Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is hard to be brief on a very long Bill. The first grouping encapsulates amendments Nos. 154 to 157, inclusive. Amendment No. 1 is fairly technical and I do not have a problem with it. There are 80 pages of amendments and the original Bill is 130 pages. To say the legislation before us is not close to being a new Bill is not exactly correct. Amendment No. 156 is to substitute a new section, amounting to nearly two pages of change.I have some concerns about it. First, it refers to the new legal services regulatory authority. In reading this new section contained in amendment No. 156, I am a little confused. As I understand it, it can deal with a complaint from the public without it going through the Law Society or, I presume, the Bar Council, but this refers in particular to the Law Society. It is a little difficult to fathom.

The Law Society also has a twin-track role in investigating a complaint against its member. I say that, and I am a little confused, because if we are talking about independence of the new regulatory authority, subsection (7)(a) of amendment No. 156 states:

Where the Society considers that the measure specified in section 61(6)(a)of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015is the appropriate measure to be taken as respects the finalisation of its investigation, it shall notify the solicitor concerned to that effect and specify the precise measure (including in the case of a restriction or condition to be placed on the practising certificate of the solicitor, the precise restriction or condition).

As I understand this, at all stages it seems that the Law Society has a twin-track role in the investigation of a complaint, either directly by a member of the public independent of the Law Society or by a group of people against a solicitor or a firm of solicitors. Subsection (7)(c) of the same amendment states:

Where the Society issues a notification pursuant to paragraph (b) and does not receive the written consent of the solicitor concerned within 21 days to the imposition of the specified measures [I presume it will be some sort of constraint on how they practice], it shall apply to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal for the holding of an inquiry under section 71 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 by it into the matter, in so far as the Society has not found that the concerns giving rise to its investigation of the matter are unfounded or that the act or omission concerned does not warrant the imposition of a sanction under this section.

If this new regulatory authority makes a decision, the Law Society, on my reading of it, must accept it. There can also be an application to the legal practitioners disciplinary tribunal for a further hearing.

In the case of some of the big guys who held us all to ransom as members of the Law Society and who went off with €50 million and €70 million and never came home, this gives significant scope where there is an initial investigation which can go on subsequently to the legal practitioners disciplinary tribunal. Therefore, there is investigation after investigation. If there is a judicial review of the matter in the High Court and Supreme Court, the investigation, particularly of a serious complaint, could extend to two or three years.

Debate on amendment No. 1, even though it is technical, also takes in amendments Nos. 154 to 157, inclusive. We have agreed to debate them together. Amendment No. 156 in particular is a lengthy new amendment that needs more explanation, as far as I am concerned. It certainly is not simple.

In changing this Bill for solicitors, I make the point, while not trying to go outside the remit of the section, that a small fisherman in the Beara Peninsula or a small farmer in Connemara should have the same right and access as a multi-millionaire. If this is as difficult as it seems, the person living in a remote part of Ireland will find it difficult to jump all the hurdles required under this new section. It certainly is not making it simple, which it should be.

Let us say a complaint is made and this new regulatory authority states the solicitor should not be allowed practice if it is a serious issue, should only practice under the supervision of somebody else or should be fined or reprimanded in some way. There seems to be another tranche of proceedings which that person could instigate, I presume through the Law Society, or the Law Society could say that the legal practitioners disciplinary tribunal would kick in, and that is another tier of investigation. It is certainly far from simple and it is certainly something the troika did not envisage.

I do not know whether this is something that has been recommended by the Law Society or agreed to, but it is a lengthy section. The Minister might clear the air on amendment No. 156, which is part of the first tranche of amendments. Maybe I am confused or I misunderstand it. Reading it through, it does not make the area of complaints and discipline simple. If anything, it makes it more convoluted.