Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and congratulate him, compliment him and wish him well in respect the new challenges he faces. I am sure he will distinguish himself in the same fashion as when discharging his previous responsibilities. I also welcome this motion. During the debate on the Prisons Act 2007, Members on all sides of the House welcomed its provisions. Before the passing of the Act, the Minister effectively was the deciding authority regarding the location of a prison. New requirements arise from that Act whereby an environmental impact statement must be undertaken to EU standards and a rapporteur's report must be prepared in that regard following a consultation process. Moreover, both must be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and must be decided by way of draft resolution from the Minister. This is an important development and constitutes significant progress in the manner in which such issues are dealt with.

A prison is a major item of infrastructure that has an impact on society in general and on the neighbourhood in which it is located in particular. It is right and appropriate to have safeguards, precautions and checks and balances within that system, which take all views and everyone's interests into consideration. The Minister is obliged under that Act to have due regard to both the environmental impact assessment and the rapporteur's report.

It is worth noting this development will lead to the closure of Mountjoy Prison. As many Members have noted, in itself this is a development that is to be greatly welcomed. Mountjoy Prison has a capacity for 934 prisoners in the male section in four different institutions. It is interesting that earlier this month, 992 prisoners were held there as the prison often is stretched to its capacity and beyond. Senator Bacik and others have alluded to the practice of slopping out that takes place there. This is a throwback to Victorian times and prisons, and it should not be part of a custodial regime in the 21st century.

As a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, I happened to visit the prison some years ago. The experience of those who were on the deputation to the prison was one of being ad idem on the need for new facilities to be put in place and for a move away from the type of arrangements that were in place there. Matters such as the number of prisoners to a cell were completely unacceptable. There has been at least one, if not more, high profile case in which someone has been murdered in a cell with the involvement of a number of prisoners. There have been instances of rape and assault, which possibly have been under-reported. When the State takes people into custody, there is an onus on it to ensure their safety and to provide reasonable basic accommodation for them.

It also must be stated that the present regime and the building do not lend themselves to modern approaches to prisoner custodial arrangements. The increase in capacity to 1,400 prisoners, with particular emphasis on single cell occupancy, is a desirable step forward. Moreover, the provision of eight different blocks, ranging up to houses and apartments, is a development all Members should support. There is a need within the prison system to categorise prisoners. Some are highly dangerous serious gangsters and murderers. A regime should be in place that is appropriate to the risks that such prisoners offer to other prisoners, staff and society at large. Others however, probably are more amenable to a less harsh regime and the structure of a modern prison will allow such a regime to be invoked and put in place. It also will allow for emphasis on work training in order that people will have the opportunity on leaving the prison system to get respectable employment. This should be its objective. It will enable them to move away from the life of crime on which they may have embarked. It will also provide them with educational facilities and rehabilitative programmes.

The Minister of State, in answer to Senator Bacik, alluded to the fact that the environmental impact statement was constructed on the basis of a maximum possible prisoner population of 2,200. We hope that this figure is not reached but if it is at least the facilities will be there to deal with it.

I do not concur with those who argue that other aspects of the Prison Service, such as Dóchas, should be left where they are. This should be decided on the basis of economics, the use of facilities and the effective administration of the prison system, which should rank high in the criteria. These elements should be combined in one location.

I welcome the fact that St. Patrick's Institution for young offenders will close as youths will be relocated to other prisons such as Wheatfield and one in Lusk. This is a welcome development as I was concerned, as were others, that having young people in a complex with hardened prisoners could only lead to a situation in which they were more likely to embark on a more serious level of crime. The segregation of hardened criminals from those involved in less serious crime is an important part of our approach to this issue.

The environmental impact assessment deals with many issues and I concur with what has been said on tree-screening, walls, neighbourliness and ensuring the implementation of the mission statement and plan in ways that allow ongoing consultation with people in the area. The report recognises that this matter does not have a great impact nationally or regionally but it is significant for people living adjacent to the complex. We should work to mitigate adverse effects in this regard and all reasonable requests made by those living nearby should be complied with. I would like to think we are doing this, particularly regarding changing roads, planting and so on. This is a move in the right direction.