Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will press the amendment. It states that "without prejudice to the functions of the authority referred to, the authority shall, following appropriate public consultation, prepare and furnish reports to the Minister". That is what we are asking for. Will it, please, prepare a report on an idea that has been around for ages, a right of direct access to a barrister, other than through a solicitor, which has been cogently argued for by my colleague, Senator David Norris? If the Minister rejects the amendment, we will not even receive a report on it. We will have made up our minds and it will become extant. Discussing an item that is absolutely crucial to the reforms and availing of barristers who can only be approached through a solicitor and are sitting in the Law Library would be fantastic to have that knowledge put at the disposal of wider society. I have experience of this, regardless of whether I had complied with the law or whether the matters were contentious. I like talking to barristers and would like wider society to have that privilege. We should at least have the authority study the matter. That is the reason we have tabled the amendment at this point. It is not obvious to very many people why one cannot talk to a barrister without having a solicitor present. If the amendment is rejected, we will not have the issue reported on.If it were accepted, I presume what is now paragraph (d) would become paragraph (e). Why can the authority not give its views? It may be extremely hostile to the idea. I have tried unsuccessfully to find out the basis on which this practice developed. Let us at least examine the issue, as per the amendment. If such a study were to take place, I would be strongly in favour of the proposal before the House.