Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)

There is very little in the Bill. It is about increasing numbers in an area where clearly there is a need for increased personnel.

The Minister's speech was wide-ranging. I suppose he felt the Bill was short and he had to go into all sorts of other areas. He told us halfway through his speech that he would not go into the entire package on criminal activities, between drugs and guns, which he would introduce, but he did not need to because the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, gave us that last week when speaking about a European directive, although it had nothing to do with it. We need to take that into consideration when Opposition Members are asked to stick strictly to the script. I just wish that sometimes the Chair — not the Acting Chairman, Deputy Woods, lest he think that I refer to him — would ask the Government to do the same.

One or two points need to be made. The arrest of a journalist today is a worrying and disturbing action on behalf of the State. Whoever's word or complaint the gardaí arrived on behalf of, it is very worrying for a journalist to be arrested. The arrest of a journalist following a report as a result of leaks, which clearly could have come only from the Attorney General's office, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the Garda, is a matter which needs a full explanation. That is very worrying.

All I can think about is that the only person jailed in respect of the beef tribunal was the journalist who did the State some service. This shows where our priorities lie. The matter requires a full and frank discussion and explanation and the journalist in question needs to be released.

Family law did not become a major issue until women acquired financial independence. It was very limited initially and is still limited. Financial independence came in the form of a package which included deserted wife's benefit. Frank Cluskey introduced the measure. Regardless of whether financial independence was regarded as good or bad, it gave women the courage and ability to live separately from their husbands.

Since the beginning of financial independence for women, report after report has stated family law needs to be separated from the rest of the legal service in terms of practice and the physical environment. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe spoke about judges with experience in one area having to work in others. It is astonishing that a judge may have to decide on cases involving criminal activity in the morning and on delicate and sensitive cases concerning child custody, residency and access rights, as well as maintenance payments in the afternoon. One does not need full knowledge of the entire legal system to work in the family law service. Rather, one must be sufficiently sensitive and have sufficient advocacy skills to be a good judge in this area. We should start to ensure this is the case.

I occasionally attend court cases to support those involved. While I find that judges do a very good job in general, we should put in place a fitness to practice committee for the Judiciary, just as we have done for the medical profession. It would not be called on very often. A very recent high profile case concerning a particular judge could probably have been dealt with far more effectively in such a committee, given the many delays that occurred during the hearings. Fitness to practice measures would be of great benefit to the legal system and we should consider them very seriously.

The main problem with the legal system does not concern judges' lists because judges deal with a spectacular amount of work, far more than most of us give them credit for. The logjam actually arises in the preparation of the book of evidence for serious cases. How many times have we heard that a book of evidence was not ready? Clearly, we need extra judges but we should realise the logjams occur when cases are not ready to go to trial. We should consider this issue seriously.

I am greatly concerned about access to the legal system. It is no accident that the majority of those on limited means have their cases heard in the lower courts, while the majority of those with excessive means have theirs heard in the higher courts. There is an old saying that one will get as much law as one can pay for. Some can pay a lot. We must come to terms with the question of access for those who feel aggrieved and those who believe they have been dealt with unjustly by the system. No one wants to go to court and it is the last place anyone wants to be, but when one has no recourse other than through the courts, access should be made as easy as possible.

The Minister rightly began his contribution with a gushing apology. It is disgraceful for any Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to criticise judges, although we may all feel like doing so. The separation of powers is sacrosanct and is as much to protect us, as legislators, as it is to protect members of the Judiciary.

The first quality a judge should have, apart from the ability to do his or her job, is compassion. Court cases have always focused on how the defendant behaved and how the evidence was presented. We should not be rushing to impose a ten year sentence for one crime and ten for another. This attitude gave us the Birmingham Six and Dean Lyons cases. Absolutism in the administration of the law can lead to very bad decisions and this needs to be taken on board. Most judges, with a few rare exceptions, do an exceptional job, as do solicitors who offer to defend people whom no other will defend. Sean O'Leary said there was no longer a defence for those we did not find acceptable in society. We should take this to heart.

The system, for all its flaws, is as good as we have got and in that regard, I keep reminding people that when we make laws, we do not do so only for the guy who will go out tonight to do heroin deals but also for ourselves. The law will apply to us and we need to keep this in mind. We are not opposing the Bill. More judges may be required but the bottleneck is at the point of preparation of cases.

There are other matters we should examine, including the separation of family law from other aspects of law. It does not need to involve the high-tech, expensive administration of law one sees in the higher courts. If, however, people want to go to the High Court and have enough money to do so, God bless them. The family law system should comprise a separate element of the legal system.

We should consider seriously the establishment of a fitness to practice committee. It would not have to sit permanently and could just be a roll-over committee before which individuals could be called. It is essential that it be established. We all know why this is the case and do not have to outline the details.

The Minister is correct that we have absolutely magnificent courthouses in which the law is applied. However, some do not afford physical access to many individuals with disabilities. Sometimes physical access is as important as material access and this should be considered.

See this speech in context