Ms Maria McDonald:

I hope I can alleviate some of the Deputy's concerns. I have spoken with some judges. The victims' directive is on their agenda and they have been provided with training in regard to certain aspects. I am aware of that, although there is only so much I can say. I am very hopeful because, having been before the courts, I have seen how a significant number of judges are using the victims' directive and are cognisant of the victims' directive, notwithstanding the fact the legislation is not yet in place. It is very difficult for them. For example, the victims' directive requires that a victim would not be cross-examined about his or her private life not related to the criminal offence, where he or she has special protection needs. That is massive; it is a mind change. The only way a person can be cross-examined now is if it is due to the person's prior sexual history. Judges have been aware of that and they have been managing it.

I understand the Deputy's position and the issues. I understand the new judicial council Bill will facilitate some of those changes. It might be appropriate to look at the Canadian Bill that is being put forward to see whether something could be written into the judicial council Bill in regard to the reporting of the sexual abuse training that is being provided or the training on certain other issues. That does not require the members of the Judiciary to do it and still allows for their independence, but it does provide transparency and accountability as to what training has been done, and it makes the public aware it has been done in that context.

I thank the witness for her presentation. There is so much involved in this whole area and it is so complex. It is not going to be easy to make things better quickly. It is probably going to require a cultural change in a lot of areas. To pick up on the points made by Deputy Jonathan O'Brien regarding education, legislation is grand but it is pointless and meaningless unless it is implemented. The Garda Inspectorate, for example, has completed three reports since 2013 but how many of its recommendations have been implemented?

In terms of the last report, which was on Garda reform, the garda charged with overseeing implementation of the reform programme in Phoenix Park is actually more a part of the problem than the solution. Deputy O'Brien spoke about training for judges but there should also be more ongoing training for gardaí and that training should be done by civilians rather than by in-house staff. To the best of my knowledge, it takes about four times longer to qualify as a hairdresser than as a garda. That has to be an issue. Even in football, League of Ireland managers who have all of the qualification badges must go on refresher courses or they lose their licences. We should apply that to other areas.

We have been talking about reducing recidivism which will, invariably, reduce the number of victims of crime. An Garda Síochána will be involved in a big way in that and even with the best will in the world, they will need more resources if we are to see a new approach. They are underresourced and are hard pressed to do their job as it is. Without resources, a lot of what we are talking about is pie in the sky, in terms of them getting involved in a whole lot of other areas that would be very positive. The State will have to recognise that more resources will be needed; otherwise we are just talking to the sky.

At the start of her presentation Ms McDonald spoke about the validity of using prison for certain things. I am strongly of the opinion that about 90% of the people in prison should not even be in there. Avoiding prison by paying fines is all very well for those who can afford it but it amplifies the divisions in society in the sense that it is not a big problem for those who are not short of money, but it is a huge problem for those who are short. Paying a fine rather than going to prison is a punishment for the less well-off but not for the well-off.

This committee has discussed the fact that fining people who are poor in order to keep them out of prison is definitely a punishment but those who are well-off should be made to do community service rather than being able to buy their way out of their problems. In terms of stopping such people from re-offending, the fact that they can just write a cheque every time they get into trouble means that there is no incentive for them to change their ways. If they are made to do community service, however, they will think twice because a lot of them would find that demeaning, despite the fact that it would be very educational for them and might bring them down to earth a bit. Coming up with schemes to keep people out of prison has to be a good thing because putting people in prison is doing nothing to reduce recidivism and in that sense, is doing nothing for victims.

The sentiment of so much of what Ms McDonald has said is very good. Does she think that the State is prepared to put its money where its mouth is and provide the resources that are needed in order to make all of this happen?