Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I will be exercising the right to agree or disagree. I listened to the debate yesterday on similar amendments and I fully support the Government position. This Bill is not about solicitors having a right to earn a living. It is about bringing down insurance costs and the costs to the citizen and the consumer. The assumption behind this amendment is that the citizen or the consumer is always at a loss unless totally encumbered with legal help. The very opposite is often the case. I have great respect for the legal profession but we are not in this House simply to act blatantly for a particular vested interest. I have been inundated with letters from solicitors about these points and I have considered the matters carefully. The reason I attended this debate yesterday was to listen to the responses to the points made. I am satisfied with what has been said. One is dealing with the nature of medical injuries. What one needs is a doctor's report and the book of quantum. Obviously, in deciding whether to accept it, one may want to take legal advice and assess one's chances, but with due respect to the solicitors in the House, we have far too many cases in which the solicitors involved sometimes take quite shocking amounts in costs, sometimes as much as 40%, 60%, 80% or even 100% of the money awarded.

This legislation gives the citizen or consumer a rare enough chance to pursue a claim and secure the money due without having to pay large amounts of money to lawyers. We should resist attempts to insinuate the legal profession back into something which has been closeted, so to speak, as something which does not involve legal issues.

I urge the Government to stick to its position, which I support. Half the radicalism of the reform will be lost if we allow lawyers to take over the process again.