Dan Neville (Limerick, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I will use my time to relate to a previous restorative justice Bill to see how it functioned. I refer to the Children Act 2001, the debate on which I was involved, which was a restorative justice measure. We have no idea how that Act operated because it related to the children's courts. The expectations for it were high. I will give some details of the restorative aspect of that Act.

The Children Bill 1999 was a development of the family conference which was an integral part of the programme on family and children's difficulties. That was greatly expanded to incorporate within its parameters modern restorative justice measures in the 1999 Bill in regard to children who had offended. The primary focus of this conference is on issues of accountability rather than welfare. Previously, the family conference was to do with the welfare of the child, but this incorporated a parameter of restorative justice measures as well. The conference is convened by An Garda Síochána to formulate an action plan for the child in respect of whom it is convened. The action plan includes provision for many matters, including the making of an apology or financial or other reparation to the victim. This also includes provision relating to the child's lifestyle such as his or her attendance at school or participation inappropriate sporting or recreational activities.

In practical terms the range of possibilities to intervene in the child's behaviour was almost limitless, as long as it was agreed to by the persons present at the conference, which would include family. The advantage of involving the child and his or her family in the decision making process and of being a party to the decision would increase the likelihood of compliance.

Since this was introduced we are in the dark as to how it has operated. The provision of some information to the House at some stage would give a significant insight into how something that provided such a level of hope for the family conference in dealing with child offenders has operated.

The victim of the child's offending could be invited to attend the conference. If the victim attends, the child is confronted by the consequences of his or her criminal behaviour. How did this operate in practice abroad? The victims in the pilot programmes welcome the opportunity of being present at such a conference. This was borne out in the pilot project studies. Some victims stressed the value of expressing their feelings to the young offenders and ensuring the offender learned from the experience. It was believed at the time that the victims would want to contribute to the offenders' rehabilitation in certain circumstances or to show their support for the process of rehabilitation of the child. Other victims emphasise their own interests. They may want to make sure things are done properly to get reparation.

Another innovation allows victims to be present at the administration of the formal caution by the Garda Síochána. This is known as restorative cautioning and is a suitable type of mini-conference response in circumstances where a full conference is not warranted. It means the child offender can be confronted with the consequences of his or her offending and can be invited to apologise or make some form of reparation to the victim in a low-key atmosphere. It would be interesting to get a full report on how successful its operation was over the past decade.

See this speech in context