Vol. 485 No. 3
10 Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Defence the package of measures, if any, he will introduce to address the level of costs in deafness compensation cases; if so, the timescale of implementation of these measures; and the outcome of his discussions with the Incorporated Law Society. [23259/97]
As I said during the Adjournment Debate last Wednesday, a huge amount of taxpayers' money is at stake and we must ensure every effort is made to contain this expenditure while having regard to the legitimate claims of those serving and former members of the Defence Forces who may have been genuinely injured. However, the State does not accept the current level of quantum because it believes this is too high. Furthermore, a rapid settlement policy, whether by a tribunal or some other scheme, would be effectively an unwarranted admission of liability. This would in turn have the effect of inducing many more claims. The present strategy of running selected cases is producing results. A number of cases, albeit small, have been dismissed by the courts and, more importantly, the overall level of quantum has been reducing, particularly in the last legal term. Pending the production of the Irish handicap assessment system by the Department of Health and Children that strategy should be continued, at least in the short term, for as long as it yields such results. The expert group of ear, nose and throat consultants and an audiologist, convened by the Department of Health and Children and tasked with developing an Irish hearing handicap assessment system, has now met. It is hoped they will be in a position to report early in the new year.
Officials of my Department met representatives of the Incorporated Law Society on Tuesday, 9 December 1997 and had a useful exchange of views on the whole question of hearing loss litigation. They proposed to the society that solicitors handling these cases reduce their fees by 50 per cent in view of the volume of litigation being processed. The representatives said they would consider it. A further meeting to work out a common approach to solving this problem was agreed. They were also told of my concern about solicitors advertising and the role this plays in fuelling this problem. The Government yesterday decided to examine this issue as a matter of urgency.
The Government is prepared to compensate those who have suffered a genuine injury and who are suffering a significant handicap. What it is not prepared to do is waste taxpayers' money on compensating individuals whose hearing is normal for their age or whose handicap is so small they did not notice it until they spotted an advertisement in the paper inducing them to make a claim.
The Estimates for this year have increased to £38 million and £85 million will be required to deal with the cost of these compensation cases in the coming year. During the debate on the Estimates in Committee the other day, the Minister said he believed most of the claimants would not get compensation in any other country. We are facing a significant problem in that large numbers of cases are getting compensation yet the Minister is saying he does not believe they should, even though the State is losing most of the cases.
A question please, Deputy.
Given that gardaí are now putting in claims, is it not time to establish a Cabinet subcommittee to deal with this issue and bring together the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Finance, Health and Children, Defence and other relevant Departments to examine the overall strategy? Even if the Minister succeeds in reducing the legal fees, the enormous demand on the Exchequer will continue. There is no doubt that genuine claims must be met but the percentage of those is unclear at this stage. However, 12 to 15 High Court judges have found that these cases are being met, that there are genuine cases, and we must examine the contradiction between what the Minister is saying and what is happening. What was the reaction of the law society to the Minister's request to reduce its fees by 50 per cent? Did it undertake to do anything in relation to the advertising which appears to be quite excessive in terms of these claims?
In reply to the first part of the question, the problem facing the State is that the courts have awarded large damages for levels of hearing loss which, in other jurisdictions, would not be considered a serious handicap and which would not attract significant damages. It is the relatively high level of court awards, combined with the large number of existing and potential claimants, which gives rise to the huge bill the Exchequer now faces. To say that all members of the Government are not concerned about this would be to underestimate what is happening.
Before dealing with the final part of the Deputy's question, I must tell her that the avalanche is continuing. In the past four weeks, there have been 465 new cases. If one converts the present awards, taking the total award and the legal costs together, and if these were to be met on a monthly basis, we are talking about £16 million per month which is the equivalent of providing a ship for the naval service every month of the year. It is one and a half times the amount of resources I have for the refurbishment, rebuilding and improvement of accommodation in a whole year. That is the reason I put forward a number of proposals, the first of which is to get the new Irish accredited hearing handicap system in place to bring down the quantum awards and have that accepted by the courts.
The second proposal is to negotiate with the Incorporated Law Society on the basis of the legal fees. There are approximately 1,700 solicitor firms in the country, a tiny percentage of which are engaged in this area. A number of those, three of four firms, are following up more than half the cases. The Incorporated Law Society is in the process of considering my proposal to reduce the fees by 50 per cent in the significant number of cases being handled by individual firms, and we hope to have another meeting in the course of the next few days to see how that is proceeding. The Government is also giving active consideration to my proposal in relation to the change in the law which allows solicitors to advertise their services which can induce further claims.
The matter is getting constant, dedicated commitment from all members of the Government, particularly from me where it is my responsibility to safeguard the taxpayer while ensuring that genuine claims are dealt with comprehensively and effectively. The Deputy's comments about the legal costs are correct. The plaintiff's legal costs represent about 30 per cent of the claim. The overall legal costs, including my costs——
On a point of order, is the Minister dealing with my question on this subject as well as that of my colleague?
I am answering two supplementaries.
The Minister is answering Question No. 10 on its own.
Between civilian, military and legal personnel, and other assistants in my office and that of the State Solicitor, there are 80 individuals dedicated full-time to this work at a cost of £1.8 million per year. These people can undertake no other work and I now require additional numbers to deal with the avalanche of claims.
I will hear a final supplementary from Deputy Fitzgerald.
The information the Minister has given us today is staggering, particularly the estimate of £16 million per month. Is that what the Minister said?
I adverted to what is happening on the cases so far.
We are talking about an enormous amount of money. Given the implications of this for the public finances and the question of the liability of the State and how it is being dealt with in the courts at present, it seems the least that should happen is that the Minister should follow up on my suggestion to establish a Cabinet subcommittee to examine the issue of the liability of the State. Even if there is agreement on an Irish assessment test and a reduction in lawyers' fees, we are still talking about an enormous amount of money and a huge liability for this State. If every other country has managed to handle this in a different way——
A question please, Deputy. We are running out of time.
——we may need to introduce legislation. We may also need to examine the possibility of dealing with this issue through the social welfare system or working with a panel of experts and fixed amounts for certain levels of hearing handicap or loss. The Minister said he is attempting other measures in the short term, but how quickly does he consider he can move to deal with these claims in an alternative way, given that every other country appears to deal with them in a different way from how we handle them? I say that with full respect for the rights of genuine claimants. There is also a rights issue involved here.
The Deputy is making a statement. Twenty minutes are provided for dealing with priority questions. A question has been tabled in the name of the Deputy's colleague, Deputy Timmins, and I am anxious to reach it. It will not be reached if we spend 20 minutes dealing with the first two priority questions.
This is a major issue and it deserves a good deal of time.
I will examine any proposal made in this House that may be helpful. The question of establishing a Cabinet subcommittee can be examined, although the full membership of the Government is concerned here. I will be happy to consider whether it can be more tightly focused. I hope early in the new year to have an Irish system of hearing handicap assessment that will be accepted by the courts. That will facilitate a number of important changes, which could embrace a number of the other questions raised by the Deputy. However, we are working within a tight timeframe and I hope by the end of January or early February to be in a position to inform the House of developments in this precise area.
