David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I second the amendment. This is a necessary reform. It is common practice in the United States where there is no division between barristers and solicitors. I understand this formed a crucial part of the original Bill introduced by the former Minister, Deputy Alan Shatter. The Minister can correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure I am right. Certainly I have heard Deputy Alan Shatter say on the wireless that he approved of this reform. The rights of the profession, those of the Bar, are being placed ahead of those of citizens. The citizen comes first; as my colleague, Senator Feargal Quinn, used to say, the customer is king. In this instance, however, it seems the profession is king and it directs that one cannot consult a barrister directly. That is ridiculous; it is feudal stuff. It is acting like a monarch who one cannot approach except through a courtier. I see no reason one should have to go through a solicitor. I am interested in hearing if the Minister can give a reason one has to go through a solicitor to speak to a barrister. It seems idiotic and is time wasting, as well as money wasting. An obstacle is being placed between the client and his or her professional adviser. If there are matters which require the attention of a solicitor rather than a barrister, that is fine. I have had many cases before the courts and sometimes one requires a solicitor to gather information to research certain matters and so on, but that is by no means always the case. I see absolutely no reason one should have to use a solicitor to get through to a barrister. There should be direct and easy access. This Bill is about cleaning up the law to make it more consumer friendly, the client feel more at ease and less exposed to risk and expense. This is a very worthwhile amendment.