Dan Boyle (Green Party)

It is fortunate that we have had an opportunity to extend the debate, as the first discussion was followed by the Minister's statement and an indication of substantial change in Government policy. It has also been followed by a significant statement in the UK, where the justice Minister recently announced the closure of six prisons. While the reasons behind such decisions in many countries might be economic, in that the cost of running a prison-based justice system is no longer sustainable as a draw on public resources, they present an opportunity to liberalise and to create a more humane and effective justice system.

Senator Mullen highlighted the fact that, for reasons to do with non-payment of fines and debt, an unacceptably large number of people form part of our prison population. Changes in this regard have been painfully slow in coming. I hope the Fines Bill will, upon enactment, address many of these changes. In terms of television licensing, a significant category of people have been dealt with through the recent Broadcasting Act 2009. That this has happened at all and not just to this extent indicates it is not something in which we can take a great deal of pride at this stage of our country's history.

I am glad the Minister of State is taking this debate. With several of his hats, he will know more than most the need to reform the prison sentencing system. Not only are an unacceptable number of people in prison for non-violent crimes and economic circumstances as much as anything else, but too many people with mental health difficulties are also being held in the prison system. Strategies to ensure alternative means of dealing with people with such conditions should move them away from the justice system and into the health system, particularly a community health system.

The recent publication of the memoirs of the former governor of Mountjoy Prison was accompanied by a great deal of media fanfare. I listened to a radio interview with him and there is no doubt that he has achieved a significant public profile. He is identified by most of the public as someone with important comments to make on this area. When he was introducing his memoirs during the interview in question, I was struck by something he pointed out. When he joined the Prison Service, the prison population was 600 people. It is now 4,500. This increase is not just down to more effective policing and prosecution of crime. Rather, it has become something of a political feather in one's cap to say that the more people one imprisons, the more successful one can claim to be politically. This scene can be found in many countries and many political parties.

I hope the current economic circumstances will help us realise that the opposite is the case. The more people we imprison, the less successful we are as a society.

We need to move away from custodial sentences as a way of dealing with the many problems in our society. Of course, there will always be a need for custodial sentences. There will be crimes that are unacceptable to many in our society and there is a need to remove people from society who are a source of danger to themselves and to society at large. I and my party believe that the use of custodial sentences has been exaggerated and over-used in our system. We need to move away from that approach as quickly as possible.

The debate on the Irish system and its philosophy is important. I express a personal fear in this regard. In the shaping of Irish prison policy we should not go down the road that had an effect on the Department of Finance and our approach to financial regulation. This was the idea there was a route whereby senior civil servants went through the Department of Finance, became Secretary General of that Department and then became the Governor of the Central Bank. We can see where that approach to the Civil Service has led us. I believe a parallel system is developing in the Department of Justice and Law Reform. There seems to be a link between running the Irish Prison Service and becoming involved in the Department, and vice versa, which has led to an intensification of the status quo. It does not allow for innovation or radical approaches and permits an ongoing defence mechanism for things staying as they are. It results in an unwillingness to change.

I would like to see the Irish Prison Service and senior positions within the Department of Justice and Law Reform opening up a little to outside influences. Too often we have seen a knee-jerk reaction to organisations such as Amnesty International and Irish Penal Reform Trust which, although they might be over-zealous in seeking better standards and an improvement in legislation, have a role to play. They should be engaged with in a sense of partnership rather than in confrontation. Too often we have seen that attitude displayed, not only towards non-governmental organisations but towards people appointed on an independent basis to assess the quality and effectiveness of our prisons. Successive Ministers for Justice and Law Reform should take no great pride in the way in which successive reports by the independent Inspector of Prisons and Places of Detention have been treated. These are important documents that indicate what is wrong and the changes that need to made on an ongoing basis. The real scandal of the ongoing reports of the independent Inspector of Prisons and Places of Detention is that many of the same flaws and faults are reported in one report after another. I do not know anyone who can stand over that in a social or political sense.

I welcome the ongoing debate. It is important, especially in the prevailing economic circumstances, with the difficult decisions we must make in many areas of expenditure on social protection, that another look be taken at expenditure in the areas of justice and the prison service to see how it can be made more effective by using the resources we have. Ultimately, that would be more just and humane.