James Reilly (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Lest there be any accusations of a conflict of interest, I wish to state at the outset that, as a practising GP, I see many people who are injured in road traffic and other accidents. I remind the House that pain is subjective and very difficult to assess objectively, although we can assess loss of function. It is a complex area.

I am very pleased Senator Ó Céidigh was here to speak to the perjury issue. While I welcome the Bill, I wish first to raise some of the issues raised by Senator Davitt. Many of the issues he mentioned are outside the scope of the present Bill and belong in other Departments, particularly insurance fraud, which is not just a case of what happens in court but sometimes how the accident happened in the first place. We have all seen the videos, the two-car accidents with eight participants and all the rest of it. In those situations, from a medical practitioner's perspective, all I can do is record the injuries and complaints. All else is beyond my remit. The anti-fraud unit is not something the Minister can address in her area but it is a Government issue. It is a suggestion that I strongly support, by the way. An anti-fraud unit in the Garda would make a hell of a difference. I am mindful of the many discussions we had on this issue in the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Business, Enterprise and Innovation when we had the Insurance Alliance in. It pointed out that hardly anybody has been convicted of perjury in this area for years. Clearly, we need to strengthen the law, so I welcome Senator Ó Céidigh's Bill.

Judges are like everybody else. They are not infallible. One of the requests made was that, where a judge did feel it was appropriate to exceed the book of quantum, he or she would give a written explanation. There are many areas this Bill cannot address, but insofar as it can address those issues which are within the Minister's remit, I very much welcome it. It is notable that 40% of compensation costs lie in the cost of the delivery of the case. That has to be serious food for thought for all of us. Going through the PIAB is certainly the way forward. The book of quantum is an important area and I am glad the Minister has emphasised that it is not just to be reviewed every year but can be reviewed sooner if the board decides it is necessary. Many would feel it is very necessary when we are paying out four to five times more for a whiplash injury here than in the United Kingdom. I especially welcome that.

I also welcome the issue of the boards. There should be competency-based individuals on the boards. We have heard a lot of talk of boards recently. One of the first things we did during my time in the Department of Health was to start putting people on boards who had expertise in law, HR and accountancy. That is very appropriate and welcome here. Members not serving more than ten years ensures that the board is kept refreshed and reflects the changing times we live through.

On the issue around moneys in excess of those authorised to be retained by the Minister, it is just common sense in my view. The only other area I wished to speak to was non-compliance. In her opening remarks, the Minister stated:

To deter non-compliance with the PIAB process, section 8, by the insertion of section 51C into the 2003 Act, introduces a deterrent in any subsequent legal proceedings in terms of legal costs whereby the court may, in its discretion, taking into account any failure to comply, make an order on what costs, if any, it will allow the claimant.

That is very important. We have to try to make it easy for those who are injured and have suffered loss and pain to be compensated in an expedient fashion, notwithstanding that cases sometimes take a while to settle in terms of uncertainty of the prognosis in more serious injuries.The longer somebody is out of work and the longer a case goes on, the more likely a person is to develop psychological problems. There has been much work on this, regarding how a person can begin to feel the pain is worse, then after a settlement he or she may suffer guilt because he or she feels the pain was not so bad. It is a complex area. If a matter that can be settled more quickly through PIAB, it is, in most cases, the preferable way to go. I accept what my colleague, Senator Davitt, has said about the areas not covered but I do not believe it is appropriate to this Bill. I hope that the Government will address those issues. It is clear that people go into court who make false claims and there is absolutely no consequence or fear of consequences for them. They can come again with a scéal eile mar a deireann siad. I welcome the Bill and look forward to its speedy passage.