Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The only difference between my amendment No. 24 and amendment No. 25 is the requirement in section 25(4)(b) that the consent of both parties required for agreement reached as part of the restorative justice process can be admitted to court. I invite Deputy Wallace to agree with me that the consent of all parties is fundamental to the entire process.

Looking at these amendments, I agree it is an important safeguard. Having regard to what Deputy Wallace said, I am prepared to accept amendment No. 25. By so doing, I will withdraw my amendment No. 24. That will address the concerns of Deputies Wallace and Clare Daly.

Amendments Nos. 37 and 38, proposed by Deputies O'Callaghan, Jonathan O'Brien, Clare Daly and Wallace, seek to add a requirement in respect of the Children Act that the offender acknowledge the basic facts of the offence. The reason this requirement has not been included in my amendment is that section 23 of the Children Act already requires the child to accept responsibility for his or her criminal behaviour before he or she can be admitted to the diversion programme. In fact, we have already catered for this as the restorative justice schemes are administered as part of youth diversion programmes. The child must have already accepted responsibility for the offence at an earlier stage in the process. The proposed amendments would duplicate this requirement, but without providing for a child to consult with his or her parents or to seek legal advice before doing so, as is provided in section 23 of the Children Act.

Will Deputy Wallace accept these provisions are already fully catered for in law, albeit in a different statute?

See this speech in context