Vol. 435 No. 4
4 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the nature of the free legal service that the proposes that private solicitors will provide in respect of District Court family law cases under the new scheme of legal aid he has introduced; the way in which the scheme will operate; and if his attention has been drawn to the criticism recently voiced of the scheme.
18 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the progress, if any, that has been made with regard to the implementation of the commitment in the Programme for a Partnership Government 1993 to 1997 to consider extending civil legal aid to tribunals such as the Social Welfare Appeals Tribunal and, following consultation with the social partners, the Employment Appeals Tribunal; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 18 together. The Programme for a Partnership Government places a responsibility on me, as Minister for Equality and Law Reform, to ensure access to the law; that the present scheme of civil legal aid and advice will be placed on a statutory footing; that additional funding will be provided to facilitate an expansion of the scheme; that the possibility of extending legal aid to tribunals will be examined; and that in the case of the Employment Appeals Tribunal, this will follow consultation with the social partners. Since taking office earlier this year I have made substantial progress in meeting these objectives.
The Grant-in-Aid to the Legal Aid Board for 1993 is almost 20 per cent higher than it was in 1992. As a result of that extra funding the board has recruited an additional 12 solicitors and is engaged in recruiting an additional 29 support staff. These increases in staff will add significantly to the capacity of the board to provide an improved service to those entitled to it under the scheme. A special allocation of £100,000 in 1993 is being used to employ the services of private solicitors on a pilot basis so as to further reduce the length of waiting lists at law centres.
The pilot project for the involvement of private solicitors by the Legal Aid Board is confined to the conduct of cases for maintenance, barring and custody orders in the District Court and is operating on the basis of panels of solicitors who have applied to undertake the work. The project should enable, among other things, the making of arrangements with local private solicitors to provide a direct service to clients. The fee payable for a case is £75, plus VAT, together with the cost of such incidental outlays as are covered by the legal aid certificate, reducing to £65, plus VAT, for a fifth and each subsequent such case dealt with by any one solicitor in a single day. I am glad to say that a good geographical spread of solicitors have applied under the project and that briefs are in the course of being distributed to them.
The board is, in consultation with my Department, devising an action plan for further development and expansion of the board's services, subject to budgetary constraints. The question of extending civil legal aid to tribunals will be considered in that context.
A Bill to put the scheme of civil legal aid and advice on a statutory footing is in the course of being drafted and the details will be announced in the normal way in due course.
I think that Deputies will accept that the developments I have outlined are a good indication of my determination and that of the Government to ensure access to the law.
Would the Minister agree that when a marriage breaks down and a husband or wife requires legal help they should be encouraged, if possible, to resolve the consequences of the breakdown without having to initiate court proceedings and that if they are to separate they should be encouraged to do so by agreement, perhaps with the assistance of lawyers or through a mediation service? Would the Minister acknowledge that the legal aid system he is now putting in place with regard to the District Courts is a court driven system which will ensure there is conflict between husbands and wives in circumstances where they cannot afford solicitors in private practice and they have to resort to the solicitors on the panel the Minister has set up?
I would have thought the Deputy would have expressed satisfaction at the substantial increases I have just announced in the civil legal aid system. Had I not been in a position to announce them he would have made appropriate adverse comments, as has been done in the past about the inadequacies of the service. I agree with the issue the Deputy raises about mediation, but it does not arise on this question. That is a separate matter. The question of the mediation service is also receiving my attention and if a question is put down the details of intended expansion in that service will also be provided.
Would the Minister not agree that on the basis of this scheme a wife in Dublin who seeks legal help and who finds the doors of the law centre closed and who does not have means of her own will be told that the only way she will get a solicitor to provide assistance, through the State scheme, is if she takes her husband to court. She will then have to issue District Court proceedings and, at best, she will see a solicitor on the morning of the court case. Would the Minister not agree that that is creating a conveyor belt system of justice for wives and is providing for deserted and unsupported wives a scheme of legal aid which is grossly inferior to that provided under the criminal legal aid system for people charged with petty crimes?
I do not agree. What I announced represents a qualitative improvement, a major step forward in the provision of legal aid in civil cases and exceeds any increase in previous years. I feel sure that will be received with great satisfaction by all sides of the House, as it has long been sought and pressed for by Deputies. Twelve additional solicitors have already been employed in the various law centres throughout the country and a further 29 support staff are in the process of being recruited during these very difficult times. Clearly this will mean a substantial extension of the availability of civil legal aid and advice provided in the law centres. With these substantial increases in staff, people will have greater access to the service which, I hope, will be further expanded in future years as provided for in the Fianna Fáil and Labour Programme for a Partnership Government.
While I welcome the appointment of additional solicitors to the law centres will the Minister acknowledge that the duty system of solicitors sitting in district court buildings waiting to see how many wives they will represent in court that day is grossly inadequate means of providing legal help to people suffering the emotional trauma of marriage breakdown and renders it impossible for them to get legal representation which will ensure that their cases are properly prepared? Will the Minister explain to the House what will happen if a wife says she is seeking legal advice but does not want to proceed to a court hearing? Under this scheme will the solicitor attending with the wife at that court case be accredited by the Legal Aid Board with dealing with an amicable separation or will the extent of the solicitor's involvement be a once off visit to the court with the person he is seeking to represent?
As Deputy Shatter well knows, the provision of the civil legal aid service is but one of the services provided and which are being expanded by this Government. I am sure the Deputy knows that solicitors employed by the Legal Aid Board are professionals and are well qualified to represent people. If the particular case before them is a matter for referral for counselling or mediation, they have full information and are skilled in referring people to the referral agencies. However, when, regrettably, court proceedings are required, it is the Government's firm intention to ensure as far as possible that the legal services which have been called for so long and so often by Members on both sides, are provided. I regret the somewhat grudging response to these very major advances in the services.
Let us come to Question No. 5 in the name of Deputy Shatter. We should not forget that we are dealing with priority questions and the time factor involved.
This is an inadequate scheme compared to the criminal legal aid scheme. Will the Minister explain why this scheme does not apply the same degree of legal representation as given to those charged with criminal offences?
This is quite unfair, Deputy.
The Minister knows the scheme is inadequate.
