Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I understand that changes were made to the timelines, so I am happy to look at some of these suggested amendments further. Turning to the in cameraaspect, there will always be situations where particular cases should be held in camera. We keep moving from different Bills. We have had the Sex Offenders (Amendment) Bill 2021 and this legislation, and we discussed some of these elements in the context of Coco's law as well. In the Sex Offences (Amendment) Bill 2021, we are expanding the provision to ensure that all sexual offences, and not just rape, would be held out of the view of the public, obviously allowing for media access in the appropriate way.

Regarding civil orders, which I think will deal with many cases where a subsequent offence has happened in respect of where somebody has served a term and then something else has happened afterwards, such proceedings will always be held in camera, in the same way as any family court or any other type of similar setting. I wish to be clear that the civil orders, which I think some people will opt for instead of having to go through the criminal trial, will always be held in camera.

Taking stalking and harassment specifically, this is something I am happy to consider further. These two aspects are not explicitly referred to within the Sex Offences (Amendment) Bill 2021 that we are progressing now, but this is an area we could explore. I am not sure this would cover all types of harassment, because not all types of harassment would have a sexual nature to them. We must look at whether one or both aspects could potentially fit into this context. Again, however, as I said, this is something I am happy to explore. I reiterate, to be clear, that the proceedings concerning the civil orders we are introducing in this legislation will all be held in camera, the same as any other family court. This will, hopefully, give some peace of mind to people.

Moving to consecutive sentences, as the Deputy mentioned there is nothing to prevent this from happening. Equally, however, if we look at the new section 10(7), this provides for an aggravating factor. A judge, therefore, must take into account where there is a previous offence and a higher sentence must be applied based on this fact. It is not that judges would be disregarding previous offences, but there is also nothing to prevent what the Deputy is suggesting from happening in this legislation. I am not sure, then, that there is anything that we need to do in this regard. I acknowledge that a higher sentence must be imposed where there has been a previous offence. The judge must take this into account.