Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Since I drafted the amendment then I should justify it by having the last word. Section 18 is on guiding principles. Section 18(2) states:

The Board shall also be guided by the following principles in the discharge of its functions:(a) the Board shall endeavour to take into consideration all relevant available information, including:

(i) the stated reasons and recommendations of the sentencing judge;

(ii) the nature and gravity of the offence;

(iii) the degree of responsibility of the person whose parole is being considered;

(iv) information from the trial.

Part of the problem is that this country has a one-size-fits-all punishment for murder and it is only a life sentence. I am concerned that if one takes out the provision one will be left with a situation where judges will try to put themselves in a situation where they are going to have to try to distinguish between different types of murders. One could have recommendations, which would not be permitted once this law came in. In America one can be sentenced without parole. Ireland has a statutory mechanism. Obviously the parole board should take into account the nature and gravity of the offence.

One could argue that Ian Brady and Myra Hindley should have got parole but I will not go into that discussion. There is a process whereby people can judicially review a decision. If the parole board refuses to grant parole to an individual for a period of 20 or 30 years solely due to the nature of the offence then that can be judicially reviewed by the individual concerned.

We must take into account that there will be people on the parole board who will try to do their best. They have a difficult job to do. They will try to balance the safety of the community, on the one hand, with the requirement of rehabilitation, on the other hand. To remove this provision would be artificial.

Therefore, I will be opposing the amendment.