Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 5, line 24, to delete "section 22" and substitute "section 22(1) and (2)".

This bundle of amendments would empower the parole board to make recommendations regarding sentence management and transfer to open prisons. Deputy O'Callaghan's amendments seek to do the same thing, perhaps in a slightly different way. His amendments are more simple, with just a line stating one of the functions of the board is to make recommendations on sentence management. Mine is a bit more detailed and convoluted. I am open to seeing which approach is best. I presume there is an argument that if too much detail is included it might tie the board's hands which is obviously not the intention. At the same time, I was trying to balance against this that if we do not include the detail there is a danger the board's functions and powers in this regard will not be clear enough, which could leave it hamstrung. This is the balance we are trying to reach. I do not know which is best so I will throw it out there.

The amendment I have tabled, whereby the Bill would empower the board to make sentence management recommendations, has been tabled on foot of the recommendations by the existing parole board, which I believe is significant and adds weight to it. It has pointed out it has this function already and it constitutes the bulk of its work. It recommends it for only five or six prisoners a year. If it is taken away it will be left bereft of a number of responsibilities. Everybody agreed on Second Stage it should continue to have this role. The question is how.

Where my group of amendments differs from Deputy O'Callaghan's is I propose that we give the board powers to make orders regarding sentence management rather than just recommendations. This is an important difference. It is important in light of the fact it will be the body reviewing all of the facts about the individual's progress, and I believe this is appropriate. It is recommended by the existing board. I have left it open to the governor of an open prison to revoke or suspend such orders, which is how it happens at present. Obviously it would be very difficult for the board to do this as it is not present in the prison. The idea of an oversight role for the board whereby a governor who revokes or suspends an order has to justify it or explain the reasons in writing is reasonable. There was unanimity on this issue on Second Stage. What we are trying to do is sort out the detail of how it would be done.