Submissions to an expert group on the probation and welfare service have revealed serious discontent among judges, legal bodies, prison welfare groups and trade unions about the operation of the existing service.
The view that alternatives to prison must be offered appears in many of the submissions. Another complaint made by several groups is that the probation and welfare service no longer appears to have any significant role in family law cases.
A Dublin Circuit Court judge, Mr Pat McCartan, said in his submission: "A fully and efficient service must be equipped to operate with wider options in dealing with offenders. Mere supervision is not enough".
Judge McCartan said the expert group should establish "community work schemes" as a necessary feature of the penal system. He said lingering reservations about these "supervised work schemes" should be addressed so that the work can become "publicly recognised . . .
"The real challenge is to be imaginative and prepared to accept other ways to achieve a reduction in recidivism and crime," said Judge McCartan.
However, in a submission the County Registrars Association, who are involved in the administration of the lower courts, said, "Circuit judges do not avail of the probation and welfare service to a sufficient extent.
"The profile of the probation and welfare service in country areas in not high and this extends even to judges themselves," it said. "Judges may not be aware of the identity of individual probation officers. The probation and welfare service does not always come to the mind of a judge unless recommended by the defendant's counsel."
A court officer in the midlands said, "The various judges down the years in the midland circuit have not made extensive use of the service".
Cork District Court Judge David Riordan said frequently an offender was placed on a probation bond with the condition that she or he attended an addiction clinic. The order might also include a curfew on the defendant, but Judge Riordan said that if these conditions were breached the mechanism for bringing the offender back into court was "cumbersome.
"In the Dublin Metropolitan area, where an information and warrant procedure is used frequently, it is months before the Garda will execute the warrant."
Judge Riordan also said that "the departure of the probation and welfare service from the District Family Law Court was a major retrogade step." He said that previously the service would interview children involved and their teachers, but now "the court is left to its own devices to come up with an answer which best suits the welfare of the child".
In its submission, the Legal Aid Board claimed the probation and welfare service no longer played "an effective role in District Court family law cases.
"Fewer and fewer family law cases are been taken on by the service either in or outside the Dublin area due to inadequate resourcing . . .
"The length of time required to get a probation officer's report is now over 12 months. This delay makes the obtaining of a report worthless".
In a submission probation and welfare officers at St Patrick's Institution, who deal with young offenders, said, "currently the service could be viewed in terms of crisis management."
A significant number of the submissions complained of poor resources for the probation and welfare service.
However the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform recently said it would be appointing 39 new probation and welfare officers. The Minister, Mr O'Donoghue, has also said that with the opening of Clover Hill remand prison, the number of early releases would be cut drastically.