Conor Sheehan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

183. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality for a timeline on legislation to implement the recommendations of the disregard scheme in relation to a mechanism to formally clear the names of those with historical convictions for consensual same sex activity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36581/25]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Victorian-era laws that criminalised consensual sexual activity between men are now rightly recognised as a historical injustice. In 2021, a multi-stakeholder working group was established to examine the disregard of such convictions. The group met eleven times, with follow up and wider outreach activities occurring between each meeting, before producing its final report in 2023.

The report contains 95 recommendations covering matters such as the range of offences that should be included, the eligibility criteria for a disregard, the procedures for applications, decisions and reviews, and how to address cases where there may be insufficient information available to determine whether a given conviction meets the criteria.

These matters need to be addressed carefully and appropriately in the statutory scheme which this Government has committed to introducing and on which my officials are currently working.

I acknowledge the Private Members’ Bill on this matter which was introduced in this House on Tuesday. I commend the work that has been put into the Bill and for the sincere commitment to securing progress on this matter. My officials are examining the Bill at present. Its procedural provisions differ in certain respects from what the Working Group recommended and, also, from the proposals I intend to bring forward. However, the overall objective is very much the same.

It is clear that there is a shared commitment across this House to address what was a deep and enduring historical injustice, one which stigmatised an entire community and caused pain and hardship to so many. I am very conscious that those affected, and their families, are hopeful that a disregard scheme can be introduced as early as possible. They deserve a scheme that is fair, accessible and straightforward.

Needless to say, it also needs to be legally and procedurally robust. I am confident that the proposals I intend to introduce will meet all of these requirements, and I am determined to bring them forward as soon as practicable and to secure their enactment at the earliest opportunity.

The Deputy will appreciate that there are limits to the capacity of these Houses to debate, amend and pass individual Bills. Any new Bill that is introduced must compete for parliamentary time with numerous other items of legislation and with other essential business. The Government has an extensive legislative programme, and there are currently over 30 pieces of primary legislation being progressed under my Department’s remit alone.

Every one of these Bills is important but, regrettably, it is not possible to advance all of them to enactment as quickly as might be wished. With this in mind, I recently asked my officials to examine whether the draft heads for the disregard scheme could be produced in a streamlined form that would facilitate their inclusion in the Criminal Law and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which is currently with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel for drafting.

I believe this is achievable and that it offers a speedier route to enactment than a dedicated Disregard Bill. Drafting of legislative heads on these lines is now at an advanced stage, and I intend to bring the heads to Government for approval shortly with a view to their being added to the Miscellaneous Provisions Bill.