Dáil debates
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill 2012 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)
7:30 pm
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source
Sinn Féin welcomes this legislation which is long overdue. The inaction on this issue for so long has had a seriously negative impact on those who made mistakes in the past, paid for their non-violent crime and yet had their conviction hanging over them for the rest of their lives. Ireland is the only jurisdiction in the European Union which does not have in place appropriate legislation to ensure certain criminal convictions can be expunged and people can move on with their lives and make a clean start with a clean slate. We are all aware of the problems that result from this. People have difficulties in obtaining visas and accessing employment, education and training courses. Many of them cannot take out certain types of insurance and are prevented from taking out a mortgage on that basis.
This jurisdiction is far behind the rest of Europe on this issue. However, we do agree that an appropriate range of employments should be expressly excluded. However, these employment-related exemptions should be limited and offence-relevant. For example, it is obviously crucial that work involving substantial access to children or vulnerable adults should be afforded special protection. However, broad and blanket exclusion of all posts in health care, the Civil Service and certain legal and financial-related posts is not justified by the evidence. Where the nature of a past conviction is not relevant, employers and others should not be permitted to discriminate.
While we welcome this Bill, there are several problems with it and we will table amendments to seek to have these rectified on Committee and Report Stages. I am hopeful the Minister will take these suggestions on board. These are not "out there" suggestions but are considered normal in most other European jurisdictions. Framing this legislation correctly will be key to ensuring the successful reintegration of prisoners in society. Clearly, the Bill must apply to a wide range of convictions and the rehabilitation periods before a conviction can be spent must be reasonable and proportionate to the original conviction. In any area of employment where a conviction will still required to be declared, despite being spent must, under normal circumstances, it must be kept to a minimum and justified based on the public good.
The Bill will not apply to most sentences and, while it is welcome that it has been agreed to on Seanad Stage that suspended sentences of up to 24 months can be considered spent, it is a shame this has not been amended to ensure custodial sentences of this length and up to 48 months, as is the case under the British legislation, would also be included. We will seek to have this amended, as the Bill will currently only apply to sentences of less than one year in prison. This is simply not adequate for the needs of those who have served their sentence and are not at risk of reoffending.
There are also issues regarding the various combinations of custodial and noncustodial sentences and people may find this difficult to follow. Furthermore, some of the periods of "rehabilitation" are on the excessive side. Six to seven years in the case of certain convictions is simply too long. Likewise, a further age-related tier, linked with the length of the rehabilitation period required, should be introduced. In the Twenty-six Counties the Children's Act 2001 makes provision for the convictions of children to become spent after a time. However, an 18-year old who commits a once-off minor offence may have this conviction hanging over him or her until he or she is nearly 30 years old because the seven-year rehabilitation period dates from conviction which may take place up to two years after actual commission of the offence. Facing employment-related discrimination during these crucial years, when the foundations of a career are laid, will have lifelong negative consequences. A tier requiring shorter rehabilitation periods for those who offend between the ages of 18 and 20 years should be introduced. I understand there may be a reluctance on the part of some to go down the road of introducing different reduced rehabilitation periods in case the former prisoner concerned reoffends. However, this is certainly not the first jurisdiction to introduce such legislation; therefore, we must look to other jurisdictions which have relevant experience and see how it has actually worked for them. There is a simpler way of doing this and we will table amendments to that effect on Committee Stage.
There are other technical provisions which need to be amended. We welcome the exclusion of spent convictions from general court proceedings. However, the legislation in its current form allows circumstances that might require courts to deviate from that general approach "where justice cannot be done except by so admitting or requiring the evidence" of spent convictions, as set out in section 6(2). The implications of this are not clear.
Some exclusions related to a number of specific types of legal proceedings seem reasonable and proportionate, although others seem vague and may require further clarification. We note that the Irish Penal Reform Trust has concerns about the exclusion of certain areas of employment and the potential impact on individuals seeking to benefit from the Bill.
Regarding the provision for new areas of employment to be excluded from the Bill, any additional area of employment should only be introduced in consultation with other Departments. As there are very important issues of equality and privacy that must be addressed, the Bill should also provide for consultation with the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission and the Data Protection Commissioner. In fact, there is an argument to be made that both bodies should appear before the committee to discuss this Bill.
Sinn Féin believes effective post-release reintegration of offenders with their families and communities once a custodial sentence has been served is essential for the prevention of reoffending and, therefore, ensuring community safety.
As that is in everyone's best interests, the Bill is more than welcome.
Since it is our view that the primary objective of justice policy is to prevent crime, part of the emphasis must be on incentivising crime-free lifestyles by ensuring gainful employment is available to ex-prisoners, but this should not be out of the reach of the majority of prisoners. To this end, unwarranted barriers and discrimination in law or policy must be proactively removed. A range of barriers currently serve to inhibit the reintegration of all those with a past conviction, especially ex-prisoners, most of which are not addressed in the Bill. The fields in which discrimination operates to exclude those with a past conviction include employment, accommodation, travel and adoption, among others. The extent of this discrimination should not be underestimated.
Sinn Féin also supports the existing regime for the expungement of criminal records of juveniles in so far as it is consistent with principles established under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A recent study found that nearly half of employers said they would not employ someone with a criminal record. Far from effectively protecting the public, these barriers actually serve to exacerbate Ireland's already high rates of repeat offending. If this and previous Governments actually wanted to remedy crime, they might have tried to do this years ago. I received a letter from the Mercy Law Resource Centre which told me that in 2011 there were 3,808 people sleeping rough. There are clear and documented links between homelessness and crime, recidivism and reoffending. Effective and humane justice policies cost the State less in the long term. We need more initiatives like this that will reduce crime and allow people to reintegrate.
A spent convictions regime for non-disclosure of criminal records should be supported by all in order to facilitate post-release reintegration through employment and prevent other forms of discrimination. More than a decade after the Good Friday Agreement, former political prisoners are still subject to grave discrimination in a wide range of areas. The political nature of the conflict in Ireland has now been recognised. This recognition must be formally extended to ex-political prisoners and discrimination against them needs to end. It is Sinn Féin's long-standing and firm position that records of all former political prisoners should be expunged to assist the process of national reconciliation and discrimination on the basis of a conflict-related conviction should be prohibited by law to enable such former prisoners to participate as equals in all aspects of economic and social life. It is a scandal that this has not been addressed in the past.
Both Sinn Féin and the Irish Human Rights Commission have also proposed that equality legislation be extended to include criminal conviction as one of the grounds on which discrimination in employment, except where objectively incompatible with job responsibilities, and the provision of services is prohibited. This protection is crucial to ensure effective post-release reintegration, in particular, through the provision of adequate and appropriate housing. This is also something that must be included in this Bill.
I urge the Minister to take on board our suggestions and commend the Bill to the House. We will engage with the Minister on Committee Stage when it commences next Wednesday and continue the discussion then.
No comments