Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, to the House to introduce this important Bill in the Seanad. I am particularly pleased to welcome him given his former role as Chairman of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. It was my pleasure to serve on that committee under his chairmanship, from 2011 to 2016. As Senator Conway noted, the committee produced several important reports on issues around restorative justice and community courts and also, notably, a report on penal reform in 2013 which made a number of recommendations relevant to our discussion today. I welcome the Bill, which is in keeping with my party's long-standing commitment to penal reform, as expressed by the leader, Deputy Brendan Howlin, when it was introduced as a Private Members' Bill in 2016. I join colleagues in paying tribute to Deputy O'Callaghan for bringing it forward.

It is long overdue that the mechanisms for dealing with the parole process and the Parole Board itself be placed on a statutory footing. I am grateful to the Irish Penal Reform Trust for pointing out to us that the main purpose of parole is to increase community safety by providing structured, supported and supervised transition of prisoners serving long sentences back into the community. A clear, transparent and fair system of parole is in the interests of all members of society, including victims and offenders. That is very much the view that we in the justice committee took in 2013 in looking at how to adopt strategies around structured sentencing and structured release of prisoners to ensure that sufficient and adequate means of rehabilitation would be in place for prisoners serving time and that people would not be released back into the community without some type of structure in place. For a long time, that lack of structure was a point on which our prison system could be criticised. It is only in relatively recent times that we have seen a more structured approach to release, the development of a sentence management process and better legislation.The previous Government undertook a good deal of penal reform but, as Deputy Howlin pointed out, there is still room for a good deal more - for example, the placing of the Prison Service on an independent statutory footing rather than its retention as simply a division of the Department of Justice and Equality. Nonetheless, I see this parole legislation as very much a step in the right direction.

It does not, however, go as far as we recommended in 2013, when we called for the introduction of a single piece of legislation to set out the basis for a structured release system to include changes to remission, temporary release and parole and to provide a statutory framework for an expanded community return programme. All of us on the committee were very impressed by the community return programme we saw in operation within the prisons in Ireland. We were also very impressed by the open prison system we saw in Finland when we did some research on Finnish penal policy. We argued that such legislation would underpin strategies currently used by groups working with offenders post release and potential offenders, recognising that there are some excellent NGOs doing a lot of important work on rehabilitation post release and in assisting the Prison Service within prisons. That is very important to say. All these recommendations are made with a view to increasing the likelihood of rehabilitation and decreasing the likelihood of reoffending, thereby providing a service for victims, the victims' families and the community as a whole. That is a very important context in which we debate the Bill.

I have a procedural issue with the Bill. I raised it on the Order of Business. Although the Bill has been in the system for three years - as I said, Deputy Howlin and others spoke on Second Stage of the Bill when Deputy O'Callaghan introduced it in 2016 - we now see it being rushed through the Seanad in three days in July, during our last sitting week. This tends to happen all too frequently with justice legislation. I said this earlier. It is unfortunate because this is such an important Bill and is so long awaited, and it is a pity we did not have a longer time to debate it. Having said that, my party is fully supportive of it, as am I, and we will facilitate its rapid progress through the Seanad. We do not intend to obstruct it. I just wanted to make that procedural point, that the Bill deserves greater time for consideration.

I wish to make some specific points about the Bill. Again, I am grateful to both the Irish Penal Reform Trust, which gave us a very helpful submission, and Dr. Diarmuid Griffin of NUI Galway, who just last year published a paper on life imprisonment and parole called Killing Time, which is beautifully written and encapsulates a lot of the parole issues we are debating. As I said, I think all of us working on penal reform - and, I hope, victims' advocacy groups - will very much welcome the Bill for placing an existing process on a statutory footing and giving greater clarity and certainty. I listened to Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell. She is right about the need for clarity and certainty, and I was grateful to her for giving us the opportunity last week to debate life sentences in the context of her Bill. The Parole Bill, however, has an application, and will have a future application, beyond just those serving life imprisonment. Dr. Griffin reminds us: "Life sentences are rarely imposed and are exceptional as a punishment in a sentencing system [such as ours] characterised by determinacy." He gives us an interesting figure: in 2016 life sentences accounted for only 16 out of 12,163 committals to prison. We are therefore talking about a very small number of committals and a relatively small number of persons in prison. However, as Dr. Griffin states, "The ultimate penalty available in a state has a social, political and cultural significance that goes beyond its use as a sanction." Those words are very pertinent. It is very important we scrutinise the Bill in detail because, while it has an application beyond those serving life sentences, its most immediate application, as provided for, is clearly to those serving indeterminate life sentences. While persons released on parole may be released from prison, they are always subject to recall. We should remember that that is genuinely a life sentences in that sense.

The Irish Penal Reform Trust points out a number of concerns it has about aspects of the Bill, and I share those concerns, in particular the increase in the period before which a person serving an indeterminate sentence is first eligible for parole from seven years currently to 12 years. I know why this provision has been put into the Bill, and again I will not oppose it, but it should be possible for those serving life sentences to be reviewed prior to the 12-year point - not that they should necessarily be released. We know that those serving life sentences serve on average 18 years so, in fact, very few if any are released after seven years. Parole decision-making is a process, however, and again, in the interests of good sentence management and structured release, it is key that persons prepare over some years for eventual release. That is in the interests of victims and their families. I am therefore not sure that the absolute 12-year cut-off is essential.

There are also issues surrounding the independence of the board. Is the membership sufficiently independent of the Minister, given that the members are appointed by the Minister? I am glad to see gender balance provided for, and I know we will have more time to debate this in detail on Committee and Report Stages.

I will make two final points. The minimum period of eligibility for 12 years of parole review will apply equally, it seems, to that very small number of children convicted and sentenced to indeterminate sentences. Again, this might be better amended. I refer finally to the role of victims in the parole process. My colleague, Deputy Sherlock, tabled amendments in the Dáil in this regard. I am glad to see that section 41 of the Bill incorporates the right of victims to information. We know how critical that is for so many victims and their families.

Again, I welcome the Bill. I look forward to making more points on Committee and Report Stages and to the speedy passage of the Bill into law.