Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to comment on No. 3A.3. Some of the content is specific to questions I asked. The correspondence was sent from the State Claims Agency, which handles, among other things, the clinical indemnity scheme and that was the main focus of our discussion at the last meeting. The longer the meeting went on, the less clear it became with regard to the number of cases settled in court, by mediation or out of court, that is, before the parties went into the court and, perhaps, the settlement was noted. I had asked for some details because the agency could not give us any realistic figures on the day. I asked how many cases were finalised in the courts in 2013. The document relates only to the clinical indemnity scheme, which is under the remit of the State Claims Agency. It states that six cases were settled in 2013. The settlements for the people concerned, that is, the plaintiffs, in four of the cases where the judgments were in their favour came to €1,053,178. That was the information I was seeking. In addition there were legal and professional costs of €1,465,470. Whatever about the poor plaintiffs, the barristers got 150% of what the plaintiffs received. Whereas the plaintiffs received approximately €1 million, the barristers received approximately €1.5 million. There is something wrong in how the Irish taxpayer has himself in this situation. People go to court after catastrophic injuries. We should rename the agency the State barristers fund rather than the State Claims Agency. There is something outrageous in 60% of the total payment going to barristers.

I have raised the matter at successive meetings with the State Claims Agency in the past two years. In its accounts the agency has a commitment of approximately €1 billion for cases to be settled. Based on the figures we have received, well in excess of €500 million and possibly up to 60% of the total could be for legal fees to the barrister profession. We do a good deal of talking at this committee and in the House about public pay scale rates and so on but this is an issue that we must address.

Let us consider the chart. I specifically asked for this information because I could not get a handle on it. I asked for details - this is only in respect of the clinical injuries scheme - of the payments in 2013 to senior counsel and who received the highest payments. The Chairman has just agreed to publish the document and it is pursuant to the public session of the committee. I do not know any of these people personally but the payments to senior counsel are outrageous. Murray McGrath received €757,728 in 2013 only in respect of his work on the clinical indemnity scheme. I do know what else he received and he may have received nothing else. Emily Egan received €694,841. It is all on the chart. Patrick Hanratty received €468,413. Declan Buckley received €363,911 and Rónán Dolan received €227,333. These five people received well in excess of €2.5 million. I will not go on to the junior counsel fees, which are for lower amounts.

I am not getting into how the figures arose but it is simply wrong. The Taoiseach is paid a salary as are Ministers but that money is more than the entire Cabinet gets paid. I have not done the tot but I believe it is more than the entire Cabinet gets paid. There is something wrong with the legal fees that the Irish taxpayer is paying. The money should be going to the people who have suffered medical negligence. Whatever about the private sector being prepared to pay these fees, the Irish taxpayer should not be paying these fees. I want this issue revisited. I have asked for the information and it is now on the public record. The State Claims Agency put it to us at the last meeting that because barristers are sole traders the agency puts the work out to tender and it cannot take on in-house barristers. If it requires a change in legislation then so be it. If an organisation like the State Claims Agency is prevented by law from employing barristers then we need to change that law. I imagine some of these barristers would be happy to work for substantially less than these figures.

Pursuant to this I am asking for some follow-up because I am outraged that €2.5 million was spent on these five people under this scheme alone. We should write back to the State Claims Agency seeking the figures paid to the top ten senior counsel for each of the past five years. The agency will come back and put it to the committee that the figure of €757,728 represented work over several years and the case was then finalised. I imagine some of those people may well be working on cases today and that they will be paid next year when the cases are finalised. We got one little snapshot for one particular year but it has not given us a proper broad view of what has been paid out. Now that we have seen this information and it is in the public arena the committee should ask for the information for the past five years for the top ten barristers. This will let us see what is happening in the State Claims Agency because it is an agency for paying barristers, it is not an agency for settling claims for people who have had clinical difficulties.