Derek Nolan (Galway West, Labour)

I am sure he is representing them quite well. The legal profession is one that does not deserve sympathy, in my view, but it is certainly one that requires understanding. I entered Blackhall Place in 2009 and I hope to graduate at some stage this year, delayed a little bit by my election to this House. I therefore have a small but insightful view into the legal profession, although not as cumulative as that of the Minister.

Of those who entered Blackhall Place with me in 2009, the majority will be qualifying this year and then joining the dole. The legal profession has taken a huge hit over recent years, and people who have spent years after their degrees studying for FE1 examinations and going through Blackhall Place will be looking at a very difficult legal and professional landscape. That preponderance of unemployed legal professionals will probably do more to increase competition in the legal profession than this Bill will ever do on its own.

Several issues have been raised since the Legal Services Regulation Bill 2011 was published. The tone of the debate from the beginning has probably been a little bit unfair and has not been very conducive to a constructive debate in many instances. Some of the criticisms of the independence of the proposed regulatory authority may be based on facts, but comparing it to totalitarian regimes was not very constructive. The Minister has pointed out that he is open to amendments on the issue and he is certainly open to looking at it correctly. The problem with the authority, along with so much else in the public sphere, is related to perception. If it is not seen to be right, public confidence in it can be undermined. I take the Minister's word that he is open to amendments and I thank him for that. I expect a satisfactory conclusion can be reached on the matter.

From my time in a solicitor's office, I know well that a referral to the Law Society was treated extremely seriously. It was not seen as an easy option whereby a lawyer went before his friends in the network, who then let him off. It was something a person did not want to happen. From a public representative point of view, however, people have come to my constituency offices and told me that they think the Law Society is absolutely incapable of being a fair adjudicator on people's disputes against solicitors, and that they would be loath to report a solicitor to his own profession for guidance. We are again going back to the issue of perception. The Law Society has recently acknowledged that public perception and has changed its view on regulation. It is now of the opinion that an independent regulatory authority should be the body to deal with complaints. I welcome that because it will only help to enhance the reputation of the solicitor profession and will enhance public confidence in the legal profession generally.

The issue of costs in the Bill has received widespread welcome across all the professions and from those commenting on the Bill. A new office of legal costs adjudication is to be set up which will provide a new level of transparency, supervision and scrutiny, which again is vital. If people complain about solicitors or barristers, it is invariably about costs. There is a lack of understanding about the way in which costs are calculated, the hourly rates charged, the issues in respect of section 68 letters, and the work done behind the scenes about which the customer does not know. There is a complete lack of trust in some instances between the practitioner and the client. I think this new body, which will be independent and which will adjudicate on costs, represents a very welcome step. It creates a formal structure whereby it will be seen that both sides are getting a fair hearing. It will certainly enhance the reputation of the legal profession.

There has been a bit of an overreaction to the issue of multidisciplinary practices. We really have to see it in operation before we can see how it will affect the legal system. Deputy Finian McGrath spoke about an auctioneer, engineer and solicitor working together. I think it is a highly unlikely probability that this would be the example, but we have to see it in operation. A solicitor and barrister working together in a multidisciplinary practice does not seem to be an issue, but I note that over the years, there has been a gradual erosion of the distinction between barristers and solicitors. I know that many solicitors are entitled to audiences in front of any court. In fact, the Minister himself is an example of those solicitors who have often exercised that right. There really is no necessity now in law for the existence of two separate professions. By working together, we could see a blending of the roles. That is not necessarily a bad thing.

Section 30 calls for a number of reports to be prepared by the new regulatory authority, one of which is on that issue of the unification of the barrister and solicitor professions. The Minister will certainly get an interesting reaction from the two professions when that report is issued. We will really see a fuss if the proposal is to merge the two professions.

I also welcome the report into the education and training of legal practitioners. I could not fault the training I received in Blackhall Place, but it was the only option I had and there was no other alternative to become a solicitor. There was only one authority and it was a very expensive privilege to go there. In fact, I am still paying off my education costs from Blackhall Place. It will be interesting to see whether there is a way of making that more affordable and easier for people to get through.

As a public representative, I am aware that one of the issues which most frustrates people relates not necessarily to those who practise law but rather the law itself and the way it is administered. Citizens are put off by the fact that it can take so long to exercise remedies granted by the Dáil or pursue legal opportunities for redress. Delays in this regard can be enormous and one can spend years waiting for a decision. If one is seeking a financial settlement, one can be obliged to wait a number of years before a judgment is handed down and then one can be obliged to enter into an entirely new legal battle in order to have it enforced. Many cannot understand the long, drawn out process which obtains. In ways, it does more to hamper people in having their rights vindicated. More than the efforts of any legal practitioner, it also affects their confidence in the legal system. The issues of enforcement, cost and delay which arise in vindicating rights granted by the Oireachtas are worthy of further consideration at a later date.

The work of the Courts Service is still very much paper-based and involves old methods of operating such as filing, stamping, etc. So much of this work could be done by electronic means. I was not that old when I took up a position in a solicitor's office and was certainly of the view that it would be quicker and more efficient to do the work to which I refer either online or by other electronic means. The modernisation of the administration of the court system and also justice would go a long way towards reducing costs.

I thank the Minister for his attention and being present in the House to take the Second Stage debate on the Bill. I look forward to the Committee Stage debate, particularly to discussing the amendments that will be brought forward.

See this speech in context