Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)

This is a very important Bill. I know that major difficulties have been encountered by courts and juries. As the Minister has observed, the legislation goes back to the M'Naghten rules and the issue of the mens rea or the will and the intention to murder. Frequently, juries that knew all was not right, were confined by the finding that they should find a person guilty but insane. As the Minister has pointed out, that meant an acquittal with the result that such a person could walk away from the court. This Bill is a step in the right direction, although as the Minister has admitted, it has not come before its time. The new plea of diminished responsibility will give more discretion to juries and will allow a lesser sentence to be imposed in cases with a mandatory sentence, such as murder. Hence, it will allow a more humane situation to prevail.

The point has been well made that this Bill is necessary. The Minister has stated that section 20 contains the usual reference to expenses. That tells the full story because the difficulty with the psychiatric services is that they have been starved of funds. The percentage expenditure on mental health is now 7% which is not adequate, when the number of suicides in Ireland, which are in their hundreds and are equivalent to the number of road traffic fatalities, are considered. Nevertheless, the budget for suicide prevention is something like €1.5 million. This Bill is necessary but also underlines the deficiencies in our system, particularly in respect of the requirement to match it with the requisite resources.

A criticism of the Bill in its initial stages related to the emphasis whereby one would have mental illnesses treated in institutions on an inpatient basis. This was seen as the consignment of people to a prison or to the Central Mental Hospital without alternatives. Alternatives should be provided and for that to happen, adequate resources must be provided for both inpatient and outpatient services. This would enable the courts to determine that someone could receive treatment in his or her community from the support staff, rather than to be taken away and confined for X number of years.

There have been major problems in the past whereby people were consigned to institutions for many years and deprived of their liberty with no hope of a review. This was addressed by previous legislation such as the Mental Health Act 2001 and the situation changed, which is to be welcomed. However, having visited Cloverhill Prison for the majority of days during which the Rossport five were held there, I have seen how the prison services work. I have seen the good work done by prison officers and other prison staff. There are also deficiencies in the system, in that the inmates are too often mentally disturbed or mentally disabled and really require help, which is not always available to them. The Minister made the point that some people enter prison in need of psychiatric care rather than a padded cell, which is currently the only option available to them. This must be addressed. I hope the Bill will go towards relieving that situation to a major extent.

The number of people in our prisons who are psychiatrically ill or have intellectual disabilities is quite high and it is important that we have the services to ensure they are rehabilitated. The point was made that prisons confine people in a space and deprive them of their liberties to protect the public but perhaps it is more important to think outside the box and about the needs of these people, so that those who are in need of psychiatric services receive treatment. Too often, people in prisons do not get these essential services.

This legislation relates to the Lunacy (Ireland) Act 1821 and the Juries Act 1976 and the lack of a statutory definition of fitness to plead. The test for insanity as a defence under criminal law has its origins in the M'Naghten rules of 1843. These rules are very restrictive and confine a defence to narrow limits. They apply to a person suffering from insanity that manifests in insane delusions yet they were accepted as the general test for insanity in Irish law despite doubts being expressed about whether they represented a comprehensive statement of Irish law on the issue.

I hope the necessary resources will be made available. The existing general adult psychiatric units catering for mentally disordered offenders should be able to cater for people of all ages, in particular patients diverted from the courts system. There are financial implications, which is contrary to the statement in the Bill which limits resources according to the discretion of the Minister for Finance. To give people the same opportunities, rights and treatments as the general population is a question of resources.

This Bill is certainly a step in the right direction and has not come before its time. That someone can be deemed to be guilty but insane is a contradiction in terms. Now, when a person who is burdened with an illness and does not know what he or she has done or its effects or seriousness is acquitted, he or she will not be deemed to be guilty. This is an important point to make. The word "insanity" in the title of the Bill should be changed to something that is more in line with modern thinking and I hope there will be an amendment to this effect.

See this speech in context