I propose to take Questions Nos. 30 and 57 together.
The amounts of claims by parties awarded costs by the tribunal will be closely scrutinised and, if necessary, vigorously contested before the Taxing Master and, if necessary, in the High Court. The work will be done by the cost accounting section of the Chief State Solicitor's Office. A legal cost accountant, specialising in legal cost claims, has been engaged to assist in this work.
Fees paid to the State legal team were set in accordance with the advice of the Attorney General, who took account of the importance and complexity of the case. Legal fees paid to the State legal team for working days when the tribunal was not in public session were reduced in January 1992 when it became apparent that the tribunal would last longer than expected. Since there were almost twice as many such days as days in public session, this renegotiation resulted in a significant saving for the Exchequer. Efforts were made to reduce the cost of counsel engaged to help complete the report and a small reduction was achieved.
Fees in relation to the beef tribunal were not allowed to rise as the hearings went on and the fees paid were at a rate considered appropriate throughout the life of the tribunal. Accordingly renegotiation, other than as I have outlined, was not undertaken. I understand that it is common for counsel to be paid at a higher rate for an unusually long assignment, since being unavailable to other clients for a long period may damage their future career and earnings prospects.
It is my intention, as I outlined some weeks ago, that every costs claim against the State will be vigorously contested in order to keep costs to the Exchequer and thus to the taxpayer to a minimum. While acknowledging the rights of all to protect their good name.
I am anxious that claims from parties who, in the light of the tribunal findings, could be considered to have brought trouble on themselves by their own actions, will be particularly keenly disputed. However, a hearing on costs claims before the Taxing Master is not the correct place to pursue allegations of tax evasion or other criminal offences. Where offences against the criminal law may have been committed, that is a matter to be dealt with through the courts in the normal way.
As regards the level of representation at the inquiry, the number of lawyers whose fees have been allowed was decided by the tribunal. That number was a good deal less than the number actually briefed by the parties concerned — 75 as against 107 claimed.
As regards excessive attendance, all claims will be closely examined when they are submitted and every avenue for reducing costs to the Exchequer will be thoroughly explored.
With regard to Deputy Byrne's question about administrative and procedural changes to be introduced, my Department has drawn up, with the Office of the Attorney General, guidelines to be applied by all Departments in respect of any future tribunals. These guidelines are designed to ensure that the legal costs in connection with tribunals are controlled to the maximum extent possible. The guidelines have been circulated to all accounting officers in Departments with the instruction that they are to be strictly implemented.
