Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

A number of measures in the report published in January are being worked upon to deal with fraud. One of the big things we can do is remove the incentive for fraud. I am referring to the idea that a claimant can get a higher claim paid out more quickly in Ireland in terms of a settlement being made. A number of measures work across this area. One is the personal injuries commission to ensure that we are not outliers when it comes to other European jurisdictions in terms of the amounts being given for awards. The commission will report by the end of the year. The work the commission is currently doing involves this international benchmarking exercise.

Another thing we need to do is reform the book of quantum. This derives from another action under the report. The idea is to bring about more granularity to it and to publish it in conjunction with the work of the personal injuries commission. At present, the book of quantum essentially is just a summation of awards that have been given. People use it as a target or guide but really they should not do so. If we can combine a revised book of quantum with more granularity along with the work of the personal injuries commission, then we should have a template for the awards that should be made.

Work is already being progressed in discussing with the Judiciary how it could take a more of an active role in the publication of this work, just as does the Judiciary in the UK. I am in favour of this. The idea is there might be more buy-in from the Judiciary into the information in the reporting work.

Another thing we need to do is to strengthen the funnel into the Personal Injuries Assessment Board. The heads of the Bill to improve the powers of the board will come by the end of this month. We know the percentages. Of the claims taken, some 20% get resolved in the PIAB, 10% are settled in the courts and 70% are settled elsewhere. We do not want to see people fast-tracking through the PIAB to try to get a better deal. We do not want people intentionally missing medical cases such that they fall out of the PIAB automatically and can then go to court. Then, when they go to court, they introduce new evidence. We are looking to change all these things. We are also looking to bring in pre-action protocols. This would be another step to reduce the costs and shorten the process. We are also looking at the possibility of an appeals mechanism for the PIAB.

All these things should make the process shorter, thus reducing the costs and, in particular, the need for additional costs to arise in the process. It should give greater certainty to the types of awards. It should also remove the inventive for fraudulent behaviour.

A number of other initiatives relating to fraud are referenced in the report. We are trying to build a database around fraudulent behaviour. This work is under a longer-term time horizon in terms of the action for completion next year. There are sensitivities around data protection and liability issues as well. We are looking at a particular recommendation that Deputy Pearse Doherty has raised several times. It relates to working with the insurance industry and the Garda Síochána on the creation of a dedicated unit within the Garda to tackle insurance fraud. The idea is that it could have the potential to be funded by the insurance industry, which is what happens in the UK. Work on that project is ongoing.