Tony McLoughlin (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fine Gael)

That is correct. I welcome the opportunity to speak on this legislation. This Bill complies with elements of the EU-IMF deal specifically concerning the level of competition and the high cost of some legal transactions. It was found that restrictive practices within the profession have stymied competition, which inevitably sees costs increasing. The organisation of the legal profession and the costs associated with legal services in Ireland have been subject to continuous criticism by successive official reports during the past number of years. The Minister must act and he is doing so in this Bill.

It is worth noting the comments by the Consumers' Association which has stated that the legal professions had been sheltered and welcomed the transparency being introduced by the Bill. I am aware of many of the concerns expressed to Members by solicitors who are concerned at the level of control the Government would exercise over the legal profession.

Further concerns were expressed to me regarding the control the proposed Government controlled legal services regulatory authority would have over all aspects of legal professional practice, including training, entry and discipline. This authority will be appointed by the Government on the recommendation of the Minister. I suggest to the Minister that he might examine the membership make-up of the authority again and review some suggestions or alternatives on the composition of this important regularity authority.

In response to those criticisms it is imperative that we compare the existing status quo with what is proposed in the Bill. Many people criticise professionals or organisations that are, in essence, self-regulatory and that is what we have currently in the legal profession, which encompasses areas around solicitor and barrister training, adjudication of legal costs and the behaviour and professional conduct of solicitors.

As a TD, I have had to deal with a constituent who has raised the issue of legal bills involving a legal separation case and when I suggested how the appeal mechanism worked, the person expressed amazement that the body to which the person would appeal would not be totally independent from the legal profession. Needless to say, in that case there was no reduction in that legal bill.

I very much welcome the fact the Bill introduces a single streamlined complaints mechanism for all legal practitioners. Currently complaints about legal practitioners are dealt with separately according to their profession. Currently, there are four different bodies that deal with complaints about solicitors: the complaints section of the Law Society, the independent adjudicator, the disciplinary tribunal of the High Court and the taxing master. It is welcome that the Bill creates a streamlined, three-step approach to dealing with complaints about both barristers and solicitors. Complaints are initially dealt with by a complaints committee; they may then be referred to a disciplinary tribunal which may impose sanctions and, where the misconduct merits heavy sanctions, these are imposed by the High Court on foot of an application by the tribunal. The Bill defines misconduct by legal practitioners which includes overcharging, as well as fraud, dishonesty and acts or omissions likely to bring the profession into disrepute.

The authority can also investigate legal practitioners on its own initiative at any time for the purpose of establishing whether they are in compliance with the Act, the Solicitors Acts or any regulations made under these Acts. I welcome these improvements and more in the area of complaints procedures which will rightly be welcomed by the general public.

Deputy Charles Flanagan touched on the role of local authorities and the legal advice used by them. I am aware of a local authority which has engaged the same legal company for more than 40 years and been threatened with possible legal action if it considers readvertising for legal services. I acknowledge that the same local authority has sought and obtained reductions in its legal charges; however, I appeal to the Minister to engage with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to assess and research the level of fees local authorities pay, how long firms are contracted to local authorities and the level of advertising for tenders across the country annually by local authorities because in many cases proper procurement is not taking place. I understand there must be a level of continuity, but at least every five years - the duration of a council term - tenders should be sought by local authorities. I would welcome consideration of this by the Departments of Justice and Equality and the Environment, Community and Local Government.

The number of colleges providing law degrees for students has broadened during the years, which is welcome. However, this is not the case in respect of professional legal education, as the Honourable Society of King's Inns is the only provider for solicitors and barristers at this level in the State. The Competition Authority has found that the reservation of professional legal training by the Law Society of Ireland and King's Inns prevents competition in legal training and may also restrict competition in legal services. A person wishing to train as a solicitor can train only on a full-time basis and, in the case of both solicitors and barristers, in a single school located in Dublin which has no incentive to minimise its costs and hence its course fees. That is not acceptable. Therefore, I welcome the Ministers initiative in this regard.

See this speech in context