Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I gave a great deal of consideration to this proposal. The Deputy's last point related to the use of the word "place" to refer to the place where the prisoner would have been residing if he or she were not in prison. This amendment, which was discussed on Committee Stage, seeks to change the text of the Bill to indicate that a person will be deemed to be ordinarily resident in a "constituency", rather than in a "place". On the face of it, the amendment seems to involve a relatively minor change of words. A person who is in legal custody may be registered as an elector under section 11(5) of the Electoral Act 1992. Such people are normally deemed to be ordinarily resident in the "place", as it is worded in the Bill, in which they would have been residing if they were not in detention. The text of the Bill follows existing law. It seems the word "place", as opposed to the word "constituency", has been used for the best part of four decades.

Deputy Gilmore made a specific point when he referred to the Irish Penal Reform Trust. I pointed out on Committee Stage that the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government had consulted the trust and was aware of its understandable concern that homeless people, in particular, might have difficulties in establishing their links to specific places. Under the current system, such people face notable difficulties in engaging with the electoral process, regardless of the provisions of the Bill before the House. One of the Bill's fundamental principles is that it will not designate prisons as places of ordinary residence, because that is not what they are. The disproportionate effect that such a designation would have on certain constituencies would not serve democracy. I am sure Deputy Gilmore would not intend to have such an effect.

We need to consider the same question that we consider under the current system. What is the best way of linking a particular homeless person with a particular place? The only home a homeless person currently has is the place where he or she resides, not necessarily voluntarily. This matter is best considered by the local registration authority and the relevant person. People could be registered at the hostels and shelters where they were permanently or temporarily residing before they were imprisoned. Current practice suggests local authorities adopt a flexible and common sense approach to this matter. If a person who happens to be detained at Wheatfield Prison wishes to designate Wexford or Wicklow as their constituency because they are from such places or they feel some affinity with them, they can do so.

Deputy Gilmore raised a related issue on a previous occasion, although he did not mention it this evening. I refer to the good point he made about the need for documentation as proof of residency. He asked how a prisoner who was homeless before he was incarcerated can be expected to have such documentation. It is not necessarily the case that proof of address would be demanded in every case. Given the circumstances involved, local authorities should be reasonable and adopt a common sense approach in these and other cases. Guidelines will be produced in this regard as the best way of ensuring there is flexibility. Other options can be considered if there is a need for documentation. In the cases of homeless people living in hostels, I understand it is sufficient for them to produce letters saying where they were from. I appreciate that Deputy Gilmore is anxious to ensure homeless people have the same rights under this legislation. Nothing in the Bill as it stands is contrary to that wish in any way.

See this speech in context