Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is on a bit of a roll. Before the summer recess, I commended him on many good innovations in the Bill we were debating at that time. This is also a very welcome Bill and, as Deputy McConalogue said, there is much common sense contained in it. On balance, we very much welcome it. I cannot help noticing the amount of legislation which comes through this portfolio and other legislation which amends existing legislation, such as the Fines Act 2010, which has never been fully implemented. I wonder how this process can take so long. The original Act came into being in 2010 and here we are three years later amending it. Why has it only ever been partially commenced? Surely there is a better way to legislate than this.

That aside, I welcome this Bill which strives to modernise the courts fines system and offer alternatives to imprisonment to those who have been found guilty for failure to pay a fine. I was pleased to hear the Minister, when he launched this Bill in July of this year, reiterate his commitment to keeping to a minimum the number of people committed to prison for the non-payment of fines. In effect, the Bill will ensure there are substantially fewer prisoners in our jails serving short sentences for non-payment of fines. This is something about which I feel very strongly given that prisoners are hugely costly to the State. We know that each prisoner costs us more than €60,000 per year. If one breaks the figure down in respect of short sentences, one can see that we really need to think about our whole imprisonment strategy.

My office undertook an exercise and spent some time attempting to cost the difference between imprisoning people who were guilty of minor offences, in particular those sentenced to fewer than six months, versus imposing community service on them. The results were quite striking. The saving that can be made from this change alone is potentially tens of millions of euro. I would be happy to share that finding with the Minister.

The Irish Penal Reform Trust has told us there were 8,304 committals to prison for fines default in 2012, which we can all agree is a very significant figure. However, the more significant statistic here is that more than 85% of people imprisoned for non-payment of fines return to prison within four years. Unfortunately, this highlights that for some people, they would prefer to serve time in prison than pay a fine, in particular, as the statistics show, if they have previously spent time in prison. For some who have already spent some time in prison, being sentenced to a day or, as the Minister demonstrated, in most cases, a couple of hours in prison is really no deterrent at all when it comes to the non-payment of fines. The system in its current form is not working and needs reform, so I am glad we are finally moving towards this.

I take the opportunity to speak briefly about the important work undertaken by the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality in its report on penal reform in March of this year. I fully support all the recommendations contained in the report and look forward to working towards implementing them. The first recommendation of the report was a reduction in prison numbers via a decarceration strategy, reducing the prison population by one third over a ten year period. The second recommendation was to commute prison sentences of fewer than six months, recommending that all sentences for fewer than six months imprisonment imposed in respect of non-violent offences should be commuted and replaced with community service orders. As I said, that is not only desirable in terms of wanting fewer people in prison but it would save a lot of money for our taxpayers. It is preferable having people working in community service and giving something back to their communities than being in prison for short periods of time.

According to the Irish Prison Service, 272 people were jailed for non-payment of television licence fines in 2012. This is a prime example of where community service should be used as a real alternative and an opportunity to make people give something back or do something positive for society. In this Bill, there is the option of instalment payments or attachment orders. The whole process makes sense. We do not want a situation where people, in particular elderly people, face prison sentences for non-payment of the likes of television licences.

I welcome section 5 which ensures the court will impose a fine based on the person's ability to pay it and the effect it may have on that person's dependants. The system should take into account a person's ability to pay a fine when it is being set as this is fair. However, I have some reservations around how the financial circumstances are defined in terms of a person's property. I would like it clarified as to whether there is a possibility that debt may be recovered via repossession of the family home. This may be something on which I will seek to submit amendments on Committee Stage, but we can discuss it further on that Stage.

Section 6(2) has made a change to the Fines Act 2010 with which I do not agree. I appeal to the Minister to retain the 24 month period as opposed to changing it to 12 months. This makes sense given the current financial climate. There is also a suggestion from the Irish Penal Reform Trust and some other non-governmental organisations that a flat administration fee or a cap be put on fines as opposed to the 10% charge set out in the Bill. I would like to hear the Minister's reasoning behind this 10% charge. Obviously, it is an administrative fee but why is it 10%? Again, this may be something I will seek to amend on Committee Stage.

In regard section 6(6), it is regrettable that there is no instalment option for fines of less than €100. For many individuals and families in the Ireland of 2013, €100 is still a significant amount of money and could make a very significant impact on a family. I will seek to amend this section to remove this.

Regarding section 8, the IPRT has recommended that consideration should be given to setting out a maximum level or proportion of receivers' fees where property is seized. I would have to agree with them on this aspect of the matter. In terms of section 11, it is worth querying if it may be beneficial to provide for community service or attachment of earnings rather than imprisonment to be pursued as the next option in cases where there has been a failure to recover assets.

I would like to conclude by reiterating my overall support for this Bill. I commend the Minister on introducing it. As I believe it marks a step in the right direction, I do not want to be overly negative about it. However, I have some concerns around some aspects of it. As I have indicated throughout my speech, I intend to submit amendments on Committee Stage to strengthen the Bill where I feel it could be strengthened.

See this speech in context