Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)

I thank the Minister for coming to the House. It is great to hear how willing he is to have a meaningful debate and discussion on the Bill. I thank Senator Ruane and her team for bringing it forward.

I will echo a lot of the words that we have already heard today around what justice and democracy are and how, to have a democratic society, we must have fair justice. A major part of a just society is recourse for everyone to understand why a State institution has taken action against them and to provide recourse for challenging that decision. Simply put, we all know the term that everyone should be entitled to due process. That is true for us in the Chamber and it is also true for applicants in prison seeking parole.

The Bill is about strengthening our justice system and making it more progressive. We have heard comments around complexity and not wanting to make the system unduly complex. We should not do that, but we are not making changes without necessity. The Bill is about closing a loophole that may exist but should not exist if people are to have access to a fair process.

The current process for seeking parole means that applicants can be put in a position whereby they are denied due process. Whether there are many cases of that happening remains to be seen, given the Minister's interventions, but that does not mean that, as he said, we should not try to close the loophole before an issue arises.

When information related to parole is withheld from somebody and their representation, we can all acknowledge that does not equate to fair justice. Under the current system, applicants can be denied access to critical information influencing their parole decision without explanation or recourse - that it can happen without recourse is an important thing to highlight. The Bill addresses these flaws by introducing two reforms which we have discussed but I will outline again. The first reform involves defining the idea of "exceptional circumstances". It is good for people in the parole system and for the public interest to have such things explicitly defined. The second reform is about establishing a framework for appointing special advocates to represent the interests of applicants where information is withheld. Again, it is about giving people the right to representation, which is so fundamental in a justice system.

Rehabilitation, as we have heard from many Senators, should be central to our justice system. Parole exists not as a privilege but, rather, as a mechanism to support reintegration and rehabilitation. When decisions affecting a person's liberty are made behind closed doors without scrutiny, we risk reinforcing the cycles of exclusion and disenfranchisement that lead many people into crime.

Special advocates provide a safeguard against arbitrary decision-making. No one is saying that the Parole Board is doing any of this with malicious intent. I acknowledge what the Minister said about the great work the Parole Board does, but it is about having legislative and procedural safeguards in place to avoid mistakes happening. In this we are following jurisdictions including, as we have heard, the North, other parts of the UK and Canada, and strengthening our system in line with that. I support the Bill and the fact it is closing an existing loophole. It recognises that not all information can be appropriately provided to parole applicants, there being particular instances where that is not appropriate. Having that highlighted for the public good is important. The idea of having no right to reply in certain circumstances is worrying. Strengthening the right to challenge a decision that is taken is really important. I hope we will have plenty of opportunities for discussion on the Bill. I am sure the Minister will work closely with Senator Ruane in the next few months and there will be the chance to debate it in detail when it comes back to the House.