Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, and the opportunity to debate this long overdue legislation which has been broadly welcomed. I am also pleased it has been introduced in the Seanad first.

The need for a statutory framework for the rehabilitation of offenders has long been recognised by those working in the criminal justice system. I must declare an interest as I am a practising criminal barrister. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, referred to a 2007 Law Reform Commission report which provided draft legislation on spent convictions. There has been legislation in place covering the rehabilitation of offenders in England for some time. The Minister stated:

Obviously, the provisions are most easily explained and understood by a person who has been convicted once of a relatively minor offence more than seven years ago. That person does not need to disclose a conviction when applying for most employment.

This legislation will make a significant difference for persons in such circumstances.

Members gave testimonies of individuals. Like many others, I have met individuals in the political system who have been debarred from applying for different jobs or undertaking different career courses because of a minor conviction in the past. This legislation will be an aid and a comfort for the people concerned.

In my work as a criminal lawyer I have come across the real problem presented by old convictions. Where it becomes most apparent is where one is representing an individual charged with another offence 15 or 20 years after committing a minor offence. Until the Children Act was introduced, even if one had committed a very minor public order offence as a child, it was still on one's record. The Children Act helped by providing for the expunging of records for offences committed when people are minors but it did not help people who committed very minor public order offences when 18 or 19 and who then had a clean slate for ten or 20 years before being brought up on another minor offence. That would not be a first offence in that case. The consequence in the very practical criminal law world is that the Probation of Offenders Act can no longer be applied and people cannot receive the benefit of the Act. In other words, instead of the judge indicating the conviction is found but not recorded, it would show up.

I appreciate the Minister's point that the scheme he is introducing is a straightforward, self-administered scheme which does not expunge the record but removes the duty to disclose for all but certain employment after the relevant period has passed. Senator Leyden raised one of the issues I have with the practical side, which is how this works with PULSE. It is clear a person convicted of a minor offence seven years ago no longer has to disclose that conviction when applying for a job, but what happens when we are not dealing with self-administration? For example, a person may apply for a visa to work in the US and the American immigration authorities would seek the PULSE record of that person from the Garda. Is that a spent conviction? Perhaps I missed how that issue would be dealt with in the Bill. A second point relates to sentencing procedures. In practice, judges will take a minor conviction from years ago in a way to prevent an offender having the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, so will that still be the case in respect of spent convictions under this Bill?

Those are the more detailed questions on the Bill's operation. I very much welcome it and it has long been called for. Senator Hayden made some excellent points about the "don't ask, don't tell" analogy and how the Bill does not go far enough. It is something of a missed opportunity, although I fully accept the argument that the Bill goes further than what was recommended by the Law Reform Commission. I welcome the fact the Minister has raised the threshold to 12 months from six months, which is very important, but he could have gone further. We could have extended the sentencing threshold, and the Irish Human Rights Commission has stated the rehabilitation periods are too long, with shorter periods maximising the possibility of rehabilitation and re-integration. Similarly, the Irish Penal Reform Trust suggested the Bill could and should go further in the interests of rehabilitation.

Others made points about the impact of the vetting bureau Bill, which we dealt with in the justice committee. I welcome the Minister's announcements that he will take on board some of the recommendations of the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Irish Penal Reform Trust, with amendments to be brought forward on Committee Stage. I look forward to debating those. I ask the Minister to consider going a little further and making the Bill even less restrictive in terms of facilitation of the re-integration of offenders into society. I fully appreciate the commitment of the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, to rehabilitation of offenders, and it is a very important goal for us to have in the shaping of a criminal justice system. We are glad to see it being very clearly expressed today.