Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I wish to go through these amendments. Basically, these are the Parts of the Bill that deal with the range of areas concerning the efforts the authority will make to facilitate resolution of complaints. For example, amendment No. 61 permits the authority to seek resolution of complaints relating to inadequate service. Amendment No. 62 allows the authority to consider excessive costs. The purpose of amendment No. 63 is to set up a mechanism within the regulatory authority to enable a review committee to consider reviews requested by a party to a determination of the authority under sections 51 or 52 and it lays down the membership of that review. Amendment No. 64 allows the authority the power to offer assistance where it is considered that the conduct of the legal practitioners could constitute misconduct. In this regard, I note that I may table a further amendment on Report Stage with regard to the definition of misconduct that will apply and perhaps in respect of some related matters. For the information of Members, I also intend to table some further amendments on Report Stage to deal with the legal issues regarding the precise transition arrangements, new regimes and cut-off dates as to when the new definitions of misconduct, etc., will apply. I will deal with this on Report Stage. Amendment No. 66 is about the admissibility of various statements and amendment No. 67 inserts a new section 57, which specifies that the authority shall prepare and publish guidelines on the manner in which the resolution of complaints by informal means may be conducted.

I stated at the outset of this debate that when it comes to considering complaints, there will be a form of triage system. In the first instance, one must establish whether the complaint is admissible and I have said quite a bit about that. Second, there will be a triage system and then there will be the assessment of the complaint. This may or may not go to the disciplinary tribunal and this section is to describe how the resolution of complaints by informal means will be conducted. Senator Barrett will appreciate why I cannot accept his proposed amendment No. 93. As it is set out, it would defeat access to the informal resolution of excessive fee complaints it is intended to make available to the public under the current text of the Bill. The purpose of the informal complaints track is to provide an alternative to the taxation of costs, as this can be a costly or cumbersome option for members of the public to pursue. This informal option does not prevent a legal practitioner from being subject to a complaint of misconduct about grossly excessive fees. I hope that clarifies matters.