Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Nally report on the reorganisation of the Chief State Solicitor's office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43889/06]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on progress in the reorganisation of the Chief State Solicitor's office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3729/07]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 9: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Nally report. [4433/07]

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 10: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Nally report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6326/07]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 10, inclusive, together.

As I indicated in reply to previous questions on the matter, the recommendations of the Nally report in regard to the reorganisation of the Chief State Solicitor's office have been largely implemented. The recommendation that responsibility for local State solicitors should be transferred from the Attorney General to the DPP, with legislative provision to enable the DPP to delegate to them, is almost implemented and should be fully implemented in the nearfuture.

The offices of the Chief State Solicitor and Director of Public Prosecutions have been in negotiations with the State Solicitors' Association for some considerable time. Following these lengthy negotiations, a revised offer was made to the association on 6 September 2006. The association indicated it will accept the offer subject to agreement on new contracts with the Director of Public Prosecutions. The details of the new contracts are in the final stages of agreement.

Officials in the Chief State Solicitor's office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions are confident final agreement will be reached in the near future allowing for the service to transfer. The enabling legislation and appropriate legislative provisions on the transfer of the local State solicitor service are contained in the Civil Service Regulation (Amendment) Act 2005, which was signed by the President on 9 July 2005.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There has been much talk about what the DPP might be able to do and what generally happens. Traditionally, as the Taoiseach is aware, the DPP was seen as being in a position to assist the courts to arrive at a decision. In our adversarial court system a situation may arise where the defendant's barrister can go into a long tirade about mitigation for a defendant while the DPP, because of a convention, sits there and says nothing. Just as the barrister for the defendant can make a case for mitigation, so too should the DPP's office be able to make a case for prosecution. He often does that by giving his views on the leniency of sentences. Does the Taoiseach accept the current system does not allow for the people, through the DPP, to have their say prior to a sentence being handed down? Would it be reasonable to set aside the current convention? In an adversarial situation, prior to a judge handing down a sentence, and where the defendant's barrister makes a case saying why the person should be given a lenient sentence, the DPP should speak on behalf of the people even if referring to tariffs set down by the Oireachtas.

The problem is that this does not happen because of a traditional convention. Does the Taoiseach have a view on this? Does he think the antiquated system should go by the board and that the DPP should be able to speak up on behalf of the people to say that a certain crime should carry a certain sentence? It would send a clear message to criminals who think they can get a soft touch and that the law is tilted in their direction.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will not give judgments on these issues. The questions relate to the Nally report's recommendations on the updating of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor's in 1999 to improve relationships between the office and the DPP and on the powers that should be transferred from the Attorney General to the DPP, with legislative provision to allow the DPP to delegate to the Chief State Solicitor. Other aspects in the report are almost fully implemented.

The DPP has contributed to some of these debates. He is independent under the 1974 Act so I do not want to give my view or that of the Government on how he handles cases. He has a level of independence that allows him to decide how he deals with these issues. He has stated in some speeches at conferences that there are areas we should examine or that his office should examine.

Since the Nally report was published in 1999, negotiations with staff to implement the recommendations and the putting in place of adequate staff structures took a few years. Staff structures for the criminal division of the Chief State Solicitor's Office were transferred to the DPP's office to form a unit headed by a solicitor. That unit has professional staff who work for the DPP under the meaning of the 1974 Act. Removing those powers from the Office of the Chief State Solicitor and giving them to a solicitor in the DPP's office was a significant change. If I was to say how he should do his job, however, I would be interfering.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What is the relationship between county solicitors and the Office of the Chief State Solicitor? Are they subcontractors? Do they get a set amount of money or are the staff of such solicitors paid equally? Is the deal done with the county solicitor who then employs the number of staff he or she thinks appropriate at different levels?

The DPP stated it would be desirable for a legal policy unit to be established in his office. Is that proceeding or have discussions taken that into account in the new arrangements?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In recent times 75 additional staff were taken on but the more recent proposal is to have a separate research unit with staff who would not be involved in the ordinary day-to-day cases. In the context of this year's Estimates, they sought resources. I do not know at what stage the negotiations are at present. It seems a very valid point that staff involved in day-to-day cases should not be the research people. Additional staff is required for that.

There was a report on the workloads and the expense base of the office of the Chief State Solicitor by reviewers engaged by the Chief State Solicitor's office before the offer was made last year. The offer dealt with many of the issues raised in the course of negotiations with the State Solicitors' Association. It is designed to have a benchmark of expenses. What happens in the Chief State Solicitor's office is that they are contracted. They have separate offices and separate staff, so their workloads are different. They are endeavouring to have a contract that would be compatible for them all. They do the vast amount of the work on a nationwide basis, so they represent a vitally important cog in the whole system. The negotiations are concluded and they are drawing up the contracts that will allow them to work to the Chief State Solicitor's office. There are a large number of people on a nationwide basis involved in these offices. At last, after a long industrial relations process, they seem to have resolved the issue and the contracts are being drawn up. They would be contracted to the Chief State Solicitor's office with terms affixed. There will not be the same money for everyone because the workloads are different in the cases of different counties.