Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)

I was not paid well for it but the firm had to charge the client a certain amount of money, which may revert to the Exchequer if the tribunal decides to award costs. I do not know in that case because I had left the firm by then. If a good senior counsel charges a lot, that is one thing but anyone would do basic meagre work that anyone with a few brain cells could do. There would be thousands of applications for that job if it was advertised because it is money for jam. If researchers are needed, there should be a public advertisement for people who have some qualification that allows them to study documents for legal privilege. One does not need a first class degree in law or significant legal qualifications to do that job. This has disturbed me in terms of how these things have operated over the years.

What sort of person do we need to read and photocopy documents for legal privilege? It is not necessarily a lawyer. Junior and senior counsel can advise if there are any problems and I assume they play a role in any case. They could work with clerks or administrative staff, who could be paid a good wage. I am not suggesting people should work for nothing unless they are college students who seek experience. I suggested this to the Law Reform Commission when it came before the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. I suggested starting a system of internship where the commission would look for the best and the brightest from our law schools to use the resources they have for free doing summer work. Although it has some informal arrangement, I was surprised the Law Reform Commission did not have such a system set up. The tribunals could do this too, especially for the voluminous discovery work.

The main features of the Bill provide for the process of establishing, suspending and dissolving a tribunal, which sometimes must be done. It is not always the case that we are trying to shut down a tribunal. Sometimes one does not want it to continue because of the concern at the direction it is taking. Many of us were concerned at the direction of the Mahon tribunal. We let it go on but some expressed the view that it should be stopped. That did not happen and we await the report.

There is clarification with regard to granting legal representation, which always causes problems. Anyone called as a witness, some of whom would never have dreamt they would have any role in a discussion on planning in Dublin, must appear and be questioned. They are worried and need legal counsel and assistance. It is important that this is clarified at the start and that they know the financial position. In the US, people associated with the Clintons in the 1990s were almost bankrupt due to the legal costs of various investigations. I would not like to see that happening here. The Bill will hopefully make changes.

Much depends on the judge in charge of tribunals. I am not sure if there is a requirement that the chairman of a tribunal be a judge. It should not have to be a High Court or Circuit Court judge who runs a tribunal. There are plenty of people who may not be legally qualified but who could be advised by senior counsel and junior counsel for the tribunal on how to operate. Maybe we should look for people with an arbitration or mediation background who could see how these matters can be resolved without the inquisitorial manner used up to now.

I welcome this Bill. Let us get it passed and let us hope that it is a long time before we establish any more tribunals.

See this speech in context