Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)

I am not sure where such administration will be based. In terms of technology, I am sure there will be a sharing of information, but such administration work will not necessarily have to be based in Garda headquarters.

I will deal with the other issues raised. We have dealt, effectively, with amendments Nos. 2 and 3. In respect of the proposals for the delivery of the relevant notice, Senator Paddy Burke's amendment No. 2 provides for the removal of subsection (10) and its replacement by a new subsection that relates to the delivery of a notice in the case of a prosecution for a fixed charge offence.

The purpose of section 103(10) of the 1961 Act is to establish two presumptions in regard to any court case that may proceed in respect of a fixed charge offence. These are that in any prosecution it will be presumed until it is proved otherwise that the notice under this section was served and that no fixed charge payment was made. It is a matter for the Garda Síochána to decide how best it should be served rather than tie its hands by proposing only three modes. It is a matter for the force to decide in that regard, once it is satisfied that such a notice has been served.

To remove that provision would be to the effect of the Senator's proposed amendment, which would remove the presumption. This would create significant difficulties for the pursuit of any prosecution in that such pursuit can only proceed where the notice has been served and where no payment has been made. It is a matter for the accused to argue against those presumptions if he or she so wishes.

The section already provides for the service of the fixed charge notice. Although it is relatively silent on the various methods of service, some of which are referred to in the Senator's proposals, it would not be appropriate to place any limitations on the possible methods of service of such notice. In any event, I do not accept that the removal of the vital provisions in the current subsection (10) to provide for that provision is warranted.

In regard to outsourcing this function, I wish to make it clear that there is no link between the number of fixed charge offences detected by the Garda Síochána and the administrative services that it is proposed to outsource to a service provider. In the first instance, there is no requirement on any person to pay a fixed charge. A person accused of a fixed charge offence can allow the matter to proceed to court. The service provider has no influence over the quantity of items that may be presented for processing. In other words, the service provider cannot drum up extra business or compel any individual to avail of the fixed charge administration route in lieu of going to court. It is appropriate to pay for such administration services that arise on a customer demand basis by way of a fee per transaction. This is the most efficient way of paying for such services and provides the best value for money to the Exchequer.

Due to the nature of the business involved it is not possible to determine in advance the volumes of payment that will arise. This is dependent on a number of factors, including the number of detections made in the payment rate of such notices. Therefore, any alternative payment arrangement would be extremely difficult to administer. I ask the Senator to consider withdrawing the amendment.