John Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the Bill which I welcome principally because it is a practical and appropriate response to a growing problem. We have problems with the prisons, principally relating to the space available, their quality and cost. Given the financial constraints, it is clear we cannot embark on a programme of prison building to accommodate all offenders where imprisonment must be considered. With this set of problems, we have to consider alternatives that deliver an appropriate punishment for criminal behaviour but also provide more benefits for the wider community.

Essentially, it is about striking the right balance. In recent years we have seen a considerable rise in the number of sentences of 12 months or less, which is putting the prison system under ever greater strain. We know that prison is not always the best option in the case of certain sentences. This can be because it may not prevent reoffending or it may, in certain circumstances, make a situation considerably worse. However, if a prison sentence is appropriate, we must ensure the person sentenced serves the appropriate time and is not released for reasons such as lack of space. This is crucial to allow the public to have faith in the justice system.

The Bill provides for greater use of community service orders where the court would otherwise be of the opinion that a custodial sentence of anything up to 12 months is appropriate. This is a welcome development, as I would prefer a person who has been convicted of a crime and is not a danger to the public to be given a chance to work voluntarily in the community as a form of reparation. I know from my constituency of Dublin North-West that there is an amount of work that could be done at local level which would make a real difference to communities. This may include general work which requires an extra pair of hands or, in some cases, more specialised work with which the offender may be able to assist.

I attended a meeting in a youth centre in Ballymun recently at which I was informed about a programme called Easy Street which utilised the experience of reformed persons to run a community outreach programme aimed at tackling incidences of low-level crime. This is important because most crime or anti-social behaviour is low level but can nevertheless have a devastating effect on communities. Those involved in the programme are making a positive contribution in their community. Avenues such as this should be explored in the context of the provisions of this Bill.

With this, as with all legislation, we must consider the issue of costs. The measures proposed in the Bill will only be effective if the Probation Service and the community groups likely to receive these individuals are adequately funded. If cost savings come from the reduced number of prison inmates, arising from an increased use of community service orders, a portion of the savings should be allocated to the Probation Service.

A community service order should not be seen as a soft sentence and rehabilitation programmes should be built into the order. Rehabilitation is not a panacea for all crime, but it should be incorporated into community service in order that the offender will not walk away, at the expiration of an order, without being rehabilitated in any way. Another benefit of community service orders is that they afford the person charged with a crime the chance to maintain family links and remain in employment, education or training. This is an important issue because where such links are broken through a custodial sentence, it may be difficult for offenders to restart their life, thereby hampering their rehabilitation.

Where perpetrators of a crime warranting a sentence of less than one year are imprisoned, the community derives almost no benefit from their punishment. I support the measures in the Bill which provide a basis for the Judiciary to consider a practical alternative which may be more beneficial both to communities and offenders.

See this speech in context