Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister and his officials. This is an important, substantial and, perhaps slightly unusually, cost-reducing Bill. I will dwell for a moment on its economic importance. It is obviously about reducing the cost of insurance claims and — something on which the Minister may not have placed undue emphasis — associated legal costs and, by extension, the costs on business. There is no doubt that during the last few years it has become a major issue at general elections. The cost of insurance has been a significant issue regarding the conduct of business in this country. I pay tribute to several members of the Government, including the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, and the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, who have been working together in a co-ordinated strategy to reduce such costs. That is vital for our competitiveness.

The overall net effect of this legislation is that, for someone contemplating a gamble on a court case on fairly flimsy evidence where, at the very least, the truth is being substantially stretched, the different dispositions of this legislation will provide a considerable deterrent. For example, the third party medical examination through previous records and cases being made must be produced. The Bill will also spare expense on witnesses, insisting that affidavits be sworn, and it is also very welcome that the measure will affect all cases pending. I would not be surprised if we see one or two cases withdrawn when this legislation takes effect.

If I have any reservation, it relates to the time. I can envisage cases of the sort that have come up with one or two other Bills. Let us imagine that there is an accident in a school whereby a great deal of dust, including asbestos, is released. The person who is injured, perhaps only slightly to begin with, does not press a claim. Then, two, three or four years later, the person finds that what was judged to be only a small injury at the time is much more serious. I feel that an exception ought to be made in certain very serious medical cases, or that at least some provision should be made for that. It is undoubtedly the case that well over 90% of injuries are apparent and should of course be claimed for immediately, and it is wide open to abuse to have a longer period, which makes them less easy to verify. However, there are exceptional instances where the extent of an injury will not become clear in the short term.

I welcome the dispositions relating to witnesses and the fact that the substance of cases may be reported without the names. It is also a very good reform that, in the case of the Supreme Court, which would involve a keynote case which will affect a great many costs, other relevant witnesses may be called so that the full range of issues can be considered.

I admire the work that the Irish Courts Service has been doing over several years on the refurbishment of courts. Money from dormant accounts will be used for that purpose. Courts fall into two categories. There are modern or reasonably modern courthouses which must be kept up to date and provide modern, decent comfortable and, indeed, warm facilities. I do not know how many district judges in the past have complained about freezing conditions. I draw the Minister's attention to the historic court buildings, of which there are several around the country. There is the Green Street Courthouse and that in Tralee. A magnificent job was done restoring Clonmel Courthouse, where the State trials took place in 1849. It is perhaps not directly part of this legislation, but I would like to plant the thought in the Minister's mind that provision might be made on a non-sitting day such as a Saturday to open those historic courthouses, which are major buildings in some towns, to the public, with a guided tour, perhaps with guides provided by the OPW. Several courthouses in the country are of very strong cultural interest.