Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy will recall, the Bill provides for the legal services regulatory authority to engage in a process and to report on whether the public should have direct access to members of the Bar for contentious matters. In those circumstances, if one has direct access to members of the Bar for contentious matters, it means one will not be filtering one's legal problems through solicitors. That is a matter of interesting discussion. I do not wish to prejudge the consultative process that will take place in which the legal services regulatory authority will engage and the report it will publish. I acknowledge that in the legal profession, that is a matter of some controversy. The legal profession in Ireland exists as it does because we inherited the historical developments of the legal profession in Britain from the 17th to the 19th centuries and it has remained unchanged since then. The legal profession, as practised in other jurisdictions, including some common law jurisdictions, is structured differently from the manner in which it is structured in this country. This issue only will arise should, as a result of the consultative process and when a report is published, it then be considered by the Government and should the Government make further changes for further reform. Consequently, it is premature at the moment to deal with this issue. I have no doubt that like many other reforms that are under discussion when it comes to both professions, they are a matter of difficulty and controversy and people have concerns about change. I think it is an issue to be addressed substantially by looking at what is in the public interest, what gives people access to appropriate legal assistance when they require it in a manner that does not generate unnecessarily excessive legal costs. They are highly important principles as to what gives access to lawyers with the necessary expertise to address particular issues. There are areas of highly complex law in which I have no doubt but that in certain circumstances in which people find themselves in litigation, they need the assistance of more than one lawyer, be they solicitors, barristers or both. There are other circumstances in which people have legal problems of a relatively straightforward nature where, if a lawyer has particular expertise, one does not necessarily need more than one lawyer.

These are all interesting issues to be teased out in the public interest and I will not prejudge them.

The issue of whether barristers should hold funds is directly related to direct access for members of the public to barristers for contentious matters, without barristers being instructed through solicitors. Normally, it is the solicitor who holds funds, which is the reason there are detailed and substantial rules, regulations and provisions in place concerning what are known as client and office accounts in the context of funds received by solicitors and the holding of moneys on deposit by solicitors. Currently, moneys that barristers receive are substantially paid by them through solicitors as opposed to directly, except in some very narrow circumstances. This may be an issue for another day, long after the legislation has been enacted and many of the reforms prescribed by it have been brought into operation.