Tom Parlon (Laois-Offaly, Progressive Democrats)

This amendment seeks to insert additional wording in section 40(9). Subsection (9) provides that if at any time after the making of the enforcement order it is reported to the High Court that any sum payable under the ICC order remains unpaid, the court may order the person to whom the ICC order relates be imprisoned. The amendment proposes that this provision will only apply in cases of sums payable under the ICC order which appeared to the High Court to be a sum which might be realised by the person to whom the order is directed.

This amendment is unnecessary. No court will imprison a person if he or she cannot realise his or her assets. Subsection (10) provides that no order under subsection (9) shall be made until the person to whom the ICC order relates has been given a reasonable opportunity to make representations to the court. Therefore, the person can outline to the court any factors that affected his or her payment in compliance with the ICC order. Subsection (9) is modelled on section 19(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1994 which deals with the general enforcement of confiscation orders. The existing wording is sufficiently flexible and I do not propose to accept the amendment.

See this speech in context