In the years to come this Bill will be seen as landmark legislation in much the same way as the Wills Act, 1837. Society is changing. Above all, average life expectancy is increasing. There will be, therefore, an ever increasing higher incidence of the elderly who fear that their mental powers may be failing and wish to make sensible provision for such an eventuality. In addition, people injured in accidents may suffer brain damage as a consequence.
People should consider drawing up enduring powers of attorney in the same way they draw up a will. Neither operation is painful or expensive, but in both instances is of enormous benefit to families. The need for this legislation arises from the fact that the power of attorney is automatically revoked when the donor becomes mentally incapable. This is a ludicrous provision because it is when a person becomes mentally incapable that this power is necessary.
There is an increasing incidence of Alzheimer's disease which, I gather, affects approximately 25,000 people in the country. As a consequence, many elderly people are anxiously awaiting the enactment of this Bill so that they can proceed to execute an enduring power of attorney.
In processing this legislation the objective must be to ensure simplicity and keep associated costs as low as possible. While the principal objective of the legislation must be simplicity, safeguards are necessary to ensure that the elderly are not manipulated and that the person exercising powers of attorney does not abuse the positions. In general, the Bill strikes a fine balance between those objectives and I welcome its broad approach. Its provisions can be fine tuned on Committee Stage.
While it may not be very expensive to employ a solicitor to draw up an enduring power of attorney, that will not be the only cost involved. I am concerned about the overall cost structure. The Bill provides that an application for registration must be made to the High Court which could be prohibitively expensive. Will an application to court be necessary in all cases? The Bill provides that notice should be given to various parties prior to registration. While that is the correct approach, would an application to the registrar of wards of court after the issue of notices be sufficient? From the point of view of cost, this option should be explored. If the registrar of wards of court was dissatisfied or if an objection was raised, the matter could then be referred to court.
Why is it necessary to deal with the matter in the High Court? This would involve more expense than if it was dealt with in the Circuit Court? Will the Minister examine the possibility of giving jurisdiction in this regard to the Circuit Court?
Where possible people should register powers of attorney while in full health. If they make arrangements to have their affairs managed by another person if they become incapacitated, the person making the arrangements should be entitled to take whatever steps are necessary. Why must the donee apply for registration? The possibility of a dual system should be considered. This would allow the person giving the power to apply for registration or, if there were evidence of mental incapacity, the attorney could make such application.
The Bill provides that the Minister can make regulations covering many of the major characteristics attached to the power of attorney. It should be possible to tease out the regulations on Committee Stage because they are as relevant as the Bill. A number of the Law Reform Commission's recommendations will be included in the regulations rather than in the Bill and the manner in which they will be implemented should be discussed on Committee Stage. If the Bill passes through Committee Stage and regulations are subsequently published and circulated, they will probably never be discussed, which would be unwise. I am sure all Members want to put in place legislation that will not give rise to unnecessary litigation or dissatisfaction and the best way to ensure that is to hold a comprehensive Committee Stage debate that includes discussion on the regulations.
The State should encourage people to exercise power of attorney if they believe it is necessary. It is understandable that people in the initial stages of mental incapacity would be reluctant to have their affairs aired in public. This is an important aspect of the Bill because such matters could be publicised in a number of ways. Applications to court should be held in private and not reported. In its latest submission on this legislation the Law Society stated: "It is especially important to prevent the publication of details of the donor's mental health or his or her wealth". It would be regrettable if people were reluctant to use the sensible powers available under this Bill because of the danger of publication of details of their personal affairs. I am sure most people would not want details of their mental state or wealth published. While the Ethics in Public Office Bill places an obligation on those in the public arena to publish details of their interests, others should not be forced into that position.
Under section 11, the Bill provides that on registration members of the public may inspect the register free of charge. Will this give rise to the publication of details of powers of attorney in newspapers which at present is the case in respect of wills, details of which are frequently published in a ghoulish fashion? If an attorney proposes to sell a property under such power, the solicitor for the puchaser must be able to ensure that the power of attorney is being exercised properly and that the necessary steps have been taken in regard to registration and so on. Will this allow newspapers to publish details of such registration in a ghoulish fashion? Solicitors must be able to protect the interests of third parties and the Minister should include a measure to prohibit such publication. That would strike the correct balance.
While in order to protect those dealing with attorneys the register must be open to the public, people may be inhibited from exercising such powers if they believe the details would be published in newspapers. I strongly suggest that the Minister give consideration to such an approach.
We are talking about private citizens making private arrangements about their private affairs for the benefit of their families. This is not any business of the media, yet some newspapers poke their noses into the registrations and publish them. They attempt to justify their actions by telling us this is in the public interest. Newspapers should be prohibited by law from doing this. Given the comments made by them about the attendance in the House and the interest among Deputies in various debates, I am sorry no member of the media has sufficient interest in the Bill to be present to listen to the debate. This may be an indication of the interest of the media generally in law reform.
The Bill is landmark legislation. I do not freely give plaudits to Ministers but I compliment the Minister for Equality and Law Reform on bringing this important legislation before the House. Prior to Committee Stage I will raise the issues put on paper by the Law Society, for example, the areas in which the Bill might run into difficulty. The purpose of Committee Stage debates is to ensure that all difficulties are ironed out. I look forward to that debate and commend the Bill to the House.