Seanad debates

Wednesday, 13 May 2015

Legal Services Regulation Bill 2011: Second Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Martin ConwayMartin Conway (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I, too, welcome the Minister to the House to put through what is an extremely important, and in many ways historic, piece of legislation.

I agree with practically all of what Senator O'Donovan has said. I certainly would echo his concerns about rural areas. I defer to his 35 years of on-the-ground practising experience, which is worth a lot. The Senator's input into this Bill here in the Seanad will be important. I would agree with his request that appropriate time be given between Committee and Report Stages, and I will be conveying that view to the Leader, because it is the first time that a Government has tackled and tried to reform the legal professions.

As has been pointed out, the first step was the publication of the Bill in 2011, when there was war. We can all remember the lobbying that went on and the phone calls, the meetings, the briefings, etc. That was because some resisted change. Human nature being what it is, change is something that makes one uncomfortable and uneasy. When it involves an organisation that, by and large, has served the country well, as the vast majority of solicitors and barristers have served their profession and the country well, there is a natural resistance to change that percolates from institutions which have not really changed.

There have been bad eggs, bad apples or bad oranges - whatever one wants to call them - on both sides. There have been individuals who have made vast amounts of money from an unregulated sector, particularly barristers. It is quite correct to state that there seems to be a gulf between what those at the top in the profession are making and what those on the ground are making. Certainly, I am aware of solicitors - I am sure Senator O'Donovan and others know them as well - who will write a letter and are not even in a position to charge for it because they know the client has not got it. There are few senior counsel who will write a letter or give a legal opinion without getting paid. There are hundreds of barristers at the bottom who are trying to establish themselves who are on less than the minimum wage, and I suppose that is where the unfairness comes in. That can be mirrored in many other professions where those at the bottom rung of the ladder starting out are struggling. Certainly, for the past number of years, with the downturn in the economy, this has been the case with young barristers, with many of them having to seek alternative employment. Indeed, many young solicitors who qualified during the years of the Celtic tiger, and who were earning reasonably good money during those years, found themselves unemployed and having to retrain and find alternative work. One would hope that some of those will be able to go back into a profession that will get its confidence back, and that, when we see an upturn in the economic fortunes of the country, there will be business for those many qualified solicitors who have had to either emigrate or retrain for different lines of work.

No sector or profession can be self-regulating, and any fair-minded person would have to accept that. What is being proposed here as a regulatory authority is reasonable. Of course, there are concerns about the independence of it. It is extremely important, and goes to the bedrock of the Constitution, that the legal profession and politics should be separate. The Minister has gone a long way to ensure that the regulatory authority will be independent, both in the structure proposed in the Bill and in the make-up, including the chairperson, those who will be nominated from the legal professions and the others who will be nominated.In terms of gender balance, every box has been ticked to ensure it is fair, transparent, open, balanced and, most importantly, workable. Members of this House in the legal profession have raised the issue of the Taxing Master and the fact that they and solicitors have waited years for a judgment on fees. People who are struggling in their own professions and businesses have had cases with the Taxing Master for years, which is totally unacceptable. The new proposal that the Minister has outlined is very welcome as part of the regulatory authority.

I would also suggest that once a claim is lodged with the cost adjudicator, there should be a period of so many weeks, months, or whatever is appropriate, within which a decision should be made, unless there is a very good reason not to. Nobody should be left waiting years to get paid. We introduced legislation over the years to ensure that the State would pay companies within a specific period for services rendered. The principle and perhaps the timeline in that legislation should prevail with this cost adjudicator when there is a dispute about fees.

The complaints structure that has been outlined is certainly reflective of what people would want. No fair-minded person could expect a member of the public to contact the profession to make a complaint about one of its members. I have no doubt it worked very well in many cases, but we are now living in an era in which openness, transparency and independence are valued principles. It is appropriate that this process be independent and that a member of the public be able to make a complaint through the authority as opposed to through the professions. I know this caused a lot of debate back in 2011 and 2012 when the legislation was first published. What is proposed is appropriate and fair. I hope that over the years we will see a reduction in the number of complaints that should occur when a profession is properly regulated and there are codes of practice and conduct - for example, in the areas of costing and charges. This legislation is trying to deal with the issue of costs for the first time and is making a fair and reasonable proposition in terms of dealing with costs. It is imperative that there be a robust and effective means of complaint which is fair to both sides.

I take on board Senator O'Donovan's points about the free legal aid scenario. I was not aware that travel expenses had been cut to that level; €0.24 per mile does seem very low. Knowing west Cork as I do, or even some parts of County Clare, that would not even fill the tank, let alone pay for parking and all that goes with it. I would like to think these are also issues the regulatory authority can consider in a dispassionate and fair way.

As I said at the beginning of my remarks, this legislation is groundbreaking and is going to bring the profession into the 21st century and beyond. It is going to reflect modern best international practice and is taking the best from all spheres to produce something that everybody can stand over and be proud of. There is no reason our system cannot be the best in Europe and the best in the world. I am looking forward to a robust debate. There are many people in this House with a lot of legal experience who have a significant amount to offer. I sincerely hope the House will play a meaningful part in ensuring that the final product is the best that this Oireachtas can produce.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.