Section 4 is proposed to be deleted.
SECTION 4
This amendment deletes the provisions of section 4 of the Bill repealing section 64 of the Principal Act which places a prohibition on incorporated bodies acting as solicitors. Although section 64 of the present Bill provides that regulations may be made in future providing for the incorporation of solicitors' practices that will be by way of exception to the general prohibition on a corporate body acting as a solicitor which will remain in force. A suitable amendment will be included in section 64 of the present Bill to provide that it will operate as an exception to the general prohibition.
The provision which will allow for incorporated bodies to act as solicitors will be an exception to the general rule, therefore it was felt that it was better to keep the general prohibition in place.
Is it agreed that section 4 be deleted?
Section 4 deleted.
SECTION 5.
We have amendment 16 and as amendments 17 and 18 are related they will be taken together for discussion purposes.
I move amendment No. 16:
In page 6, line 24, before "MEMBERSHIP OF LAW SOCIETY" to insert "NAME AND".
In Part II of the Bill, the present heading is "Membership of the Law Society". I propose to change that to "Name and Membership of the Law Society". It is felt that this amendment proposes a more suitable title for Part II of the Bill because it is also dealing with the name. The name is changed from the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland to the Law Society of Ireland, therefore we decided to indicate that in the title of the part.
There is an amendment tabled in my name, where I say that the words "of Ireland" should go into the heading. I do not think, Chairman, it is going to have any profound legal impact on the operation of the Bill. Nevertheless it seems to me that the title of Part II should clearly say what it deals with. We could in fact, to use the Minister's approach or the Draftsman's approach, have said "name and membership of a body". We could have then gone on with the Minister's change of name in section 5, amendment No. 18. Just as you could say you are going to call it the Law Society of Ireland the Minister could tell me that is in section 5, well why even refer to the Law Society in the heading. It seems to me it is just a tidying up provision and I do not think it is a politically contentious proposal. As a tidying up provision I ask the Minister to accept that amendment and put in the words "of Ireland" in the heading to Part II particularly seeing as the Minister will be proposing this in section 5. It seems to me to make sense. We are talking about the Law Society of Ireland, not of Nigeria, Tanganyika, Australia or wherever. There is no point in not including it. I will not labour the point any further.
The heading is the title of what the actual Part of the Bill deals with. Part II deals with the Law Society of Ireland, it could not possibly be dealing with any other law society but I take Deputy Shatter's point that it certainly will not do any damage so I will consider it for inclusion.
Is amendment 16 agreed?
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 17:
In page 6, line 24, after "SOCIETY" to insert "OF IRELAND".
I will accept amendment No. 17.
Amendment agreed to.
NEW SECTIONS
I move amendment No. 18:
In page 6, before section 5 but in Part II, to insert the following new section:
5.—(1) The body heretofore known as the ‘Incorporated Law Society of Ireland' shall be known as the ‘Law Society of Ireland' and may provide itself with a seal.
(2) Where, before the coming into operation of this section, any legal proceedings are pending to which the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland is a party, the name the Law Society of Ireland shall be substituted in the proceedings for the name the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland and the proceedings shall not abate because of such substitution.
(3) References to the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland immediately before the coming into operation of this section contained in any statute or statutory instrument (within the meaning of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1947) or in the memorandum or articles of association of any company or in any will, trust, deed, agreement or other document shall be construed on and after the coming into operation of this section as references to the Law Society of Ireland.".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 6, before section 5 but in Part II, to insert the following new section:
5. The Principal Act is hereby amended by the substitution of the following section for section 78:
78.—(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of their Charters, the Society shall make any amendments to the bye-laws of the Society that are necessary to bring them into conformity with the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 1992, and any regulations made thereunder.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in their Charters, the Society may in their bye-laws make provision for—
(i) the membership of the Council,
(ii) the election or appointment of members of the Council,
(iii) the admission of honorary or associate members of the Society.
(3) In this section "their Charters" means respectively, the Charter and the Supplemental Charter of the Society referred to in section 33 (1) of the Act of 1960.'.".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 5 deleted.
SECTION 6
Question proposed: "That section 6 stand part of the Bill."
Could I ask the Minister on the Section why he thinks the Society should admit honorary members? I may be wrong about this but it is not something that has been done heretofore. What was the motivation for it? As a working professional I just wondered why it intends to use honorary members. I have no hard and fast views on it but I would have thought the concept of awarding honorary membership is all very well where you are dealing with an institution that does not deliver a service. What will be the status of someone who is made an honorary member of the Society? Will he be entitled then to set up practice or have any rights or other consequences on it? I am curious as to the need for this provision.
My understanding is that unless somebody is admitted as a solicitor they cannot set up a practice. In relation to why the Law Society should want to admit honorary members, Deputy McCartan will have to address that question to the Law Society because this provision appeared in the Bill as a result of a request made to the Department by the Law Society and in the spirit of openness and reasonableness which has characterised this Government we decided to accede to that request.
Could you tell me the reasons why? Was it just because of openness? Was there any evaluation done on the need for it or the purpose of it and the implications of it? I do not think there are financial considerations involved in it but, by and large, we have done all right so far and that is my view as a member of the Law Society. I am concerned to see that the best standards are maintained. I would like to know what is the intention of this provision and what are the reasons behind it and the implications of it.
Chairman, I think that if we manage to get our way through this entire Bill on Committee Stage the first people who should be made honorary members are the entire membership of this Committee. On a non-party political basis it would give me a great deal of pleasure to see my colleague, Deputy Allen, made an honorary member of the Law Society. I am sorry to say it in his absence but no doubt he will read the minutes.
It conjures up wonderful images of various members of the Bar being made honorary members of the Law Society. It might be yet another small step in the direction of a unitary legal profession. I assume the only reason the Law Society want this is that, on occasions, they see fit to honour people who have done a particular service. I hope it is not something that would be used to simply toady to whoever happens to be the Minister for Justice of the day regardless of the political complexion of the Government of the day. Some people might form the view that the way to get on the right side of the Department of Justice politically is not only to invite the Minister to dinner but to make him an honorary member as well and perhaps throw in a few officials in the Department of Justice as well.
I am not suggesting that that would remove the influence of any of the officials as to their attitude to the Law Society but, nevertheless, Ministers tend to be impressed on occasion by such things. It seems we are making a meal of an unexceptional measure. The universities and other educational establishments will regularly simply honour people in walks of life. I am not quite sure what function the Law Society sees itself playing in that area. I am not sure what the service would be to the legal profession or what service they would recognise? I would see for example that someone — again I am not specially pleading because I happen to be a member of the Law Society as a solicitor — perhaps who had distinguished themselves in writing legal text books but who was not a solicitor might very well be the sort of person who would become an honorary member and to whom honour would be done, or someone who has written a large number of learned legal articles or someone who has made a substantial impact to the learning and teaching of law but who was not a solicitor would fall, I think, within this provision.
It is not an exceptional provision and I see no particular reason for us not allowing it to be there. I hope it would be one that would be used wisely by the Society and that there will not be a free for all to distribute honours. Perhaps people who are not members of the council of the Law Society may not be so massively impressed with it as the Society might. Perhaps the next Lord Mayor or the newly elected Lord Mayor of Dublin would be an appropriate person to be made an honorary member of the Law Society. I could think of certain people in that context and, indeed, considering the relationship between the current President of the Law Society and the current President of the State perhaps she should be the first person who would be given honorary membership. There are situations where that might be appropriate and indeed it may be appropriate in the context of people from overseas.
I do not want to make a meal of this but I do want some further clarification. There is a very strong perception within the legal profession generally that the Law Society Council is a club of its own within the Society and a very cosy club within that Society. I say that in full deference to them because I know many of them do exceptionally good work on the Council of the Law Society but the Council is considered very much a law unto its own and a tidy organisation unto its own.
I think Deputy Taylor made mention of his one effort to get elected to the Council. I made a comment across the table to a wrong party. I would never have even bothered to try. I remember attending a campaign for a young member of the profession — I tried to run a campaign for him — and he succeeded after two attempts but lost it the next year. It is a tough one to break and it is tough to get in there.
Dublin South-West is a lot easier.
I have no doubt and Dublin North-East has been much kinder too.
I have no difficulty with the idea of the law school which exists down in Blackhall Place being able to give out — like universities — honorary awards if that is what is felt appropriate. I am not speaking to make a meal of this. Do other professional bodies have the power to grant honorary membership — for example, the architects profession or the medical profession? Can you become an honorary member of the medical profession — I am not sure of this?
I think you can become an honorary member of anything.
I wonder Chairman. Most of these professions, including the Law Society, are regulated by statute and I doubt if statute provides for honorary membership. This is different to universities granting honorary doctorates or whatever in my respectful view. It struck me as to why the Society felt it should have this, or more particularly why the Minister would promote the concept and whether or not there was an evaluation done of the implications of such honorary membership. I have not received any submission from the Law Society on it and I am not privy to the reasons why they think it is an important device.
I get the impression Deputy McCartan will not be considered for honorary membership when it comes up. If people from overseas would like to be considered as honorary members, why not. We are considering an honours list at some stage in this country generally and I see no reason why there should be any great objection to this one.
We have only been talking about one part of section 6. There is a second part to it on a different category of membership again — associated membership. Maybe the Minister could clarify what is involved in that. That section is talking about groups of people who are members of a corresponding professional body in another jurisdiction becoming associate members as distinct from honorary members. What would the import of that be? Would that give them any particular rights or functions so far as practice is concerned or what is the thinking behind that? Was that also answerable by the Law Society and if so, for what purpose?
We may need some clarification from the Law Society in this regard. The Law Society I understand made representations to the Minister that they wished to honour certain people who were not actual members of the Law Society. One way to honour them is to make them an honorary member. They felt it desirable to admit people from corresponding professional bodies overseas to be associate members of the society. I cannot see that this has any impact or any implication in practice. These people obviously cannot practice unless they are admitted as solicitors. I do not think it is going to have any tremendously detrimental effect. If the Deputies wish me to communicate with the Law Society and ask them to set out the reasons why they have asked for these rights, I would be happy to do so and I shall communicate the reply to them.
I would welcome that. I am conscious of the fact that there are members of the Society in the room and I do not want in any way to be seen to be disrespectful towards them but I was curious to know a bit more about this particular provision. In regard to some comments that Deputy Davern made, I have a very good working relationship with the Law Society in their legislative programmes and irrespective of what their ultimate intentions are as to how they work the honorary provision once it is in place. I would like to hear from the Society through the Minister, as to their views.
I am sure that the law societies in other countries and the bar associations also have honorary memberships. I know it is quite common throughout the United States. Maybe we would be able to find out if it is likewise in other parts of Europe. I see nothing wrong with it. I am quite happy to go along with the suggestion of asking them for further reasons.
The Minister has indicated his intentions to seek further clarification and to communicate back to the members of the Committee.
On that basis is section 6 agreed to stand part of the Bill? Section 6 agreed to.
Section 7 agreed to.