Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, and acknowledge the good work he has done in this area since his appointment. However, I do not share the same kind of enthusiasm expressed by certain other groups in respect of the matters to which he refers. My great hope for the British-Irish Agreement and the commitment to shadow legislation was that the area which we are discussing would have been one of those in respect of which substantial progress could have been made. I wish to provide a number of classic examples of what is not happening and to suggest what might easily be done.

In the first instance, the registers of sex offenders, North and South, should be shared. Whereas in legislative terms it would not be possible to have one register for the entire island of Ireland, it would be possible to create a situation where both registers could be completely shared and where people would not be obliged to cross the Border in the interests of sharing information. The Border is open and people traverse it every day. In that context, it would be in everyone's interests, including those of sex offenders, to share the two registers.

At present, the notification period which applies in the North is being reduced from 14 days to three days. That is a welcome development. However, the period which applies in this jurisdiction remains at seven days. With the sharing of information relating to sex offenders, progress could be made in this regard.

Another issue, which I discussed with the Minister of State approximately 18 months ago, is vetting. The situation in this regard is a complete mess. I am familiar with a person who was vetted as a teacher in the North, who came to teach in the South and was required to be vetted again, who returned to the North as an educational psychologist and had to be vetted once more and who was vetted all over again on returning to the South. That is complete nonsense. The Garda unit does an excellent job but there is a need to consider what is involved here. When people change jobs, they should not be required to be vetted again and the information relating to their original vetting should be made available, in a secure way, to those to whom it is appropriate.

Perhaps two years ago, the Minister of State and I discussed the issue of protocols relating to people in sports organisations who deal with those who are under age and who are involved in sport. The authorities, North and South, should examine this matter in the interests of putting in place the same protocols in both jurisdictions. The position is similar with regard to educators. The rules and protocols, suggestions and proposals relating to teachers and others in the area of education who deal with children should be the same, North and South. If the latter cannot be achieved, then we should try to ensure that as many of these as possible should be the same.

Senator O'Donovan referred to the fact that many sex offenders, particularly paedophiles, do not acknowledge, accept or believe that they have done anything wrong. These individuals leave prison with exactly the same view of the world they harboured when they were incarcerated. I am of the view that in the case of sex offenders, the reduction in sentence - anywhere from one third to one half of the overall term - to which prisoners who display good conduct are entitled should be tied to their attending treatment or participating in rehabilitation courses. There should be a clear connection in this regard. If a person does not acknowledge the gravity of his or her crime and has no appreciation regarding what he or she has done, it is not safe for him or her to be released back into society. That is the reality. There have been many cases where unsuitable individuals have been released early from prison.

I do not quite understand how post-release supervision orders work. However, it appears that we are making provision for the Garda to seek such orders. In my opinion, if a judge considers a sex offender to be a risk, then such an order should automatically come into play. We should make provision in legislation to ensure that post-release supervision orders become part of the normal approach to dealing with this issue.

In the context of the approach to sex crimes, there is already a great deal of engagement between legal practitioners, North and South. On a number of occasions each year, members at the various levels within the Judiciary hold private conferences at which they discuss issues such as sentencing and approaches to certain types of cases. There is a great argument in favour of holding such meetings on an all-Ireland basis at times. This is a matter to which the North-South Ministerial Council should give consideration. Members of the Judiciary in this jurisdiction and their counterparts across the Border should be able - in private session - to discuss how to approach cases involving sex offenders. This would assist in bringing about a degree of uniformity between these two different but common-law based legal systems. In this way, we might arrive at an approach that would be acceptable to those on both sides.

In summary, I would appreciate movement in respect of vetting, the sharing of the sex offenders registers, North and South, to the Garda and the PSNI and a reduction in the notification period. I am surprised that the latter cannot be dealt with by means of a ministerial order. In addition, the reduction in the term of sentence that is available to all prisoners who display good conduct should, in the case of sex offenders, be related to their submitting to partake of the various treatment options on offer in different prisons.