Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

To respond to that last point, it has been shown elsewhere that, where guidelines are in place, it is not simply that the judges read them. There is transparency and knowledge about the sentences being handed down across the board. There is more information about sentencing. Judges are better educated and better equipped as to what the standards are and what is expected of them. There is more transparency in standards as to what are considered mitigating and aggravating factors. That would be valuable. I look forward to the Judicial Council Bill proceeding to Committee Stage in the Seanad in the near future. I think it will bring about a significant change in sentencing policy that is measured and that will make a real difference.

In terms of the provisions that are specifically opposed, I take on board many of the points that Deputies Wallace and Clare Daly made. I do not support mandatory minimums. I would draw a distinction for presumptive minimums because it preserves an element of judicial discretion that I think is important. Judges have exercised that discretion in areas in which presumptive minimums exist.

On the face of it, and in the abstract, what has been outlined here seems a relatively fair approach to sentencing. When somebody who commits a serious offence within a reasonable amount of time of committing another relevant offence that is also quite serious - making him or her a repeat offender - the kind of approach that is outlined is very often the approach that a judge would take. Having said that, there are points that have been made which I will consider. I will not oppose the sections at this point, but I will keep an open mind as matters progress.

I am very wary of mandatory minimum sentences. Presumptive minimum sentences are somewhat different. It takes two or three readings of the formula outlined here in order to properly understand exactly what is proposed. Time will tell what effect that will have, but we will certainly have to keep an eye on it.

The most significant reservation I have is one that I would like the views of both Minister of State and the Minister for Justice and Equality on, and perhaps there will be an opportunity for that on Report Stage. Where there is a clear indication for what the sentence for a second offence might be, there is a disincentive for the accused to plead guilty. I am slightly concerned at that because if the prospective sentence for the second offence is already relatively clear, it seems possible that an accused's lawyers will suggest there is no point in pleading guilty. If a guilty plea is not entered, that means the complainant will potentially be brought through a court process, and the trauma involved, that would otherwise be avoided.

I will not be opposing the section at this point, but I would like the Minister and the Minister of State to address the point I have made. I will keep an open mind until Report Stage.