Ms Fíona Ní Chinnéide:

I thank Deputy O'Callaghan. We completely agree that we do not need more reports proving the value of penal reform: the Whitaker committee report, the management of offenders from 1994, the Oireachtas sub-committee report in 2013, which we thought was extremely strong, and the strategic review of penal policy. What we need now is implementation. I agree with the Deputy.

Regarding what could be useful to address fines, it takes a while for practices to change. We had concerns with the two fines Acts; the Fines Act 2010 initially, that was not fully implemented, and then the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014, which was only fully implemented in January. We would have questions on these. For example, we believe the threshold of €100 is too high for payment by instalment and that there should be no limit. For people coming from certain circumstances at certain times of year coming up with €100 on the spot can be very difficult, for example two weeks before Christmas when getting Christmas presents for the kids. We would remove that €100 as a base. The original Fines Act 2010 had provision for payment by instalment of fines over two years in certain circumstances. That was reduced to 12 months in the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014. We would extend it. We see no reason it should not be over 24 months. We hear again and again from people who want to pay but who cannot pay upfront and in full. People should be facilitated to pay. We agree that it is a completely wasteful practice that puts an enormous burden on the Prison Service.

The Deputy is completely accurate that committals for non-payment of fines made up more than 50% of total committals in 2015. Nobody agrees that this is the best way to go. There are provisions in the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014 for alternatives. There is now provision for attachment of earnings orders if people do not pay. We would wonder slightly why people are continuing to be sent to prison but it could be based on the date that they received the fine. There are attachment of earnings orders for people who are in employment. There is provision for community service alternatives for people who are not in employment. There are recovery orders. There is a suite of measures. Essentially an evaluation is needed. It has been in operation for a year now, so the first point would be an evaluation of its success and to see if those other provisions are being used or if the default is still prison even though that is not in accordance with the legislation. That would be a very useful thing to do.

I agree completely that justice needs to be done and needs to be seen to be done, and anything that enhances public confidence in the system is to be welcomed. It would also be useful to do more research on community-based alternatives, to look more closely at them and to invite groups in to talk about them. Some work was done by the previous Joint Committee on Justice and Equality and a proposal was accepted by the then Minister regarding community courts. To return to something that Deputy O'Brien asked initially, community courts are expensive to set up in the first instance but this is about the longer game. This is about saving money but re-offending rates are a very narrow way of looking at the success of any provision. One needs to consider that if people do not go to prison they are maintained in their community, they stay with their families, the impacts on the children are minimised and, if they are in employment, they can maintain their job.

It is better for the community and it is less damaging.

Mindful of Ireland's obligation to implement the European Union victims directive, which the Irish Penal Reform Trust, IPRT, welcomes, we would have concerns about legislation that seeks to go beyond the EU directive but victims are less well served by the Irish criminal justice system.

Restorative justice has been found to be extremely beneficial to offenders and victims alike, with reported satisfaction rates of 90% which, compared to satisfaction rates in the criminal justice system, are multiples of that figure. There is provision in the EU victims directive for restorative justice. We are only now commissioning analysis of the victims Bill as published but we believe the restorative aspect is quite weak in that Bill and should be strengthened. It would be very valuable to talk to groups like Facing Forward. Restorative justice is not new to Ireland. The Nenagh reparation project has been running for the past ten years but we are a great country for successful pilot projects that never get national provision. In 2009, the National Commission on Restorative Justice agreed unanimously that that should be rolled out nationwide. More focus on restorative justice and more examination of the benefits for victims and offenders alike would be valuable.

We mentioned the community courts, community service and restorative justice.