Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I find it strange that an individual with a spent conviction - in other words, one who is supposedly forgiven - must, on finding himself being interviewed by gardaí, tell them he really was a criminal in the past. If he is being interviewed by gardaí, he will more than likely be trying to prove his innocence in the process of the interview. He may be dealing with a member of the force who will presume he is guilty until he can prove himself innocent. If he has to tell such a garda that, by the way, ten years previously he did something and was convicted as a result, although the conviction had since been spent, he would be placing himself at a serious disadvantage. It would be grossly unfair.

On amendment No. 49, I note the provision that one has to tell an insurance company about a spent conviction. Most people's experience of dealing with insurance companies, including mine, is that they are not the most pleasant at all times. It is obligatory, however, and we have to deal with them. A friend of mine who never crashed a car in her life and is 58 years of age was caught for drinking and driving and served her time. She is now looking for insurance for her car again. While the quote was €350 before she lost her licence, the insurer now wants €2,000 because of her conviction. Insurance companies are difficult enough to deal with without giving them more ammunition against people with spent convictions. As such, I would appreciate it if the Government would take another look at amendments Nos. 48 and 49.

See this speech in context