Ms Saoirse Brady:

I thank the committee for the invitation to speak on this important proposed legislation. Established in 1994, the IPRT is Ireland’s principal independent NGO working for systemic penal reform and change. Our vision is a just, humane Ireland where prison is used as a last resort. We urge the committee to give the general scheme of the Bill its full attention to ensure the final legislation is fit for purpose and the Irish Prison Service, IPS, maintains the highest standards in governance and accountability.

Accountability and oversight have a different significance in the closed world of prisons, encompassing much more than the prevention of human rights violations behind closed doors. They involve ensuring the prison system meets its mission to provide safe and secure custody, dignity of care and rehabilitation to prisoners and does everything it can to minimise the harmful effects of imprisonment on people so held.

We welcome the long overdue publication of the general scheme but it must be prioritised and accompanied by a firm commitment to adequate investment in the proposed governance and audit structures of the IPS or there is an inherent risk the new body will become a firefighting operation. The statutory appointment of the director general as the Accounting Officer for the IPS, at head 34, is welcome. However, we ask the committee to consider whether the proposed limitations on expressing opinions to Oireachtas committees other than the Committee of Public Accounts is appropriate or necessary. While it is welcome that the heads of Bill set out the composition and membership of the IPS board, we call into question the appointment by the Minister for Justice and would instead recommend that the legislation is clear that appointments, in whole or in part, are to be made pursuant to a public competition managed by the Public Appointments Service, PAS.

The IPRT is concerned that the statutory power of the Minister, as set out in head 52, to redact in part or in full the publication of the annual report of the IPS seems particularly stringent. The IPRT suggests that the committee consider the need for such a statutory provision, especially given the importance of protecting the independence of the IPS and the fact the same does not apply to other statutory bodies.

The Office of the Inspector of Prisons has recently increased its activity and output and this is welcome. Creating an effective and accountable system, however, requires not only robust and independent oversight but also the shaping of a prison culture that respects complaints, acts swiftly to address any wrongdoings, and harnesses data and information to drive progress. Accountability is not a singular entity, one office or one practice.

The notable omission of prison culture and its importance cannot be overstated. It encompasses working relationships between staff and management and between staff and prisoners. Poor standards or poor service provision or treatment in day-to-day life can create a pervasive culture whereby people in prison tolerate poor conditions rather than challenging them to realise their rights. This is particularly relevant in light of the ongoing review of the 2007 prison rules by the Department of Justice as there is currently no adequate complaints system that offers an effective remedy for people in prison. We hope the review will be completed shortly. A robust and effective complaints system must have in place conditions that support it, including the promotion of a positive culture in order that staff and prisoners can have confidence in the system to support better management overall.

Our written submission goes into more detail on several key heads of the general scheme of the Bill. My colleague, Ms Kehoe, and I are happy to answer any questions on them.