Richard Bruton
Ceist:3 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance his proposals to reduce tribunal costs. [8684/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTuesday, 23 March 2004
Ceisteanna (3)
Freagraí ó Béal (12 píosaí cainte)
To end October 2003, the total cost to the Exchequer of completed and sitting tribunals of inquiry and other public inquiries was €138.6 million. Of this, €99.4 million was in respect of legal costs and €39.2 million related to other costs. The figure for legal costs includes some €25.5 million in respect of third party legal costs awarded at three completed tribunals. This represents some 68% of the total cost of these tribunals.
In regard to tribunals and public inquiries which are sitting at present, the total cost to end October is €101 million, of which €68 million is in respect of legal costs. The latter only refers to the costs of the tribunal of inquiry legal teams as the issue of third party costs has not yet been adjudicated on in any instance. Given the significance of these costs in completed tribunals and inquiries, there is scope for a sharp acceleration in Exchequer costs if third party legal costs follow the pattern of completed tribunals.
Given the considerable actual and potential costs arising, I am concerned as to the ongoing resultant burden on the Exchequer. At the invitation of the planning tribunal, I made a submission to the tribunal last May in regard to the liability of the Exchequer for third party legal costs. The tribunal has not yet adjudicated on the issue.
More generally, I have a number of proposals under consideration aimed at reducing costs. These proposals follow liaison with the Attorney General and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It is my intention to shortly submit the proposals to the Government for approval. I am not therefore at liberty at this juncture to go into the individual detail of these proposals but broadly they are aimed at addressing a number of issues affecting future tribunals including: tightening and better focusing of the terms of reference with a view to minimising duration and costs; streamlining the operation of tribunals; and a review of the basis of payment for legal representatives.
As the Deputy is aware, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform recently introduced the Commissions of Investigation Bill, which passed Second Stage in the Dáil on 5 March. The mechanism being provided by this Bill may be considered as providing either a precursor or an alternative to tribunals of inquiry. It is, however, also designed to address concerns such as those relating to the time and cost of public investigations. Overall, it seeks to provide a more effective and flexible way of investigating matters of public concern while balancing the issues of time, cost, fair procedures and the rights of affected parties.
This measure has the potential to considerably reduce the need for full-scale tribunals of inquiry and I strongly support it.
I read with interest the Minister's comments at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis. He struck a chord with delegates when he said he would tackle the cost of tribunals. However, it transpires that his only proposals are in respect of future tribunals. He has no proposals in regard to the massive cost we face in respect of current tribunals which will increase. Was he Minister for Finance when sanction was given to increase the brief fee from €20,000 to €60,000, which represents a trebling of the fee and an increase of more than 200%? Was he Minister for Finance when the fee for non-sitting days was increased from €1,270 to €2,250 per day? Comparing the first McCracken tribunal with the most recent tribunals, how does he square his sanctioning of increased per diem daily rates to barristers with his alleged concern expressed at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis to contain the cost of tribunals?
As the Deputy will be aware from contributions made by his former colleague in Government, Deputy Quinn, the Minister for Finance sanctions these fees at appropriate times following consideration by the Office of the Attorney General and deliberations it has with counsel on the going rates at a specific time. This matter was alluded to on many occasions by Deputy Quinn in his two and a half years as Minister for Finance. In my time as Minister for Finance, I too have approved a number of increases. The last such were approved with effect from July 2002.
Different daily rates are paid to counsel working on the various tribunals, details of which I can supply to Deputies if they wish. In the Moriarty tribunal, senior counsel are on the per diem rate of €2,500. In the Morris, Barr and planning tribunals, the equivalent figure is €2,250 and, in the Laffoy and Dunne tribunals, it is €1,905 per day. Brief fees have been paid by these tribunals to senior counsel as follows: in the Moriarty tribunal it was €31,743——
The Minister is evading answering the question.
No, I am answering the question. The brief fee for senior counsel on the planning tribunal was €31,743; in respect of the Laffoy tribunal the figure was €34,918; in respect of the Dunne tribunal, €31,743; in the Morris tribunal, €60,000; and in the Barr tribunal the figure was €60,000.
This is an old style filibuster.
As I referred to in my reply and on previous occasion, the costs to which we refer in the figure of €101 million relate to the State's legal costs at this time taking account of what has happened in respect of other tribunals. The costs of third parties will be a considerable multiple of this which is of concern to me. In that context, I will bring proposals to the Government in the near future which I hope will go some way to relieving the taxpayer of these considerable costs.
The Minister has clearly overshot the runway in this regard. The reality is that he sought to get public support and that of his party's Ard-Fheis by stating he would contain costs. However, is it not the case that the Minister has done nothing but increase the fees repeatedly? He has nothing to address the ridiculous anomaly of daily rates for work which should clearly be done on a contract basis. We will face enormous fee increases because the Minister has not learnt the lesson from the huge spiralling costs of these tribunals as they are set up, one after the other.
I am delighted the Deputy agrees with me when he states that counsel's per diem rates are incorrect and that there should be a different method of payment.
The Minister is not doing anything about it.
I am glad he supports me in this regard and, when I bring proposals before the Oireachtas, I am sure Fine Gael will support me. At these per diem rates, in three days a senior counsel earns more than an old age pensioner gets for a whole year.
The Minister has more than doubled those rates.