asked the Minister for Justice if he intends introducing a new Courts Bill to streamline insurance compensation claims; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - New Courts Bill.
6.
As I have already indicated on other occasions, I intend to introduce a court and court officers Bill later this year. This will include a provision to facilitate the introduction of a system of pre-trial procedures, to settle as many issues as possible before the trial of actions in the High Court, including claims involving insurance companies.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Like other Deputies here, I read about these proposals in the newspaper. Apparently we cannot get that type of detailed information in reply to a parliamentary question. It is a matter of grave disappointment to many of us who stuck our necks out in relation to the abolition of juries in civil actions to find that——
Some of us gave more accurate predictions. The Deputy should have listened to what he was told.
——the reduction in the level of claims being paid and the reduction in the level of premiums have not taken place. In fact there is an attempt to increase considerably the motor insurance premiums. Would the Minister not agree that we should be very slow to carry out any further changes in our court procedure until there is clear evidence that there is a reciprocal arrangement on the part of insurance companies to reduce the premiums they are charging the consumer?
We are having an extension of this question, an extension out of all proportion——
The Minister will be very concerned to ensure that as part of the package of the reduction of costs these developments will be provided as soon as possible. The Bill in question will contain other proposals apart from the pre-trial procedures. Some of these involve important matters of policy which have yet to be finalised. The Minister would hope that the Bill can be introduced fairly soon so that it will be brought into law before the end of this year.
Will the Minister not agree that the last similar experience we had, namely, the abolition of juries, contrary to the undertakings given that there would be reductions in insurance premiums, has produced the opposite result? Can the Minister now say, before this legislation is visited on us, what the insurance companies are going to do about it, having regard to the fact that the last venture cost us at least an increase of 4½ per cent in motor insurance premiums? What will the increase be on this occasion?
We are now entering into the area of insurance premiums.
It is probably a little early to judge the full implications of the measures, and the full package will obviously have to be in place to get the benefit from it.
Would the Minister not agree that waiting for the new courts Bill is going to mean a huge delay in making any changes in the administration of the cases in the Four Courts and elsewhere? Would he not agree that there are other devices available to his Department and through the administrators of the courts in terms of changing the rules? Could not a lot be done by way of orders and ministerial regulation to streamline and improve the system at least in the interim? Are we not facing into at least a two year delay before legislation could ever be introduced and passed in this House, to deal at a minimum with the reorganisation of the courts? Surely something must be done in the interim.
With the co-operation of the other side of the House, legislation can be dealt with fairly effectively. Over the last two years that has been fairly obvious. In relation to the pre-trial procedures to be operated by the Master of the High Court, it is intended that they will be operated by rules of court. This will allow greater flexibility since procedures would require alteration from time to time and that would be most conveniently achieved by rules of court. The proposed Bill will enable such rules to be made.
Would the Minister not agree that tactically it is very unwise to make commitments to introduce further legislation in this area until we actually see something coming from the other side in terms of a reduction in insurance premiums? Once one makes a further promise it can be said that once we have this additional legislation permiums may come down. The last time we were told categorically that a major change in our whole legal system, abolishing juries, would have a major effect on the level of insurance premiums here and that has not happened. The onus is on the insurance companies to tell us why this has not happened before we commit ourselves to further changes in our legal system.
There is an onus on us to have the procedures as effective as possible. It is then for the Minister for Industry and Commerce to insist that the gains and benefits are passed on to the consumers.
What gains and benefits have we had in the last year?
You are not doing too badly out of it.