Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I am very conscious of time. We have three hours in which to reach very important parts, including this part because the Minister has moved a great distance from his original proposal in respect of sentencing. We need to deal with the Minister's amendments and tease them out.

Having said that, I will make a few important observations about the debate we have had and try to do so without being seen to talk about any particular cases. We must examine an issue — I will not say it is a difficulty — with the operation of the Court of Criminal Appeal. Certainly, judges in their courts are looking over their shoulders to some extent at the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal. Some say that this is the way it should be, but the Court of Criminal Appeal is not a fixed court. There is not necessarily consistency coming from that court, depending on its individual make-up.

I do not know instantly how we are going to solve that, but it is an issue we must resolve. If there is to be an appellate court that is setting down the pattern of sentencing, that in itself must be consistent. We must achieve this. I am concerned that judges are now saying that if they had their way, they would give what they would deem to be an appropriate sentence but, having regard to the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal in a similar case dealt with by them, they will not give a sentence they deem to be appropriate. This is an issue which we must address in some way.

We come back to the issue I raised this morning and again in respect of one of my priority questions, namely, judicial standards. I do not have any difficulties with using the phrase "judicial training" because other professions are trained. What used to be called teacher training colleges and are now called colleges of education provide training. Training in a professional capacity is no bad thing, we should not shy away from it and one does not need to say it is analogous to training circus animals. It is professional training to have consistency, understand what is required and apply broad experience from others to it.

I am intrigued that the Minister said the Judiciary needs a common consciousness in respect of it. This sounds vaguely like something out of the 1960s. How we going to get this?

See this speech in context