Deputy Briscoe wishes to bring to the attention of the Committee a revised motion to be moved in the Dáil relating to a decision we took last week regarding the voting situation and so on.
Procedure Generally.
I understand, Chairman, that notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders it is proposed that the Special Committee on the Solicitors Bill shall meet at the times to be decided by the Committee and that only voice votes shall be recorded in the business being dealt with each day. It is open to any Deputy to record his dissent. I understand that this is to take account of divisions in the House and it is proposed—
"That where a division is demanded in the Special Committee on the Solicitors (Amendment) Bill 1991 whenever the Chairman shall have declared the result, in his opinion, of the putting of the question, any Member may have his dissent from such declaration recorded in the official proceedings of the Committee by raising his hand when called upon to do so by the Chairman.".
I think most Members are familiar with that. Basically a motion has to be moved in the Dáil to give effect to what we decided informally as a Committee last week. I wish to make Members aware of that and to advise that that will be done within the next few days, I understand.
The third paragraph states —"That if during a sitting of the Committee, the Chairman's attention is called to the fact that a quorum is not present, or if on the report of a division such fact shall appear, the Chairman shall suspend the meeting for not less than eight minutes; and no decision shall be considered to have been arrived at by such division. If on the resumption of the meeting a quorum is not present, the Chairman shall suspend the meeting to a later hour to be named by him or shall adjourn the Committee without question put to a subsequent day; and the hour of such adjournment, as also the names of the Members present, shall be entered in the official proceedings of the Committee.". I think that means if there is a vote put without a quorum being present the Chairman has to suspend the meeting.
That will be ratified by the Dáil within the next few days. It gives effect to what we decided last week.
We will move on to amendment No. 2. There is an amendment to amendment No. 2 and amendment No. 3 is also related so we will take all of them together, by agreement.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 5, lines 16 to 19, to delete subsection (3) and substitute the following:
"(3) Sections 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 62 of this Act shall come into operation 3 months after the date of its passing.
(4) Sections 15, 16, 17 and 18 shall come into operation on such day or days as may be fixed by order of the Minister, either generally or with reference to a particular purpose or provision, and different days may be so fixed for different purposes and different provisions.”.
This amendment substitutes a revised commencement provision in section 1 of the Bill. Its effect will be to bring all the provisions of the Bill except the particular sections referred to in the amendment into operation on the passing of the Bill. Under the proposed new subsection (3) the eight sections referred to will come into operation three months after the Bill is passed. Sections 8 to 14, inclusive, relate to the new complaints machinery, regarding inadequate services and overcharging, to be operated by the Law Society. The Society will need a short period to put the necessary administrative arrangements in place, including staffing, before dealing with complaints under the new provisions. The Society intend to instruct the profession as to compliance with the provisions of section 62 of the Bill dealing with solicitor and own client costs. It is proposed that that section should also come into operation after three months.
In regard to the proposed new subsection (4), section Nos. 16, 17 and 18 deal with the composition and powers of the new disciplinary committee which will include five lay-persons to be nominated by the Minister for Justice. It is proposed that these sections will come into effect by ministerial order. The intention is to bring them into operation at the earliest possible date when arrangements have been made to make the necessary nominations and any necessary arrangements have been made with the outgoing disclipinary committee. That committee will continue to operate until the new disciplinary committee is in place and will also finalise any applications which it has on hands on the changeover date. That is under the terms of other proposed amendments in my name.
Section 15 contains the enabling provisions to establish the proposed independent adjudicator scheme. Regulations will have to be made first of all by the Minister for Justice or indeed by the Law Society, to govern the scheme. An adjudicator will have to be appointed by the Law Society and the consent of the Minister for Justice obtained by the Society for that appointment. Administrative arrangements will have to be established by the adjudicator to deal with complaints received from the public. These matters will be pursued as a top priority as soon as the Bill is passed so that the provisions can be brought into effect at the earliest possible date. It is also relevant to mention that under a proposed official amendment to section 15 which we will deal with when we come to that section, the adjudicator, when appointed, will be empowered to investigate a complaint made to him relating to a matter which arose before a section comes into operation.
I move amendment 1 to amendment 2: To delete subsection (4).
The last time I was here I had a very great interest in legislation which depended on ministerial order to bring it into effect. That is why I speak so strongly in support of this amendment. The Minister has no grounds to justify the delaying of the bringing into effect of section 15, which relates to the adjudicator or ombudsman, and which anyone who has had any dealing with the legal profession is waiting for. How many times each day and each week do we have to talk to people and advise them of their rights. How frustrated people are because there is nobody they can turn to. This is an everyday occurrence. It is surprising that the Minister is proposing a ministerial order to bring in section 15 which relates to the appointment on an ombudsman. I feel that the Minister should reconsider that matter.
Section 16 provides for the establishment of the committee referred to by the Minister and the appointment of lay members. That should not necessarily take a great deal of time to do. Consequently, if we are to give effect, within a reasonable time, to the legislation which is proposed and which is long awaited and the same applies to sections 16, 17 and 18, I think we should agree to the amendment to amendment 2.
In relation to section 15, I agree with what Deputy Sherlock says about the fairly immediate need for the independent adjudicator. However, if the Deputy looks at section 15 he will note that the Minister may, by regulations, require the Society to establish and fund the scheme etc. That would indicate that the Minister will have to make regulations. As I understand the section the Minister does not necessarily have to make the regulations, the Law Society may make the regulations instead taking into account all the matters which they are required to take into account under section 15. But, whether it be the Law Society or the Minister for Justice, regulations will have to be made. Then a suitable person will have to be appointed to act as independent adjudicator as was done in the United Kingdom. That presumably would include interviews, etc. Staffing arrangements will have to be made, premises will have to be nominated and a salary scale agreed and all that will be done by the Law Society in consultation and with the approval of the Minister for Justice. I agree that this is very necessary and we would like to see it happening as quickly as possible. I envisage that it will come into effect very shortly after the passage of this Bill because we are all aware of the need for it. That is why it is in the legislation in the first place.
In relation to section 16, this is a radical new proposal which will involve lay people being appointed to the disciplinary committee which was hitherto composed totally of solicitors. Five of those lay people will be appointed by the Minister for Justice. The Minister will have to arrange to nominate people, people will have to accept nomination, etc. I concede that this will not take as long to put into effect as the provisions in section 15 but I both propose and promise that as long as I am here these sections will come into operation as quickly as possible but the very nature of the proposals are such that they cannot come into operation automatically.
Deputy Sherlock, as briefly as possible.
I will not delay proceedings. I am glad to hear the Minister acknowledge that there is an urgency about the matter. I am sceptical about the delay that can occur when it comes to ministerial regulations, from experience. I accept the Minister's commitment to bring it in as quickly as possible.
Amendment 1 to amendment 2, by leave, withdrawn.
Main amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 3, not moved.
Section 1, as amended, agreed to.