Ivana Bacik (Independent)

Again, this relates to the levy to be paid for the establishment of the expenses of the ombudsman, or "ombudsperson". I am grateful to Senator O'Donovan; I also like to use that word to symbolise that it could be a man or woman. This levy is to be paid by the Bar Council and Law Society. The Bar Council has approached the Minister and I did not table an amendment to subsection (4) because I did not think it was appropriate as this might be reviewed in the future. It seemed reasonable to take 10% from each professional body. However, I am conscious from the figures, which the Minister put on the record on Second Stage, that there is an enormous gulf between the level of complaints against barristers and solicitors. In 2007-08 there were 24 complaints against barristers compared with 1,745 against solicitors. The complaints against barristers represent 0.01% of the overall total of complaints. In that context perhaps 10% is rather too much for the Bar Council. I did not feel it was appropriate to table an amendment on this because it will have to be reviewed and section 20 gives the Minister quite extensive power by regulation to examine how the levy is paid, although not to overrule subsection (4).

Leaving the remaining 80% to be paid pro rata seems to allow for equity but we return to the issue of the overall running costs of the legal services ombudsman. The 10% figure may not be particularly significant if the overall running costs are kept low. It is not inappropriate for each professional body to pay 10% but I acknowledge that the discrepancy in the numbers of complaints may mean the Bar Council may have some merit in its argument that it should pay less. The 80% rule——