Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the issues that have been debated here is the public perception that under the current system, the Law Society or the Bar Council, in investigating complaints through their respective structures, are essentially investigating themselves. However, if one actually examines in an honest way the structures of the Law Society and the Bar Council, one will see that they were very robust and fair. Indeed, within the Law Society structures, the option exists of going to an independent party if one is not happy with the decision of the society. However, there was a public perception and the allegation was made many times that the systems amounted to the legal fraternity investigating the legal fraternity, especially if an outcome was reached with which an individual was not happy.

In Britain the regulatory authority allows the various law fraternities to continue to investigate cases. The various fraternities continue to have their own investigative structures which are under the supervision of the authority. The authority does not carry out investigations directly. That is the system that operates in Britain. The Law Society here has accepted that there is a negative public perception and has supported the concept being put forward by the Minister of an independent regulatory authority. Clearly, there is going to be a change. The reality is that the staff who are working there at the moment are dealing with very complex matters which require people of substantial expertise. The staff have many years of experience in dealing with these cases. There is precedent here in terms of changes and new structures being put in place under which the existing staff who work in the area, as a matter of natural justice, continue on in the new structure. In that way, the new structure takes all of that expertise and hits the ground running. It would be very helpful to have a new authority that is clearly independent, that is strengthened in many regards by this legislation and that has a core element of staff who have the expertise and knowledge needed so that the authority starts in the best way possible.

If we allow this legislation to progress as it is, all of the staff to whom we refer will be made redundant. Then the authority will incur advertising and hiring costs. There will be a cost - not just to the Law Society, which will be making a substantial contribution to the new regulatory authority anyway, but also to the taxpayer - due to hiring and re-hiring. I understand the concerns expressed by the Minister and he has invited the Opposition to express its view. I believe that the transfer of the staff who have worked in this area and have significant expertise would not undermine the independence of the new authority.

They would bring that level of expertise over.

I do not assume we will resolve this today in this committee session, but I ask the Minister to consider our points and engage with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, the Law Society and the other interested parties to see what kind of solution can be found. We have had representations from the trade unions on this matter. They have expressed concern that we have a new body that performs the same work that these 16 staff perform. There is no question mark over the 16 staff and their independence, professionalism and fairness and how they have carried out their work. I am not aware that they have ever been castigated or found not to have carried out their work with professional and independent diligence. I appreciate that there was a perception that the legal fraternity was investigating the legal fraternity but there is no question mark over them and no wrongdoing has ever been found. We would be creating a new independent authority that the Law Society has chosen to support, but we would be punishing the staff and creating all sorts of difficulties.

A solution is here to be found if everybody approaches it with a will. The Minister has asked for the view and maybe the comfort of the Opposition's perspective. I will not attack the Minister. I have made clear my position that there is a natural justice issue with regard to transferring the staff over and putting in place whatever criteria or protections are needed. I appreciate that the Minister will not take 16 staff and directly put them into new positions. He may want to put in place protections. There is a way of transferring these staff and taking advantage of their expertise while protecting the independence and the perception of the independence of the new authority. It has happened. There are precedents. The Minister may not support this amendment. It is a very safe amendment. It just allows the authority to appoint these people; it does not say it will or shall, but merely allows the option. Would the Minister consider examining this before Report Stage and engaging with the various interested parties to see if there is some solution that can address all of our concerns?