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. The Law Reform Commission published another report in 2002. The groundwork was laid for the Bill in terms of the reports outlined. In addition, Fine Gael published a number of Bills on the area that were shot down by the Government of the day.

The Bill is to be welcomed. In certain cases fines appear ludicrously small compared to the offence and they bring the law into disrepute. The updating of the maximum fines is important and the increase in fines imposed by the higher courts. It is particularly important in the areas of environmental crime, company law and competition matters that fines are commensurate with the offence and have a real deterrent effect.

The provision giving powers to the court to inquire into the capacity of persons to pay fines is of fundamental importance. It will increase the burden on the courts but it is a fundamental part of ascertaining the ability to pay and the reasonableness and justice in sending a person to prison for non-payment of a fine if he or she has an inability to pay. Figures are not available in this country but in the United Kingdom one study showed that 90% of fine defaulters were men, 76% were unemployed and approximately 66% had been in prison previously either for non-payment of a fine or for something else. If those figures reflect the situation in this country then we recognise the problem we are dealing with in that in many cases there is an inability to pay fines. Therefore, I welcome the provision on payment by instalment which is of fundamental importance.

I have come across a situation where, for example, a person was fined more than €1,000 for dumping material at a bottle bank or some such collection centre. Many such persons are unemployed and would never be in a position to get €1,000 together to pay the fine in one lump sum. I investigated the possibility of the individual in that case paying by instalment. The provision for payment by instalment is most important.

The Minister outlined an alternative to prison for persons in default of payment such as community service and other means. I welcome the Bill. It has gone through considerable vetting in committee. I note that a number of amendments have been made to it. I reserve my position in terms of tabling amendments on Committee Stage. I recognise the work that has been put into the Bill by the Minister and the Department in addition to the ground-breaking work of the Law Reform Commission and the other bodies involved with it.

In referring to indexation the Minister indicated it would not be appropriate that the matter would be dealt with by way of regulation but that it should be done by way of primary legislation according to the advice of the Attorney General. Section 11 provides that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may, by regulation, do anything which appears to him or her to be necessary or expedient for removing a difficulty that may arise. In a sense this is the Oireachtas delegating to the Minister power to amend the primary legislation. If there is a problem of drafting or otherwise, it should be corrected in primary legislation. It is not a healthy precedent, although I understand that type of arrangement whereby one can amend primary legislation by regulation is more applicable in the case of the transposition of European Union law. I do not see the justification for it in this case. It does not help to ensure clarity and transparency in the law where even a practitioner has to look not only through the primary legislation and amendments thereto but has to vet regulations for changes in primary legislation. That is not desirable. I am not sure I understand the consistency in argument where indexation, which would seem to be a rather technical matter, should by done by primary legislation but in this case the Minister can do anything which he considers expedient to deal with a difficulty that arises in the implementation of the Act. I urge the Minister to clarify that matter.

The broad thrust of the Bill is appropriate. The updating of the system of indexation, whereby the multipliers are applied is such that the system is very coherent and rational. I very much welcome the provision for payment by instalment and the alternatives to imprisonment for default of payment. In many ways, we are dealing with people who have difficulties associated with income and employment. This is an important Bill to deal with what is essentially a sector of society that is disadvantaged. The heavy hand of the law is currently provided for in existing legislation and this Bill can ameliorate it to some extent and provide a more just system for dealing with the kinds of infringements of the law in question.