I have two Private Notice Questions, one of which was sent in at 10.30 this morning before the events in Cork. That question asked the Minister for Justice if, in view of yesterday's comments by Judge Murphy, a Circuit Court judge in Cork, about the free legal aid dispute and the recent serious incidents in Cork where criminals who would normally be in prison are roaming the streets of Cork because of the breakdown of the criminal courts system, he will make a statement on the matter. Subsequent to the dreadful events that occurred in the Cork District Court this morning I put down the following question: To ask the Minister for Justice if he will make a statement in view of the decision made today in the Cork District Court to strike out a murder charge because of the absence of free legal aid to the accused arising from the free legal aid dispute.
Private Notice Questions. - Free Legal Aid Dispute.
asked the Minister for Justice, in the light of recent remarks made by two senior judges in relation to the serious position of the free legal aid schemes in Cork, what immediate action he proposes to take to resolve the dispute, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Le do chead, glacaim na ceisteanna ón Teachta Allen agus an cheist ó Teachta O'Sullivan le chéile.
I am aware of the action of a judge in Cork District Court today who struckout a criminal charge in the case of a person charged with the crime of murder. The action by the judge was taken in the context of the legal aid dispute involving solicitors in Cork city as a result of which legal representation would not be available to the defendant in any further proceedings arising from this charge. I can assure the House, however, that the State may still prosecute the defendant in respect of the charge against him.
As a consequence of the solicitors' action in Cork in refusing to operate the criminal legal aid scheme, persons charged with criminal offences before the courts in Cork city who are granted free legal aid cannot get a solicitor to defend them. This is notwithstanding the Minister's frequent appeals to the solicitors to resume this vital work pending the outcome of the negotiations between the Department of Justice and the Incorporated Law Society on that body's claim for a complete review of the fees paid under the scheme. The society's claim was lodged with the Department of Justice on 18 February last, more than four months after commencement of the action by the solicitors in Cork. In their claim the society sought an enormous increase, in the order of 500 per cent, in legal aid fees for solicitors in all parts of the State who operate the criminal legal aid scheme.
At a meeting on Friday, 1 May 1992 to discuss the society's claim the Department made an offer of a significant increase in fees payable to solicitors in respect of criminal legal aid work done by them in the District Court and in respect of appeals to the Circuit Court. They also offered to introduce a mechanism which would ensure that these fees would be reviewed on a regular basis. The Department did not make any offer on that portion of the society's claim which related to fees paid to solicitors for criminal legal aid work done by them in the Circuit and higher courts. By virtue of the statutory arrangements whereby increases in legal aid fees granted to counsel for work done in these courts are automatically extended to include solicitors, the solicitors have already had full benefit from the significant increase granted to barristers in 1991 for criminal legal aid work.
Unfortunately, the significant offer made by the Department on Friday, 1 May which would apply to solicitors throughout the State was rejected by the representatives of the Incorporated Law Society. A further meeting with the society is due to take place this week. I can assure the House that every effort is being made to process the claim and to resolve the dispute as speedily as possible. I take this opportunity to appeal to the solicitors in Cork to resume operation of the criminal legal aid scheme pending the outcome of negotiations with the Incorporated Law Society.
I very much regret that a Minister of State at the Department of the Gaeltacht is answering a very important question involving the welfare and safety of the people in Cork. Does the Minister realise the seriousness of the position in Cork city where hardened criminals who are normally behind bars are roaming the streets at present? The gardaí in Cork are demoralised because they know who the criminals are but cannot get a conviction in the courts in Cork. I ask the Minister to behave in a responsible manner — the Department are guilty of criminal negligence in this case — and I also ask the solicitors in Cork to behave responsibly in this episode. The people of Cork are the victims of an ongoing dispute. I ask the Minister to come forward with the real figures. He mentioned 500 per cent which sounds impressive, but I would ask the Minister to confirm that the bill for the free legal aid scheme last year was £60,000. To give a figure of 500 per cent is just leading us on. I ask the Minister, and the Department of Justice, to involve themselves immediately in realistic negotiations, to put an end to the sparring and to think of the people throughout the city who are the victims of negligence.
I will ignore the Deputy's initial remarks and refer him to the people of the Cork Gaeltacht who will answer him. The Department, and the Minister, are taking this matter extremely seriously.
What does the Minister mean by that?
I will refer to the facts. The Southern Law Association served the Minister for Justice with a three weeks ultimatum in September 1991. The Minister, or the Department, must negotiate at national and not at local level. The case made by the Incorporated Law Society was not received by the Minister or the Department until 18 February this year. The Department responded four months after the Cork solicitors decided they would strike and sent the ultimatum to the Minister. This must be negotiated nationally. Is the Minister to ignore the Incorporated Law Society who have responsibility for negotiating on behalf of solicitors throughout the country? They met on 1 May and the figure of 500 per cent is the base figure. In fact, it is much higher.
What is the figure? It is £60,000.
The Department made a realistic offer. I am sure all will be aware of this from their contacts with the profession. I have no intention of negotiating across the Floor of the House. It is a matter for the Department and the Incorporated Law Society.
The Minister made a statement and he should back it up with figures.
We realise the importance of this.
Deputy Farrelly, the Minister is not to be subjected to cross-examination.
He made a statement and he should back it up with figures. Five hundred per cent of what?
I will not have the Minister, or anybody else, interrupted in the way Deputy Farrelly is interrupting. If the Minister's reply does not appeal to the Deputy, he does not have to listen to it, but he should allow those who are listening to benefit from his reply and what is the outcome of normal debate.
There is no benefit.
The society in their claim sought increases of the order of 500 per cent. The Department have made a realistic offer which has been rejected. I hope further meetings will be held this week. I take the opportunity to once more call on the solicitors to return to operating the scheme pending the outcome of negotiations.
That answer is typical of the Minister.
Will the Minister give an assurance to the House that he will act immediately, irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations this week in Cork, because at this stage negotiating time is over? We have had ten months of negotiations without result. Will the Minister give an assurance that the public in Cork city where the dispute is, will be protected and that he will act to that end?
I can assure the House that the Department and the Minister for Justice, who is unavoidably absent on official business, will make every effort to resolve this, but there are two sides to this dispute. I once more call on the solicitors to return to operating this scheme pending the outcome of the negotiations. I would emphasise that the Southern Law Society took action and it was some four months afterwards before the Incorporated Law Society, who are the negotiating body for the country, lodged their claim.
I remind the House that other business is ordered which is subject to a time limit, so I would ask for very brief questions.
Would the Minister agree that he has trotted out the date of last October as being an ultimatum from the Southern Law Society? Is it true that that document was submitted to his Department after years of frustration and long-fingering by the Department who refused on many occasions to come to realistic negotiations with the Southern Law Society on what are considered by everybody to be the rather meagre fees being paid under the free legal aid system? The Minister says he will not negotiate across the floor of this House but will the Minister ask the Minister for Justice, or his Minister of State, to enter negotiations with the Southern Law Society and the Department? The Minister should become politically active in order to stop what happened today in Cork where, after 22 adjournments of a case, the person charged was released.
It is not a case of negotiating locally; it is a case of negotiating nationally. The Minister, and his departmental officials, will continue to negotiate with the Incorporated Law Society. It is intended to have a further meeting this week. Every effort is being made to resolve the dispute. I realise the implications for the people in Cork of the scheme not being operated.
Will the Minister enter directly into negotiations?
I hope now to have final questions.
It is a question of negotiating nationally and not locally. My understanding is that there will be negotiations with the Incorporated Law Society and not with the Southern Law Society.
A brief question from Deputies Allen, O'Sullivan and McCartan.
May I have an assurance that the Minister for Justice will get involved in the negotiations scheduled for later this week, because otherwise they will be relatively meaningless? Will the Minister impress on the Minister for Justice the seriousness of the situation in Cork where people are now terrified and gardaí are demoralised?
I fully appreciate the consequences of the withdrawal by the solicitors from the scheme but I would point out that it is a matter now between the Incorporated Law Society and the officials of the Department of Justice. The Minister will be kept fully informed of the situation. I assure the Deputy that I will discuss the matter with the Minister on his return.
The Minister can go on "The Late Late Show" and on "The Gay Byrne Hour" and tell us what he is doing but he will not do his work. It is a case of all publicity and no action. It is all hype and it is disgraceful.
Deputy Allen appreciates that he does not add to his case by roaring across the House.
He is very frustrated.
We are getting the usual Civil Service reply.
The Deputy will have to contain his emotions in the House.
My mother was attacked in Cork because of this dispute. That is the reality, and we are getting Civil Service rhetoric.
The Chair appreciates all that, but shouting across the House will not help the Deputy to redress whatever wrong was done to his dear mother.
It affects my constituents also.
Would the Minister agree that ultimately it is the responsibility of the Minister for Justice to see that the law is implemented? At the moment it is not being implemented. I ask the Minister again if he will give an assurance to the House that notwithstanding any negotiations this week, he will act independently.
Negotiations are continuing. The claim was submitted to the Department on 18 February and a meeting was held on 1 May. The offer was rejected and a further meeting will be held this week. The Minister, and the Government, are as anxious as the Deputies from Cork to resolve this. I fully appreciate the Deputies' concern and every effort will be made to resolve the problem but the negotiations will be with the Incorporated Law Society.
I join with the Cork Deputies who are in a "no win" situation, as are the people of Cork. As a person who has been involved in the negotiations at this level with the Department over the years I can say that often the only real progress that is ever made is when solicitors withdraw their services. Criticism cannot be levelled at the solicitors——
The Deputy must be joking.
——in Cork who have suffered years of frustration. The Minister said that part of the offer was for reviews on a regular basis. That is the kind of language that frightens me. Unless there is built into any settlement at this stage, a commitment to an annual review we will have the same frustrations and flashpoints recurring as those that led to the withdrawal of the services in Cork over a year ago. Would the Minister agree that as a minimum ingredient in any settlement there must be a commitment from the Department to a review on an annual basis?
The Deputy will be aware that there is an increase each year——
There is not.
——on the basis of the CPI, but we are talking about increasing the base. I would not give a commitment on this and it would be wrong of me to do so. I have full confidence in the officials in the Department of Justice, and in the Incorporated Law Society to make the case to the Department. I am sure the Department and the society will be anxious to ensure that whatever arrangement they come to — I hope in the near future — will be a lasting one.
A final question from Deputy Cotter.
Would the Minister not agree that it is very clear from his response that there has been considerable foot dragging by the Department on this issue? Every day for the past ten months there have been difficulties in the courts and we will be faced with the same thing every day until somebody gets some sense. Would the Minister not agree also that there is ample evidence to suggest that this Government are soft on crime and that this episode——
That does not arise. I thought you had a question relevant to the question asked.