David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

I accept what the Minister stated with regard to the amendment giving rise to a technical difficulty and I bow to his knowledge and experience. If, however, one follows the logic of his assertion, one could argue that we are creating an imbalance because we are asking judges to consider handing down community service orders only in respect of certain crimes which attract custodial sentences of up to 12 months. I do not, therefore, accept the argument he is putting forward. In the amendment, all we are asking judges to do is to consider imposing community service orders rather than handing down custodial sentences. It will be the responsibility of a judge to make a judgment and to consider what will be the most appropriate punishment to impose or approach to take. The intention behind the amendment is to require that judges provide written reasons for handing down custodial sentences of, for example, six or eight months rather than - as we are asking them to do - imposing community service orders. It do not accept that the amendment would create the types of technical difficulties to which the Minister referred. As legislators, we create the laws and can set down how judges should interpret them. To follow the logic of what the Minister is saying, many imbalances have been created through decisions made in the Oireachtas in terms of how judges must interpret the scope of the laws we pass and the provisions and criteria contained therein.

I do not accept the merit of the Minister's argument in this regard, notwithstanding his acknowledgement of our reasoning in putting forward this amendment. I do not understand how the provision could be seen to impose a burden on a judge. All that is required is that he or she makes a simple statement as to why it was decided to impose a custodial sentence rather than a community service order. If judges do not make use of this legislation in the way that we hope, we will have to review it at some point. The provision of a written statement explaining why a custodial sentence was chosen would provide an insight into the reasoning and motivation of judicial decisions in this regard. That is all we are seeking. We are not looking to create any unnecessary imbalances between any of the courts in the State. It is not inappropriate for us to ask a District Court judge to do something that a Circuit Court judge, for example, is not obliged to do. It is appropriate in certain areas and I cannot see how it could be deemed otherwise.