Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I join in welcoming the Minister of State and I welcome these amendments that will bring clarity to the intent of the Bill.

I fully subscribe to everything Senator O'Meara has said, as I think she has put the case very well. The tribunals are inquiring into issues that are matters of public concern and which needed to be inquired into and one looks forward to their ultimate determination. The cost issue, which this Bill addresses, being apportioned among those who may not have fully co-operated with the tribunal, has become a matter of serious public concern. I am not sure if I subscribe fully to the point made by Senator O'Meara, that the Houses of the Oireachtas set up these tribunals and should let them get on with it. I am not sure that what passes for good drama on the "Vincent Browne Show" is the best way of dealing with these issues. While Senator Terry was critical, I welcome the publication of the commissions of inquiry Bill, which will streamline and deal in a more efficient way with these issues.

Legal costs have become a major public concern, one which successive Governments have failed to tackle. Recently a barrister pointed out that the biggest culprit in establishing headline charges per day is the State. In some instances, the tribunals probably agreed under duress, but it is fair to say that the issue of cost should be addressed. In a discussion of some high profile cases on radio this morning, the point was made that access to the court can result a person's financial ruin. That should not be the case. In a republic, the courts should be accessible to the people at large to vindicate their rights and the costs should not be prohibitive so that this becomes the prerogative of the rich. I would like to think the Government might take up this challenge in order to address the unsustainable level of fees charged in the Law Library. I have referred to this matter before. The Law Library and the judicial system generally are open to serious challenge regarding competition. Competition should be ensured within all strata of the economy, yet within the legal sector, the essence and purpose of competition law does not seem to be operating at all. Costs are apportioned but they should be reasonable. If the pursuance of a case in the Circuit Court, the High Court or the Supreme Court leads to inordinate delays, judicial discretion can be exercised for some such costs, even if one indicates they are not to be allowed. In this instance, however, I am not sure what discretion will be applied. Some of the tribunals may well have extended into areas which may have added nothing to determining the issues before them. There is a real issue to be examined in that regard, although it may not be politically correct for us to urge that it should be examined. The operation of the tribunals should be effective and efficient, so there is an onus on us to inject that efficiency if it is lacking.

Some controversial comments have been made about one of the tribunals to the effect that people will have to wait ten or 15 years for a final determination of the issues. That defies all logic and common sense. The Houses of the Oireachtas, rather than the Government, should examine these issues to see where the broad remit of some tribunals could be refocused so the original intention of the Oireachtas to get to the truth in certain instances is pursued much more effectively. In that way, we would not end up in ten or 15 years' time with tribunals still running and their costs escalating. I may have moved away from the Bill in making these comments but the distribution and allocation of costs relate to the overall operation and efficiency of the tribunals.