Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Having listened to the arguments made in the House and by interested parties outside it, the Minister has decided to reduce the maximum relevant or waiting period by two years from seven to five years and to make consequential changes to all other relevant periods so that the minimum time a person must wait before a spent conviction becomes spent will be just two years. I think most people will welcome that.

It is important to put this into context. The most widely employed criminal sanction in our judicial system is the fine. The average fine handed down by the courts in Ireland is ¤300 while half are less than ¤200. The overwhelming majority of fines are for less than ¤5,000. The reduction in the relevant period for fines of less than ¤5,000 means that for the vast majority of people convicted in Irish courts, their convictions will be spent after two years.

The opportunity presented by the change to the maximum waiting period is being availed of to reduce the number of different classifications of sentences for the purpose of Schedule 2, where custodial sentences and fines are concerned. In the case of fines, there are only two categories, above and below a class A fine, currently ¤5,000 in the case of custodial sentence. There are also two categories, above and below six months. The change in relevant periods is a major change in the provisions of the Bill. It is a change that is consistent with the Government's general approach to this legislation, which is to make it as accessible as possible and to the benefit of the greatest number of people. No one would argue that a waiting period of two years from the date of a conviction for a community service order imposed instead of a prison sentence of up to six months is excessive or punitive. Indeed, it is worth contrasting the proposal here for a four year waiting period for a six month sentence with the Law Reform Commission's proposal for a seven year waiting period for the same sentence and the ten year waiting period in operation in Australia.

The descriptions of community service orders at paragraphs 5 and 6 of Part 2 of Schedule 2 are amended to take account of the changes already made to the definition of "relevant non-custodial sentences". I hope it is clear that a lot of thought has gone into devising a balanced proposal vis-à-visboth the length of sentence covered by the Bill and the associated relevant periods. I also hope it is clear that the Minister has taken on board many of the comments made in this House and elsewhere and has significantly amended the Bill in the context of suspended sentences and waiting periods.

Senator van Turnhout's proposed amendment No. 34 obviously reflects her earlier amendments designed to increase the length of sentence covered by the Bill. I hope she will agree that the Minister's amendments move the Bill a long way towards her position and, in some cases, for example, where a six-month sentence is imposed, there is an overlap between her position and that of the Government. Having said that, given that her earlier amendments on the length of sentences to be covered by the Bill were not accepted, it is not possible to accept her amendment.