I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 and 9 together.
Since the scheme was introduced in 1985 approximately 4,000 community service orders have been made and I am generally satisfied with the operation of the scheme. I have previously made clear my wish that the scheme be availed of as an alternative to imprisonment to the widest possible extent. The House will appreciate, however, that the extent to which community service orders are made under the Criminal Justice (Community Service) Act, 1983, is a matter for the courts.
A change in legislation would be necessary to enable community service to be substituted for imprisonment in the case of fine defaulters. While I will keep this matter under review, such a change would involve a departure from a central feature of the present scheme in accordance with which community service may be imposed only in cases where the court, but for the availability of community service, would have deemed a custodial sentence, rather than a fine or other noncustodial sanction, to be the appropriate penalty for a particular offence. This feature of the scheme was designed to ensure that community service operated as a genuine alternative to custody, rather than as a replacement for other non-custodial sanctions and this is an aspect which would have to be borne in mind in the consideration of any proposals for amending the legislation governing the scheme.
I should mention that there is no evidence to suggest that the use of community service in the case of fine defaulters would significantly ease pressure on custodial accommodation. For example, on 1 March 1989 only 17 offenders were serving sentences exclusively for non-payment of fines and all but two of these were being accommodated at "open" prisons.