Joe O'Toole (Independent)

In support of the points made by Senator Quinn, I take on board what people said earlier. The Irish are very litigious by nature and we tend to go right up the line if there is another option. If arbitration or court proceedings are options, we will go to the limit, but that is an option that runs out. I am well aware of the figures Senator Quinn just mentioned. Britain could teach us a lesson on non-judicial determination of matters. I am vice chairman of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board. When that was set up, we were in court every day of the week and people said that insurance claims for road accidents and work related accidents could never be determined without going to court, which would go on for years with a three-year delay before getting into courts and perhaps a seven-year delay overall before it was ever dealt with. After only three or four years, there is now more than 60% acceptance of the system without proceeding beyond it, and it is improving all the time.

In a different area, the same applied when the GAA set up the system of appealing against disciplinary decisions. Every day two years ago the newspapers reported cases going to the highest level of appeal and it was necessary to bring in lawyers to deal with appeals against decisions made by the disciplinary boards. While it is not the same, it is a determination process that is non-judicial by nature. Britain has also used this in cases of medical negligence. We have made a presentation to Government in recent years outlining how the State could save a considerable amount of money by having determination, conciliation or assessment of medical negligence issues without going through the courts, and it will eventually happen.

The clinching point in support of the issue brought forward by the Department of Finance and Senator Quinn is having a remedy - in this case the adjudication - that is done domestically and is seen to be done fairly. If that goes up the line through a process of arbitration, through the courts or whatever way it happens to go, it almost becomes a sine qua non that the person on the next level up must take into account what the adjudicator did. The more the process continues, the more that becomes the benchmark of norm for the decision maker of the higher body. While it takes time to bed in, if it goes to the courts and they see that a reasonable and fair domestic remedy was put in place, they will not be moved by further argument on the same issue.

A bedding-in process will need to take place. When this comes into play, the first thing that will happen is that the big guys will continue to challenge the decisions through the courts and string it out. While they will do that at the beginning, they will eventually conclude that it will lead to them incurring legal fees without getting them any further in the end. In the beginning matters will be somewhat stretched but this is fundamental. It is revolutionary as a way of doing business and will take a period to bed in but it will do so along the lines outlined by Senator Quinn. I support it on that basis.