Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I contend the amendment is unnecessary and I am not inclined to accept it. As the Deputy Connolly, the amendment suggests that the information provided to the applicant must be clear and accessible. Of course, everybody will agree that the information should be clear but I am satisfied that information the board provides would, in any event, be clear. A difficulty I have is that the use of such a term in legislation could give rise to undue difficulty and uncertainty. The meaning of what is "clear" or "accessible" in respect of one applicant might not be the same for another.

By way of comfort for the Deputy, the amendments are providing for legal representation, which would be available to the applicant for parole at an early stage. Any form of legal representation would be of such assistance to the applicant as to ensure that the applicant has an understanding of the process and, in order to have an understanding of the process, one would expect that the information would be clear and accessible. To put such terms in statutory form might give rise to unintended difficulties. I have an expectation that when the board is providing information, every effort should be made to ensure the information is clear and accessible. If that was not the case, one could suggest the board was not fulfilling its functions in a proper and reasonable manner. I add to that the issue of legal representation. With the legal representation available to the applicant, the expectation would be that the information would be both accessible and clear.

See this speech in context