Carol Nolan (Laois-Offaly, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The principle behind this Bill is sound in that it brings about additional motivation to ensure people have timely access to our courts and, where this does not happen, to provide for compensation through the office of a newly appointed chief court delays assessor and court delays assessors. However, we have similar legislation in other areas of Irish law and it has not worked out so well in practice. An Bord Pleanála has a statutory duty under section 126 of the Planning and Development Act to ensure every appeal is determined within 18 weeks, beginning on the date of receipt of an appeal. Look how that has worked out. It has caused much frustration among people in rural Ireland, including couples trying to build near a family farm and others who want to remain in their community. An obligation to perform an assessment of need is provided for under the Disability Act 2005, yet thousands of children have been mired in the assessment process for well in excess of three months. Where is their compensation?

There is another very important dimension to this, touched upon recently by the Minister of State, Deputy James Browne. He spoke about how a stable, well-functioning court system that can give decisions within a reliable timeframe is an important part of Ireland's attractiveness to foreign businesses and feeds directly into Ireland's prosperity. I agree but I have been making this very point for some time with respect to projects like that of Banagher Chilling in Banagher, County Offaly. The extraordinary and unacceptable delays in this case were such that, as I said at the time, it was like someone shining a spotlight into the midlands night sky and saying, "Beware of investing here."

We saw the active threat that delays in judicial reviews can have on developments, including the Glanbia plant in Kilkenny, which was being obstructed by An Taisce.

Thankfully, the Supreme Court dismissed in February of last year An Taisce's appeal against the granting of permission.

For most people, however, it is not delays that are not the main problem in accessing the courts, but the significant costs involved with such access. I accept that delays add to the costs, but even getting your foot in the door can cost an arm and a leg and bring a normal person seeking the vindication of his or her rights to the brink of bankruptcy. Indeed, as The Irish Timesnoted recently, the experience of Irish court users is "poor", "costly" and "lengthy" and court information technology and data systems are "not fit for purpose". This is according to an independent report commissioned by the Department of Justice. That report suggested that the State may need up to 108 additional judges over the next five years. It was also noted that there were stark variations in waiting times for domestic violence applications in the District Court, ranging from a same day hearing in Dublin and speedy hearings in 14 other districts, including Athlone, Castlebar and Clonakilty, to a 26-week wait for a hearing in Nenagh, County Tipperary. The Government says that it is considering the appointment of several additional judges to speed up the process. However, I will make the point - one made by Mr. Seth Barrett Tillman of Maynooth University many times - that these appointments will not improve matters if the rules and traditions that guide the conduct of litigation carry on using the same or a similar procedural framework. In fact, it will just mean that whatever new courts we set up will continue to be weighed down by the exact same backlog in the exact same way as exists now.

See this speech in context