Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 3 Jul 1998

Vol. 156 No. 10

Criminal Justice (Release of Prisoners) Bill, 1998: Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

I thank Senators for agreeing to take this important measure today. This is a practical indication of the willingness of every Member of the House to play his or her part in supporting the British-Irish Agreement. Members of this House may be aware there were briefings of party leaders about this issue. As part of that process the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Ruairi Quinn, very helpfully let the Taoiseach have a copy of a draft Bill dealing with this matter. I appreciate that and, while the Bill before the House goes beyond the approach in the Labour Party draft, it is fair to say this Bill reflects the central approach proposed in that draft.

There can be no doubt that one of the most contentious aspects of the British-Irish Agreement has been the part of it which deals with the accelerated release of prisoners. It is easy to understand why. On one level many people find it difficult to reconcile the early release of prisoners with their basic concept of justice. They remember truly terrible events which have taken place and instinctively react against the idea that some of the people involved in those events should be released from prison early.

The issue of prisoners was one of the most difficult issues which all the participants to the negotiations had to address. The Agreement would not have provided the basis for a fresh settlement of the Northern Ireland conflict and a fresh start unless the issue of prisoners was addressed in the manner in which it was.

I know from my contacts with people who have suffered as a result of the violence — particularly relatives of members of the Garda Síochána who were killed in the course of duty — the difficulties which many of them have with what is being proposed. Sadly, there is nothing any of us could say which could be expected to ameliorate the sense of hurt and loss of the families involved. However, the reality is that a very difficult judgment had to be made about what set of circumstances would bring about the best chance of ensuring that peace would prevail on this island; that might prevent future needless death and destruction; that could mean those families grieving at present would not inevitably be replaced by generations of newly bereaved. In short, we were trying to ensure that in future people would not be imprisoned by history in a hopeless cycle of violence.

For all the understandable concerns many people have about the prisoner issue, the situation now is that the Agreement has been accepted by the vast majority of the people of the island and it falls on all of us to give full effect to all the terms of that Agreement. The Bill before the House today is part of that process.

I am sure all Members of the House will agree it is vital that we do not overlook the concerns of victims of violence. It was precisely in that context that the first initiative I was able to take on foot of the Agreement was directed to the concerns of victims. This involved obtaining Government approval for the appointment of former Tánaiste, Mr. John Wilson, to conduct a review of the services and arrangements in place to meet the needs of those in this jurisdiction who had suffered as a result of violent action associated with the conflict in Northern Ireland.

I am very grateful — as I am sure we all are — to the former Tánaiste for agreeing to undertake this task. Those of us who have the honour of knowing him on a personal level will be well aware of the special characteristics which he will bring to this important and difficult task. It is important that the message goes out clearly from this House that we are fully aware of the plight of victims and will continue to address their concerns as best we can.

The central requirement of the part of the Agreement dealing with prisoner issues is for both Governments to put in place mechanisms to provide for an accelerated programme for the release of certain categories of prisoners. The Governments also indicated, in paragraph 4 of the relevant part of the Agreement, that they would seek to enact the appropriate legislation to give effect to these arrangements by the end of June 1998. The position at the time of the negotiations was that it was already clear that legislation would be required in Northern Ireland and it also appeared possible that legislation might be required in this jurisdiction to deal with certain categories of prisoners who might be affected by the proposed arrangements.

This commitment has been addressed by the introduction in Westminster of the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Bill. In addition, as part of the normal legislative process, a detailed examination was carried out by my Department, in conjunction with the Attorney General's Office, with a view to analysing and, if necessary, preparing any further legislative measures which might be necessary in this jurisdiction to give effect to the commitments contained in the Agreement in relation to prisoners.

That examination concluded that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Government had already appropriate and sufficient legislative powers, in particular, the Offences against the State Act, 1939, and the Criminal Justice Act, 1960, available to them to allow full effect to be given to the commitments contained in the Agreement in relation to the release of prisoners without the need for specific additional legislation to be introduced.

It is also worth bearing in mind in the current context that the primary legislation necessary to give effect to the British-lrish Agreement was passed by the Oireachtas in the form of the Bill to make the necessary constitutional changes, which was subsequently passed by the people in the referendum. That measure will allow the State to consent to be bound by that Agreement in which, in turn, the Government reaffirms its commitment, inter alia, to implement the provisions of the Agreement reached in the multi-party negotiations. This will, therefore, give a particular legal status to the terms of that Agreement including those relating to prisoners, although there will be some lapse of time before the State will be in a position to indicate its consent to be bound by the Agreement.

While specific legislation is not necessary to allow effect to be given to the releases envisaged in the Agreement, there is a broader political issue at stake. I believe there is agreement on all sides of the House that we should not do anything which might be open to the perception that we are not complying fully with all the terms of the Agreement. In those circumstances, I believe that there will be general support for the Bill before the House.

Before turning to the detail of the Bill, it is worth reminding ourselves of the main features of the relevant part of the British-Irish Agreement. It provides that both Governments will put in place mechanisms to provide for an accelerated programme for the release of prisoners, including transferred prisoners, convicted of scheduled offences in Northern Ireland or, in the case of those sentenced outside Northern Ireland, similar offences. Prisoners affiliated to organisations which have not established or are not maintaining a complete and unequivocal ceasefire will not benefit from the arrangements. Both Governments will complete a review process within a fixed timeframe and set prospective release dates of qualifying prisoners while allowing account to be taken of the seriousness of the offences for which the person was convicted and the need to protect the community. In addition, the intention is that, should the circumstances allow it, any qualifying prisoners who remained in custody two years after the commencement of the scheme would be released at that point.

Members of the House will be aware that the British Government has introduced legislation to give effect in its jurisdiction to this part of the Agreement. Any comparison between the approach in that Bill and the measure before the House should take into account the fact that we are operating in different legal environments which make it inevitable that different approaches have to be taken. In particular, the Bill does not contain any new powers of release in relation to prisoners. The intention is that prisoners released under the Agreement in this jurisdiction will be released under existing legislative provisions. I wish to make it clear that these are the same provisions that successive Governments have used in releasing prisoners in the context of trying to bring about a settlement. We do not in our law have a system of release under what is called "on licence", but we have a parallel power to impose conditions on releases. That has been done in relation to the release of the relevant category of prisoner in recent years and that is what will be done when releases fall to be authorised under the Agreement. The central condition of such releases is that the person concerned will keep the peace, that is, the person will not become involved in any criminal activity while on release.

There has been some public comment to the effect that the criteria in the Bill in relation to releases are not specific enough. I reject that. It seems that there is no more straightforward and appropriate approach that could be taken to this matter than to provide, as the Bill does, that such releases will be considered by reference to the relevant part of the Agreement. That, in turn, sets out the criteria to be taken into account. This was also the broad approach adopted in the Labour Party Bill.

In essence, the Bill will establish a commission to advise the Minister, by reference to the relevant part of the British-Irish Agreement, in relation to the exercise of powers of release in the cases of prisoners whom the Minister deems to be "qualifying prisoners" for the purpose of the Agreement.

Section 1 is standard providing for certain necessary definitions. Section 2 provides that on a day to be appointed by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, a Release of Prisoners Commission will be established. The commission will be independent in the performance of its function.

Section 3 sets out the function of the commission. Under subsection (1) its function will be to advise the Minister, when so requested by him or her, regarding

the exercise of any power of release — as defined in subsection (1) — in relation to those whom the Minister specifies as qualifying prisoners for the purposes of the terms of that part of the Agreement reached in the multi-party talks which relates to prisoners. Subsection (2) provides that the Minister will request the commission to give advice on the exercise, by reference to the relevant provisions of the Agreement, of any power of release in relation to such prisoners. The subsection further provides that the commission will comply with such a request. Subsection (3) states that the reference to "relevant provisions" is a reference to the provisions of the Agreement reached in the multi-party talks under the heading "Prisoners". These are set out in the Schedule to the Bill.

Section 4 provides that the Minister or the Government in considering whether to exercise, by reference to the relevant provisions of the Agreement, any power of release in relation to a qualifying prisoner will have regard to the relevant provisions of the Agreement and the commission's advice. The membership and procedure of the commission are set out in section 5. Subsection (1) provides that the commission will consist of a chairman and two ordinary members appointed by the Minister to be members of the commission. The person appointed to be chairman will be a solicitor or barrister who has practised for at least seven years prior to appointment. The other members of the commission will be a member of the Probation and Welfare Service and an officer of the Minister other than a member of the Probation and Welfare Service. The section also contains standard provisions in relation to the membership and functioning of the commission.

Section 6(1) requires the commission to make a report in writing to the Minister of its activities since its establishment. The report is to be made not later than two years after its establishment. A copy of the report will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas by the Minister. Under subsection (3) there is provision for the Minister to make an order at any time after the expiry of two years from its establishment for the dissolution of the commission where he or she is of the opinion that it is no longer necessary that it should remain in existence.

Sections 7 and 8 are standard providing for the payment of expenses arising under the Act and the short title. The Schedule reproduces that part of the Agreement reached in the multi-party talks which deals with the issue of prisoners.

When speaking in the other House on the motion approving the Agreement on 21 April last, I stated my belief that it could prove to be a turning point in the history of this island. I also indicated my belief that it offered a unique opportunity for all sides to put our past differences behind us and to work for the future development of the island as a whole. Events since then, including the overwhelming endorsement of the Agreement in referenda North and South on 22 May and the outcome of last week's Assembly elections, have served to confirm me in that view.

It would be foolish to pretend that everything will go smoothly on the long and difficult journey on which we have set out. However, what is important now is that the Agreement continues to be implemented in the spirit of partnership, equality and mutual respect in which it was negotiated. This Bill is another step on that journey, which is why I commend it to the House.

Mr. Connor

We have no difficulty in agreeing with this Bill. As the Minister stated, it arises from the British-Irish Agreement. There is no doubt, as he stated also, that the prisoner issue was probably the most difficult question faced by negotiators on all sides. For Sinn Féin and parties with links to loyalist paramilitaries, the issue of prisoner release would have been paramount in any settlement. The attitude of the prisoners was crucial to those parties which spoke for them during the long negotiating process. We must acknowledge the responsibility of prisoners and their leaders in prisons on both islands. Their helpfulness played no small part in creating the environment which facilitated the Agreement.

However, there is another aspect of the prisoner issue with which I have the greatest sympathy, which is the attitude of victims of the truly awful and often unspeakable crimes and atrocities committed by many prisoners who, as members of paramilitary organisations, carried out deeds in which depravity often seemed to know no boundary, I know the families of two gardaí who were gunned down in Ballaghdereen in 1980 after a paramilitary bank raid. They died about five miles from where I live. Both were murdered in a most cold-blooded, callous manner when they ran into the path of people who would claim political justification for their abominable deeds.

Such deeds have happened many times since then on this side of the Border, and on countless occasions in the past 30 years of conflict on the other side of the Border and on the other island. The heartbreak and grief visited on the victims and their surviving loved ones was unimaginable. One can easily imagine and fully understand the feelings of victims who lost husbands or those whose lives were blighted by the loss of limbs or other faculties when they see those who committed those deeds walk free with their sins forgiven and their slates wiped clean. In deference to the understandable difficulties this will cause for victims, the Minister must attach some conditions, such as release under licence, to many of the releases.

The Minister must be more forthcoming on the exact role of the independent prisoner release commission. What method of evaluation will be used in assessing each prisoner's case for release? What criteria, if any, will be used? What contact, if any, will there be with victims and their relatives? For example, will they get a full explanation if they seek one of the release of someone who caused them such heartbreak and bereavement? It is very important to make contact with such people and to make information fully available to them if they seek it. The Minister must be very sensitive to the feelings and problems which will be experienced by victims and their relations.

However, having said that, I add my voice to those asking victims and their relations in all parts of this island and on our sister island to understand the need for prisoner release, as something which goes to the heart of the Agreement and achieving a settlement. The settlement can only succeed if all parts of the bargain are kept. The prize of an enduring peace is worth paying a very high price for. Victims and relatives have already paid a high price, often the supreme price. Nevertheless, we ask them to be generous and to abide with those of us who support this Agreement and want to see it succeed. I say with no arrogance that 95 per cent of the people want this Agreement to succeed. All we can do is work with generosity and a mutual understanding so that peace will be delivered.

I welcome the Government's decision to appoint an eminent person to conduct the review of the services and arrangements to meet the needs of people in this jurisdiction who have suffered as a result of violent action associated with the conflict in Northern Ireland, as the Minister put it. The choice of the former Tánaiste, Minister and long time Member of the Oireachtas is an excellent one. He is a great person of great experience and intellectual integrity. He was a Deputy for two Border constituencies, Cavan and Monaghan, for at least 20 years. He has an insight into the conflict in Northern Ireland which few others have. However, what resources will be at his disposal in conducting his review? What actions will he be entitled to take if he sees action is necessary? There is no use in having someone like Mr. John Wilson conducting a review of the services available to victims unless the Minister assures us the inadequacies to which he draws attention will be addressed and his requests will not be ignored. I do not know if his terms of reference have been fully drawn up yet. However, they should state that the onus will be on the Government to accept any recommendations he might make within all reasonable limits.

I listened to the Dáil debate on the Bill yesterday. I was particularly interested in the contribution of the Sinn Féin Member, Deputy Caoimhghin Ó Caoláin. I hoped he might say something about the pleas of the dozens of people whose relatives or loved ones were abducted and murdered by the IRA and buried or disposed of in unknown places. It is the dear wish of these relatives to know the whereabouts of the graves of their husbands, sons and grandsons who were abducted and murdered ten or 30 years ago, or much more recently in some cases. These grieving relatives want to recover the bodies of their loved ones and afford them the dignity of a decent or Christian burial. I am not saying Deputy Ó Caoláin knows the location of these graves but he has influence with those who do. It would be a wonderful gesture towards reconciliation and confidence building if he would use his privileged position as a Member of the Dáil to say he would seek help in identifying these graves. Alas, he could not say that as his party — or, at least, the party it seems he belongs to — would not allow him to.

Sinn Féin and the IRA should offer an apology for some of the terrible deeds they were associated with during the conflict. Members will remember Mr. Gusty Spence, leader of the Combined Loyalist Command, offering what he described as an abject apology to all who lost their lives through the actions of his organisation; he made this apology when announcing their ceasefire.

I appeal to Sinn Féin and the IRA in particular to offer an apology. That would be a wonderful gesture at this stage of the process, and gestures are very important. The prisoner issue has been an essential element of all conflict resolutions in recent years. It was central to the end of apart-heid in South Africa, and to the ending of civil wars in Mozambique, Angola and Cambodia. It is crucial to the solution of many complex national emergencies such as those in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Sudan, and it was addressed courageously in this Agreement.

I congratulate everyone who was involved in the Agreement. However, much as I hate to end on a discordant note, I do not think the balance in the Bill between the necessity for legislation and the sensitivity of victims and relatives is quite right.

Mr. L. Fitzgerald

The Minister's work rate is prodigious. He must be setting phenomenal records. I do not know how many Bills he has brought before the Dáil and Seanad but his work rate is quite prodigious. I welcome this Bill and I do not share all Senator Connor's sentiments.

Any Bill that accelerates the promotion of the British-Irish Agreement is to be welcomed, and that is what this Bill does. The support in the Oireachtas for the Agreement is reflected in the debate on this Bill, and the Minister has referred to the support from the other party leaders, particularly the leader of the Labour Party. The Schedule contains the provisions relating to prisoners included under the British-Irish Agreement, which was overwhelmingly endorsed North and South. The Bill adheres faithfully to the terms of the Agreement.

Speakers have referred to the prisoners issue arising wherever peoples in conflict try to settle their differences. It is at the core of such efforts, and the prisoners issue has been at the core of the problems in Northern Ireland over the past 25 years. I recall visiting Belfast in the mid 1980s, particularly during the Harry Kirkpatrick trial, and seeing approximately 40 prisoners were forced to stand in a corral in the corner of a courtroom. The Diplock court system did nothing to advance the cause of peace in Northern Ireland. It is heartening to see how far we have come since the supergrass system was used to bribe political activists and militarists to "grass" on their fellow militarists. We have made huge advances since then and the British-Irish Agreement is a vital part of that advance. It is important that we reflect on that to appreciate the role this Bill is playing in the overall settlement.

There is another sad side to the release of prisoners. I refer to the victims of crimes perpetrated by those criminals. We have all heard stories of horrible violence and murder perpetrated by some of the prisoners under consideration for release. As the Minister said, it is very difficult to address the sense of bereavement and injustice felt by relatives of the dead. It is difficult to console them and to address their needs in a holistic way while also addressing the terms of the Agreement, as we are bound to do as signatories to the Agreement. We must strike a balance that is sensitive to those relatives and that ensures the hopeless cycle of violence that has bedevilled Northern Ireland is brought to an end.

The Minister has got the balance right, and I heartily welcome his decision to establish a commission under the former Tánaiste, Mr. John Wilson, to meet the needs of those in this jurisdiction who have suffered as a result of violent actions in Northern Ireland. I commend the Minister on his excellent choice. Mr. Wilson is a man of long experience both inside and outside politics, and he has a great capacity for empathy. He is also a man of calibre, both in public and private. These characteristics enable him to bring the insight, experience and professionalism that will be necessary in dealing with this very sensitive area.

Senator Connor was concerned that the Minister did not address these needs sufficiently in dealing with the categories of prisoners to be released. The Minister should spell out in further detail the way in which he intends dealing with the concerns and needs of the bereaved and the victims of violence. The terms of reference given to Mr. Wilson oblige him to conduct a review of the services and arrangements in place to meet the needs of those who have suffered as a result of violent action associated with the conflict in Northern Ireland over the past 30 years. Mr. Wilson is also charged with identifying further measures which need to be taken to acknowledge and address the suffering and concerns of those people. This is an all embracing approach in the context of those who were hurt, injured or bereaved.

Mr. Wilson is also charged with addressing the needs and concerns of those who sustained serious injuries and members of the immediate families of those who died or sustained serious injuries in the service of the State as a consequence of violent action ensuing from the conflict. He will advise how support can be given to victims and families and how their coping with the immediate aftermath and continuing consequences of violence can be acknowledged and sustained. This is extremely important and central to what must be addressed by the State in reaching out to these people. It is very important that a clear and unambiguous message go from the House that legislators, through Bills such as this and in promoting the British-Irish Agreement, are fully aware of their plight as victims and will address their concerns on an ongoing basis to ensure they are adequately dealt with.

Prisoner releases is a central requirement of the British-Irish Agreement and it is heartening and reassuring to hear the Minister say there are definite categories of prisoners who will quality under the Bill and that reviews of its operation will take place. These are necessary safeguards required to ensure a correct balance. I commend the Bill and believe the Minister has achieved the correct balance.

Mr. Costello

I welcome the Bill. I know the Minister paid tribute to the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Quinn, for providing the initial draft of a Bill. I thought the Bill was essential from the outset because the British-Irish Agreement formed a package, a central issue of which was the release of prisoners over a two year period. A specific requirement of the Agreement was that both Governments introduce legislation to bring this about. The British Government has done this through its Northern Ireland Sentences Bill, the debate on which was lively, particularly in relation to the qualifying categories of prisoners. The first breach of the Agreement took place on this issue. Here, despite people's reservations, we seem to be at one in relation to the necessity of providing for the spirit and letter of the Agreement.

The Official Secrets Act, 1939, and the Criminal Justice Act, 1960, set out the Minister's role on prisoners in our jurisdiction, including those transferred from elsewhere, in terms of release. Nevertheless here we are talking about a separate dispensation and a new imperative. We adopted the Agreement through constitutional amendment and it is appropriate that we specify separate legislation to ensure this is reflected in domestic law and as it is different from anything which has gone before. I am glad the Bill is before us. I would have wished it to be more comprehensive in terms of reflecting the values, wishes and spirit of the changes.

The British-Irish Agreement was accepted by a very substantial percentage of the people throughout the island who voted for the total package. In general terms we are providing for an amnesty over a two year period. Such arrangements, whereby prisoners are given concessions in terms of release which look particularly attractive if taken in the context of deeds committed, have always existed in the termination of conflicts. It happened here down through the centuries and there have been examples of it throughout the world, including in recent conflicts referred to by previous speakers. The other side of the coin is that terrible things have been done and there are victims, many of whom were innocent, including those not involved in the security forces, who endured a huge amount of suffering in tragic circumstances, something we should take on board.

I am glad that Mr. John Wilson, a previous Tánaiste and much respected figure, has been appointed by the Government to review the services available to those who have suffered and that the British Government has made a similar arrangement in the context of Northern Ireland.

Prisoners have played an extremely important role right through the process in bringing the conflict to a conclusion. Their thinking has been important in Nationalist and loyalist contexts from the beginning. Prisoners were crucial in bringing about the initial 1994 ceasefire. At the same time loyalist and Nationalist prisoners argued the case and by and large initiated the process both North and South. This was reflected in the transfer of sentenced persons legislation introduced in 1995. It formed part of the ongoing process of facilitating debate while ensuring prisoners and their families were treated fairly in terms of serving sentences within a reasonable distance of their homes. Prisoners were the stalwarts in maintaining the renewed ceasefire and were central to the decisions taken at the Sinn Féin delegate conference before the party decided overwhelmingly to support the Agreement. Similarly, the release of prominent loyalist prisoners had the same effect in Northern Ireland. Therefore, the role of prisoners has been beneficial. It could be said their role was negative and detrimental in previous decades, but their role has been extremely beneficial in recent years.

Senator Connor mentioned the prisoners serving sentences for the murder of two gardaí in Ballaghaderreen. Are prisoners in that category covered by the deal? Will the Minister clarify the category of qualifying prisoners in that regard? A number of organisations whose members were involved in scheduled offences do not support the British-Irish Agreement. If those prisoners come on board, will they benefit from that element of the package? Will non-aligned prisoners or INLA prisoners, who have disassociated themselves from their central organisations, be considered part and parcel of the Agreement in terms of early release? The Minister said he will keep the situation under review. We know the organisations which have accepted the Agreement but what is the situation in relation to others?

I want to ask the Minister about the part of the Agreement which stated the Governments would take measures to facilitate the reintegration of prisoners into the community providing various supports, employment opportunities, re-training, re-skilling and further education. This an area to which the legislation should have been extended. If large numbers of prisoners are released at the same time, there will be a need for support mechanisms to ensure they do not go astray or return to evil ways. We must ensure they become integrated into the community and that there is a career option available to them. One of the weakness of the legislation is that no attempt, good, bad or indifferent, is made to ensure those who will be released from prison will be supported and helped reintegrate into the community.

Senator Connor raised the question of those on both sides of the divide who disappeared during the conflict and whose burial places are unknown. There is a need to disclose those locations so these people can get a decent Christian burial. I would like the Minister to raise this issue at whatever level in this jurisdiction and with his British counterparts as regards Northern Ireland. If nothing is done, it will remain one of the traumatic scars of this period. I urge the Minister to take steps to deal with this matter.

I compliment the Minister on bringing forward the legislation which will make a substantial contribution to ensuring the peace process moves ahead more smoothly. With these initial steps, I hope we will have peace on our island from now on.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

I thank Senators who contributed to this debate. There was, understandably, a general welcome for the Bill. It might be helpful at this stage to repeat that the Bill does not give any new powers of release to either the Minister or the Government. The existing powers of release have proved adequate in the past to allow successive Governments deal with releases of this nature. It is difficult to see any valid reason to call them into question now.

One possible approach would have been to list a set of detailed criteria on release but that would involve, in terms of our law, needlessly seeking to define what is meant by particular provisions of the Agreement. In our view, that is neither necessary nor desirable. As I said in my introduction to this debate, we have taken the straightforward approach by specifying that the releases in question should be made by reference to the terms of the Agreement or account should be taken of the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community. Many of these specific factors which were mentioned might be taken into account are in reality subsumed by those concepts.

We deliberately took the approach in the Bill that we would not seek to further define the terms used in the Agreement because to do so would be unnecessary and undesirable. Cases which fall to be dealt with under the Agreement will be considered on an individual basis, including the conditions that would be appropriate to particular releases. It was understandable and right that during the course of this debate there was considerable emphasis on the plight of victims. I mentioned at the outset the work which the former Tánaiste, John Wilson, is undertaking in this regard.

It might be useful to mention that this Bill represents one element of my Department's continuing involvement with the peace process. The British-Irish Agreement has significant implications for my Department across a wide range of policy areas for which it has primary responsibility within our public service. These derive from those provisions of the Agreement dealing with rights, safeguards, equality of opportunity, decommissioning, security and the constitutional changes presaged by the 19th amendment of the Constitution in addition to the provisions on prisoners.

A number of the commitments made by the Government in these areas will, therefore, fall to my Department to take forward. It is appropriate in the context of this debate to detail some of these briefly. Progress has been made in giving effect to a number of commitments made in the Agreement. The Employment Equality Bill has been enacted and regulations were made on Monday of last week under the Decommissioning Act, 1997, which provide for the decommissioning schemes recommended by the independent International Commission on Decommissioning and endorsed by the participants to the multi-party negotiations.

Other issues relating to the Agreement currently being addressed by my Department include the issue of the establishment of a human rights commission, which is intended to be a statutory body underpinned by legislation, and the review of the Offences Against the State Acts, 1939 to 1985, on which I intend to bring proposals to Government in the near future for the purpose of establishing a review mechanism. There will obviously be other occasions during which we may debate these matters in detail. Meanwhile, I again thank Senators for their co-operation in this matter. Incidentally, I should have said the decommissioning regulations were signed this week.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

I thank Senators for their co-operation in taking this Bill today. It is important we should be seen to do everything necessary to support the implementation of the British-Irish Agreement. Senators have shown their willingness to do so.

Given this is the last day of the session, it is worth mentioning that by my reckoning, this is the 17th Bill I have had before the Seanad since my appointment as Minister a little over a year ago. I have received a very high level of co-operation from the Seanad in dealing with what, by any standards, is a substantial body of law reform and I recognise the heavy burden placed on Senators, especially on the spokesperson on Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

I look forward to resuming our major law reform initiatives later in the year. In the meantime I express my best wishes to all Senators. They will be sitting in committees during July and September, but I wish them a pleasant August.

Mr. Connor

I thank the Minister for the kindness of his remarks. I have been the spokesperson for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for the main Opposition party since this Seanad assembled. The Minister has kept us busy and I congratulate him on the corpus of legislation most of which was necessary. Some of it — for example, the Parental Leave Bill — was very innovative. I congratulate him on his work rate. It is clear that as spokespersons we will spend much of our time here in the coming session doing very necessary work as he introduces more legislation.

Mr. Costello

I wish to be associated with the remarks made by Senator Connor. It is appropriate we end on this note where we are passing legislation that will facilitate and progress the British-Irish Agreement. It is well we did not finish on the Firearms Bill.

I compliment the Minister on the manner in which he has dealt with legislation before the House. He produces most of the legislation here. A total of 17 Bills introduced by him were passed in the last session. This represents a colossal amount of work and time for any Minister. His work load is astounding. I thank him for maintaining his courtesy and good humour and being able to respond in a comprehensive fashion to all of the questions that have been put to him. I wish him a good break. No doubt we will see him in the autumn.

Mr. L. Fitzgerald

I join with the other Senators in complimenting the Minister. His work rate is prodigious, innovative and progressive. I am continually impressed by the manner in which he is able to deal with a wide range of amendments and is able to respond to the concerns raised by Senators. Seventeen Bills is a hugely impressive record. I wish him a restful break, however long or short. He will have to attend to his departmental duties in the period when the House has risen, although committees are still meeting. If ever a Minister deserved a break this one does. Although this debate was short it was very important and positive. It is heartening that the House is rising on such a good note on all sides and with a Bill of such significance and importance for the future of the island.

Mr. Cassidy

I also wish to be associated with the words of thanks to the Minister. The House dealt with approximately 50 Bills this session, 17 of which were from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It is a sizeable amount of work. After the Taoiseach, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the hardest worked Minister.

Question put and agreed to.