Lynn Ruane (Independent)

I thank everyone for their contributions. They will be helpful in teasing out what questions may come up for people. I am always grateful for the further exploration of a topic as it is coming up. I will try to answer some of them. Some of them I cannot answer just now. I considered approaching the Parole Board on this but I was also cautious around including the board in legislation that affects it. Now that it is on the Minister's table, it makes more sense to consult the board. I have consulted legal representation from the North where similar legislation is in situ. I have gone around the houses but have not negotiated or sat down with the Parole Board specifically.

To be clear, the special advocate does not determine whether the parolee should be given the information. He or she makes submissions or oral presentations to the Parole Board to determine the validity or the scale of that information and whether it is an adequate use by An Garda Síochána. It is not that the special advocate would, at the end of the decision-making process, decide that this information should be shared with the parolee or his or her legal representative. It is actually an extension of the parole process itself.

With regard to confidentiality, and maybe I need to understand this more, my inclination is that we could also say that about Parole Board members because they are made privy to the information. We already have a situation where the Parole Board members are made privy to the information and it is then decided whether they think it is appropriate to share the information. If we are talking about how we support or protect a special advocate, it would be with the same processes we have in place for the Parole Board itself, which carries out that function, but without the extra layer of a barrister's oversight. It is not a criticism of the new board. I engage a lot with the board. It is not always very popular. I do a lot of work with men in the prison system, so I am constantly engaged at various levels of parole processes. This particular issue relates to a very small number of people in that wider parole process. The parole process, in terms of who is applying for parole, involves a small number of people so this legislation affects a smaller number within that small number. Regarding additional layers of burden, the process is not going to add too many layers for a large number of people. It will probably be for one or two people along the way. When it comes to people who are seen as having an organised crime aspect, Garda advice comes up a lot and often says this person still has links to organised crime. What are we saying that means? It is very difficult for a person who grew up in a particular community, and who maybe grew up within a particular family and may have an uncle or someone who is heavily involved in it, to not have links to organised crime. It is very difficult to not have links to organised crime if someone's whole existence and life has literally been embedded within particular situations.

It is also to make sure we understand what we mean when we say "links". Are we saying this person has committed a crime as part of still having links to organised crime or are we just saying people still have links to organised crime? That is something we really should explore because it will be very difficult for some people to not have particular links to it. They would need to completely change their names, move country and no longer know their family, friends, loved ones, childhood pals or whatever. We can tease out those things in terms of how we think about these things.

The questions that have been raised are important in terms of understanding. I did not want the Bill to be too restrictive in terms of the criteria the Minister would use to decide whether a special advocate would be appointed. In some cases a special advocate would be appointed and would say this is a completely good use of this legislation and this information definitely should not be shared. This Bill definitely does not aim to try to open up information to being exposed, State secrets or other stuff such as Garda intelligence that is being unduly or inappropriately shared with anybody. It is just that extra layer which protects the Parole Board and the Garda in terms of the use of this function. This Bill also gives an extra layer of oversight to the individual where somebody else, independent of those factors, is there to assess this on his or her behalf, and if they say this is an appropriate use, it means all avenues are covered.

I will not oppose the amendment today. I will accept it and engage over the next while in terms of the use of this Bill. I reiterate that I understand this will concern a small number of people. I know how many people it will concern currently. I do not wish to go too much into that because I do not want to identify particular cases or things that are in motion. The parole process was only set up a couple of years ago, so if this has only come up as an issue now, we need to make sure we put those extra layers of access to justice to ensure people are properly supported going forward in the parole process, that it is clear and transparent, that all avenues are covered and that everyone is protected during the process.