Mr. Keith Walsh:

There may not be. The Law Society held a number of conferences and seminars on this about five or six years ago and four years ago at which we discussed the advisability of limiting judges to family law. There was a concern among practitioners that if judges were to remain in family law for the entirety of their careers and were not switched around, it generally would not be a good thing, It is advisable to get a mix of practice such that one comes into family law and stays there for a number of years and then may do it. We want a general judge. There are a number of judges who were appointed as specialist judges in the Circuit Court for insolvency arrangements and cases having regard to the capacity Act, which only recently came in. Some of those judges are not sitting at all because they are specialist judges in the Circuit Court and there are no cases for them and because if one is appointed as a specialist judge, one cannot do other, more general work. Those judges could be released immediately if they could be changed from specialists. We are therefore not generally in favour of the appointment of specialist judges. We are in favour of judges being properly trained and getting specialist experience. We want a wide breadth of talent. There are particular skills one picks up in other areas, particularly in criminal law, such that one is familiar with a variety of disciplines before one sits on the bench and when one is on the bench. That is the Law Society's viewpoint. We think one should be appointed as a general judge but one is assigned to this division. Again, that can be done administratively and legislatively.