Darragh O'Brien (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the opportunity to address this Bill. Deputy Kathleen Lynch observed that attitudes have changed in the area of mental health. We all have a role to play in terms of recognising that people have episodes in their lives that bring them over the edge and lead them to do things they would not normally do. We also have work to do in educating public attitudes to depression, suicide and other mental illnesses, which are as real as physical illnesses.

The Bill proposes two important amendments to the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006. It has been carefully devised to achieve a balance between the rights of the individual, which must be paramount in this, and the need to safeguard the community at large. The primary amendment relates to the conditional discharge of persons detained in the Central Mental Hospital. Currently, the mental health review board is entitled to conditionally discharge suitable patients, but it does not have the power to make the necessary arrangements for the supervision of a patient who has been discharged. This means it cannot ensure that patients are returned if conditions are breached. This is detrimental to patients, society and hospitals. This lack of enforcement has effectively made the Act unworkable in this regard and has meant the board was not in a position to grant conditional discharges.

Given that this goes to the core of an individual's right to freedom, it is not surprising that the situation has resulted in several legal challenges. It is understandable that there are concerns regarding personal freedoms, but we must also consider the concerns of communities and society at large. If this Bill is enacted, the board will be allowed to recall patients who breach the conditions of their release and thereafter to review, as soon as possible, their continued detention. It will also be possible for a person who has been granted a conditional release to be granted a full release, without conditions, after one year. This is a sensible approach.

The second amendment deals with cases where unfitness to be tried may be an issue, a matter that has attracted a great deal of public comment. As the law stands, the court can refer an individual to the Central Mental Hospital for up to two weeks for an assessment to determine whether he or she is mentally fit to be tried for a criminal offence. This is not a standard procedure, nor should it be, because it presents a difficult scenario for the Judiciary and the Courts Service. It can become very emotive when, for instance, a conviction is overturned on the grounds of mental insanity.

The European Convention on Human Rights states than an individual cannot be deprived of liberty unless he or she has been found, on the basis of objective medical expertise, to be of unsound mind.

In this instance, I agree with Deputy Kathleen Lynch that we must leave it to the professionals, and not the State, to make those decisions. When clinical, psychological and psychiatric assessments are done on people who find themselves in these situations it is important that resources are in place to ensure that these procedures can be followed on a seamless basis.

The Bill ensures that our law complies with the European Convention on Human Rights. It proposes that a court hear evidence from a consultant psychiatrist before requiring a full assessment of the accused person. The Bill also allows for other centres, apart from the Central Mental Hospital, to carry out assessments. The net effect of this will be to reduce pressure on the Central Mental Hospital, where accommodation is scarce. I know the Minister of State is actively looking at alternative locations for the Central Mental Hospital. I welcome the fact that he has engaged with interested groups in this area. The relocation the Central Mental Hospital should not cause it to be seen as an extension of the prison service. We must be careful of the public perception of the hospital and of the people who seek treatment there.

The proposed amendments represent a progressive common-sense approach to the law in this area. At their most basic level, they bridge the gaps that currently exist in the law. I welcome the fact that the legislation will be kept under constant review to see whether the procedures enshrined in the Bill are effective. At the core of any legislation we pass there must be vigilance to ensure that the systems we put in place are working to the benefit of the individual patient, the Health Service Executive and the community. Issues leading to disagreement will arise from time to time and anomalies may be created within the system. That is why it is important it is kept under review.

The alternative to introducing these amendments is to leave the situation as it is. Inaction in this instance has never been mine or my party's preference. A failure to act would undermine the interests of society at large, as well as of individuals, particularly vulnerable individuals. It could also expose the State to further legal challenges with possible significant legal costs and damages awards.

The Bill offers a win win situation for the individual, society and the State. I am glad to have been given an opportunity to make my contribution to this issue. Mental health needs a particular focus. The Minister of State takes a particular interest in this area and it is important, particular when resources are scarce, that mental health continues to be given the priority it deserves. The figures are stark. The effect of difficult economic situations on depression and on the break-up of families can be great. These are difficult things for people to deal with and it is incumbent upon legislators and the Government to ensure that as many resources as possible are applied to this area. Prevention of mental illness is better than its cure. It is important that people can be open about depression, how they are feeling and their own mental health and can access services and talk to people. This is particularly important for young men because we have seen an increase in rates of suicide among this group. We must look closely at this area. People must not feel that they cannot talk or seek advice. If young people cannot seek help from their parents, and sometimes they cannot, the State should be able to assist these people where possible.

See this speech in context