Mr. John Costello:

I thank the Chairman and sub-committee members for inviting me to attend. I would like to summarise my submission which I sent to the sub-committee in August.

When I took over as chairman of the Parole Board July 2011, there were regular delays in reviewing the cases of prisoners. From 2013, however, I am hopeful that all prisoners will be reviewed by the board on time. If there are delays, the individual prisoner will be notified and informed when the review will take place. From feedback we have received, it appears that many prisoners are not fully aware of the work of the board. Accordingly, in the next 12 months I hope to visit all the prisons and have meetings with the relevant prisoners to inform them about the work of the board. Only today we had a board meeting inArbour Hill Prison and I had a meeting with a number of prisoners about the parole process. I hope to speak to prisoners in Wheatfield Prison and the Midlands Prison in November.

There is no formal training of board members before they are appointed to the Parole Board. I have introduced a system whereby the board is addressed, at most meetings, by a member of the Irish Prison Service, the Probation Service or the psychology service on relevant matters. One of the problems we have identified is that there is only a small number of fixed-term prisoners participating in the parole process. Most of the prisoners participating are serving a life sentence. The following initiatives might be helpful to encourage these prisoners to participate in the process.
The Prisons Act 2007 provides for 33% remission for those who engage with the rehabilitation services. This provision has been used infrequently and the Parole Board could play an important role in this area in terms of enhanced remission.Many prisoners sentenced to life or a long prison sentence are not aware of what steps they should take to improve themselves while in prison. The initiative of the integrated sentence management scheme is to be welcomed, but it should apply to all long-term prisoners, especially those serving a life sentence.

The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, has suggested prisoners might be reviewed after four or five years by the Parole Board. While welcoming this idea, the board could not review greater numbers of prisoners without increased resources, as well as without increased resources for the probation and psychology services which must prepare reports for it. When a prisoner is released on remission, it is not possible for supervision orders to be made. It is only when a prisoner is released onparole or given temporary release that supervision orders or conditions can be made. This is a problem which causes complications in practice.

I will mention some points on life sentence prisoners. It is important that such prisoners are given a sentence plan from the start of their sentence. As mentioned, it is hoped the integrated sentence management scheme will deal with this matter. The Parole Board only reviews life sentence prisoners after they have served a sentence of seven years, but it might be helpful for it to review them after four or five years. However, a life sentence prisoner was recently granted parole, with the Minister's consent, after serving a sentence of 12 or 13 years. He was a model prisoner and quite exceptional inhow he had rehabilitated during his prison sentence. He hasoffered to speak to other life sentence prisoners when we are addressing them in the next 12 months or so.
Life sentence prisoners can become institutionalised if they have served 15 or 16 years or more in prison. The Parole Board, inconjunction with the Irish Prison Service, should give special attention to such prisoners. If a prisoner in the United Kingdom is sentenced following a murder conviction, he or she normally receives the benefit of a tariff, or a minimum sentence which the court directs he or she must serve. If he or she subsequently transfers to Ireland and continues his or her sentence in Ireland, he or she loses the benefit of this tariff, as Irish law applies and there is no recognition of tariffs imposed by the English courts. The Law Reform Commission, in a report earlier this year on mandatory sentencing, recommended that courts might be given discretion to recommend a minimum sentence which persons convicted of murder might serve. There is merit in this suggestion, but sentencing guidelines would be essential if such reforms were to be introduced.
The privacy of prisoners should be respected after they have been released from prison, but quite often the press have noregard for these issues.On a related point, elderly prisoners and prisoners suffering from intellectual disabilities should receive special treatment in prison. More resources are needed to assist the Probation Service when helping prisoners who are released to reintegrate into society. If the numbers of prisoners are reduced in the prisons, with a subsequent saving of money, such savings should be transferred to the Probation Service.

The Minister has confirmed that the Parole Board will be placed on a statutory footing and mentioned that he hopes the legislation will be introduced in2014. However, if this reform is introduced, there should be an appeals process from the board to a tribunal or other appropriate body. I also have a concern that when the board is placed on a statutory footing, there could be increased demand from prisoners for legal representation. I am in favour of legal representation in some but not all cases. There could also be a greater number of judicial reviews of board decisions and these matters would have to be examined.

Iwelcome recent initiatives such as the community release scheme, the new incentivised regimes policy andthe new integrated management programme. I also welcome the community integrated plan which will be developed nine months prior to the release of a prisoner back into the community. I congratulate the Irish Prison Service, the Probation Service and the psychology service for all the excellent work they do.