John Bruton
Question:1 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he has received the recent report on the Judiciary by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25072/99]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - All-Party Committee on the Constitution.
It is good to see you back, a Cheann Comhairle.
Thank you. I wish to convey my thanks to other Members who sent me good wishes; in particular, I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and the panel of chairmen for all their help in the past week or so.
Hear, hear.
Well said.
I welcome the Fourth Progress Report on the Courts and the Judiciary, published by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution on Wednesday, 24 November 1999. The report recommends a number of changes to the Constitution which require serious consideration.
The crucial recommendations made by the committee relate to issues such as the establishment of a judicial council and the reform of the current impeachment procedure.
The report will be considered in detail by the Government at an early opportunity.
Does the Taoiseach agree, in principle, that there should be a judicial code of ethics and a new procedure for impeachment, which would allow one House to investigate a charge made in another House of the Oireachtas and for the judge concerned to appear in any proceeding to defend his or her position?
Deputy Bruton will appreciate the Government has not examined the report yet. However, in the spirit in which he put the question, the report – most of which I have had the opportunity to read – seems excellent. It seems to be well thought out in principle. This arose from the situation last May. It would have created great difficulties. At that stage, the Ceann Comhairle wrote to me and others and we asked the all-party committee to look at it. There are recommendations on judicial conduct, removal of judges, appointment of judges and security of tenure in what seems to be an excellent report. In principle, the answer is "yes".
Does the Taoiseach agree that what the committee has tried to do, and what the House will eventually have to try to do, is to strike the right balance between accountability and independence and that both considerations will have to be weighed against each other at all stages? Will he indicate to the House the timeframe for the Government's consideration of this excellent report? Within broad limits, when does he expect to come to the House with the Government's considered view on these matters?
The memorandum for the Government is being prepared. I hope the report will be before the Government in January. The Attorney General will, obviously, also have a big input into this. There are many parts to the report but the establishment of the judicial council and the reform of the current impeachment procedure – which is what the report arose from – are the two most significant issues. However, the memorandum will cover all the issues involved, such as appointments and transparency.
I agree with Deputy Bruton. This is a difficult area but a great deal of time has elapsed since the original Article 35.2 was drafted. Our courts are far larger and more complex today, although some of the principles do not change. Article 35.2 states, "All judges shall be independent in the exercise of their judicial functions and subject only to this Constitution and the law". The report sets out the difficulties that can arise. One of the issues we will have to look at very carefully in regard to judicial conduct is having a lay element on that council. That issue was well debated in public in the middle of the year. I am conscious it is a fundamental change, but it is hard to argue against it.
Does the Taoiseach agree that, as a result of what is known colloquially as the "compo culture", the courts are acquiring an ever closer resemblance to a cross between a cattle market and a stock exchange, where discussions on how much money "A" will get and who will hold out for more are conducted by those congregating on the steps of the court before the case goes to hearing? The procedure does not necessarily give the system of justice the good repute we would wish. In addition to tackling the issue of the appointment and accountability of judges, we need to deal with the compensation culture which is causing, to a degree, a perversion of the true nature of justice in a democracy such as ours. The pursuit of money and claims, which while legal are not necessarily just, is taking over from the true role of defending the liberties of the citizen.
We are moving a little away from the subject matter of the question and the report. There is grave concern about this issue. Members are aware that the compensation culture has spread to many areas and it is an enormously serious problem. A recent report rated countries in order of compensation awards. In 1980, Ireland was at the bottom of this table but was fighting for top place in 1999.
Top of the pops for compo.
This is of major concern. There have also been recent cases involving the medical profession. In 1975, having returned from a conference in America, an eminent physician who, unfortunately, is deceased, informed me of medical legal insurance about which I knew nothing as it was unheard of at the time. He predicted that if we continued as we were going this would be an enormous problem for the medical profession in 20 years.
Was it Senator Alton?
Yes. Unfortunately, he was shown to be correct.
Has the Government referred to this committee proposals to change the way in which the Oireachtas determines the budget?
No.
Does the Taoiseach consider it appropriate that the Minister for Finance has written to congress? We do not know the contents of the letter as yet and I suspect the Taoiseach does not know either, but there are fears that the social partners have been asked to cast budget No. 6 on the basis of today's letter.
I do not see how this matter is relevant.
It refers to the constitutional role of this House.
The Deputy should ask a question on the report of the all-party committee.
We ranged over Senator Alton's musings on what would happen to medical legal insurance, compo culture and other matters.
We should not introduce budgetary matters as they are not relevant to the question.
They are being introduced into every other forum in the country, a Cheann Comhairle, and I welcome you back to the House. Will you allow me to ask one more question on this matter?
Only if it is relevant to the question.
This is covered by Question No. 5 concerning the Government's rejection of the NESC report.
My question is relevant to the constitutional role of this House. Is the Taoiseach aware of the contents of the letter sent to congress and, on the basis of that letter, does he propose to request the Minister for Finance to come into the House on the last full sitting day of the millennium to outline, in a constitutional way, which budget we are speaking about?
That question is not relevant.
The Minister will be wearing sack cloth and ashes designed by Louis Copeland.
This question refers to the report on the Judiciary by the all-party committee which had no function in the budget.
Then it is about the only group that was not involved.