Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for taking the time to appear before the committee to give us the benefit of their experience and expertise in this area. We appreciate it. The submissions and notes provided to the committee are helpful and stimulating. The presentations were substantial and challenging.

All of us on the sub-committee share the frustration of the witnesses at the number and extent of reports carried out in the past on the penal system. Professor Ian O'Donnell referred to the previous justice committee report 12 years ago gathering dust.

We are all anxious to ensure the report we produce at the end of this year will not be another of these reports - I am aware everyone says this when producing a report - but it seemed to us when we set up this sub-committee that there was a window of opportunity at this time. I am the rapporteur for the sub-committee and having been involved in penal reform for years, I see an opportunity now with the new Minister, who has announced the establishment of a penal policy working group and has shown more of an interest in penal reform than has been evident for some time. Also, there is a change of regime within the Irish Prison Service and the Department of Justice.

We were all very depressed by the findings of the report on St. Patrick's Institution. We went into that institution some months ago with the Chair of the committee and saw a very sanitised version of the prison and the detention centre. I understand the Minister, Deputy Shatter, said the same thing and that when he visited he did not understand the extent of the immense abuse going on. However, action will be taken on foot of the report and perhaps this committee will invite the Minister in to ask what specifically is being done to address the problems in St. Patrick's Institution. We are very pleased that the detention of minors there is being phased out, but clearly more needs to be done.

With regard to the report on St. Patrick's Institution, this sub-committee was set up in light of the Thornton Hall review group report, which highlighted the issue of back door strategies to try and reduce the reliance on imprisonment and address problems of recidivism by looking at how we deal with end of sentence management. There has been significant work done on sentencing and the need to ensure greater reliance on community sanction and reserve imprisonment as a last resort. However, statutory reform has been very slow in terms of implementing the Fines Act. This committee is looking specifically at what happens at the end of a sentence. This work is assisted by the work done already in the Irish Penal Reform Trust's excellent report, which was published on Monday, on reform of remission, temporary release and parole and this will inform what we do. Therefore, we are very grateful these issues are addressed in all of the submissions.

I have a few specific questions for the witnesses on their views and recommendations with regard to what we should be looking at. Professor O'Donnell referred to an optimum prison size. What is the optimum prison size and is there a cap above which prisons should not go? With regard to optimum rules on remission, the Irish Penal Reform Trust has recommended a standard remission rate of 50% should be introduced for those serving sentences of less than five years and that enhanced remission of 50% should be possible, on an earned basis, for those serving sentences of over five years. I am aware the witnesses today have put forward different suggestions on remission. Dr. Warner said that 30% or one third was standard and 50% for young offenders. What is the optimum remission in an ideal world?

What can be done through statutory reform? We heard previously that the work being done on the community return programme is being done on foot of current legislation and there was disagreement among those who came before us as to whether statutory reform was needed if we were to recommend putting community return on a more formal footing. Fr. McVerry referred to integrated sentence management, of which we have heard glowing reports from the Irish Prison Service. However, Fr. McVerry said it was not working. How can we achieve the potential of that programme and other good initiatives such as community return? The community return programme is only a pilot programme currently and there appears to be some disagreement as to whether integrated sentence management is being rolled out.

With regard to people who are just released from prison, how can we ensure practical supports are in place? Does this require legislation or do we simply need to reform the social welfare provisions to ensure people have access to accommodation, medical cards and cash on their release? I thank Dr. Warner for the Finnish and Swedish examples he has given us, which are very helpful. We have taken his recommendation on board for our visit to Finland.