Aodhán Ó Ríordáin
Question:2. Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin asked the Minister for Justice what progress has been made on resolving the pay restoration dispute with criminal barristers. [44134/23]
View answerWednesday, 11 October 2023
Questions (2)
Oral answers (6 contributions)
I want to give the Minister the opportunity to inform the House of any movement that was made yesterday in the budget regarding fees payable to criminal barristers in light of the ongoing dispute and the withdrawal of criminal barristers from criminal proceedings in the courts last Tuesday.
I am happy to be able to give an update on progress that has been made on this issue. I fully recognise the important role played by barristers and solicitors in the administration of criminal justice, not only in the context of working to defend those who are accused but also working with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in respect of prosecutions.
I take this opportunity to acknowledge the ongoing co-operation and flexibility shown by the legal profession in working with the Government and the courts to try to improve overall efficiencies and to create a more victim-centred system. This includes through a number of actions to give effect to Supporting a Victim’s Journey, the first plan I published, to support victims of domestic and sexual violence going through the courts, implementing the Family Justice Strategy and the overall modernisation programme in the courts. The criminal legal aid scheme, which has operated since the 1960s, is vital to our criminal justice system. It is administered by my Department which has the responsibility for making payments under the scheme.
I assure the Deputy that this issue has been a priority for me and my Department. I am pleased to inform him that an increase of 10% in fees to barristers and solicitors under the scheme was agreed in yesterday's budget. I want to make it clear that this 10% is the starting point in a much wider process. It is the first step on a pathway to further engagement with the profession and with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. In conjunction with the increase in fees, the intention is to try to build on the strengths of the criminal legal aid scheme while addressing any issues relating to how it is structured. Engagement will now begin with the legal profession for the purpose of working together to identify reforms to the fees, including automation of payments, which has been raised with me a number of times, and will support improved efficiency and governance in the administration of the scheme. This is with an intention of creating a pathway and ensuring there is fairness in the level of fees paid under the criminal legal aid scheme. These are necessary reforms and will help to further support the reforms being introduced in the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Bill 2023 more generally. I am pleased to be able to make these changes but I stress that this is the start of the process. I look forward to engaging with the associations.
If that had been flagged to the Bar Council two weeks ago, there would not have been the loss of an entire day of criminal cases. The Bar Council was not in any way aware of any move by the Government to do any sort of restoration of fees. If the Minister had said to the Bar Council two weeks ago what she has just said to me, its day of action would not have occurred, which was flagged on 12 July. As outlined in the budgetary submission from the Bar Council of Ireland, in September 2008, there was a non-payment of the 2.5% increase per the public service pay agreement; in March 2009, there was an 8% reduction in fee levels at the same time as the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, cuts; in April 2010, there was an 8% reduction in fee levels at the same time as FEMPI cuts; and in October 2011, there was a reduction of 10%. They are the only people standing in a courtroom whose fees have not been restored. Will the Minister provide a timeline as to when she expects the full restoration of fees, as others have had?
I appreciate, depending on the type of work, that there were two 8% cuts and a cut of 10% each in the lower and higher courts. For somebody working in both courts, that was a much higher cut. If somebody is working in the lower courts, the restoration we introduced and allowed for in yesterday's budget goes nearly halfway to responding to those cuts. As I said, this is the start of a process. I want to make sure that a fair system is in place that allows for fair restoration for those who provide a very valuable service to the State. As the Deputy knows, I cannot confirm a budget before the budget happens. I made it very clear to the associations that this was a priority for me in the budget and that I was engaging with the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform when I met them at various events they held and when speaking to individuals. I appreciate that they felt the need to continue with the protests. I wish it had not gotten to that point but I understand why it happened. The most important thing now is that the budget has passed, there is a 10% restoration and, most importantly, beyond that, I will engage with them to see what more we can do, looking at the overall structure.
It is not good enough. The Minister could have prevented it from taking place. In July 2018, a detailed review process led by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions stated:
That all parties are in unequivocal agreement that the ongoing flexibility being delivered by prosecuting counsel, documented above, is considered comparable to the flexibility delivered by other groups to justify the reversing of cuts imposed during the financial emergency.
That was five years ago. It was written in conjunction with the Minister's Department and sanctioned by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. The point is that this was well flagged five years ago, flagged on 12 July and still took place on 3 October, causing untold disruption to our court services on that day and the delaying of very serious court cases. We know about a sexual assault case that could not go ahead last May because of the lack of a senior counsel; this was flagged. This should have been communicated to the Bar Council. We did not need to have that day of action last Tuesday. I ask again for a timeline, please, for the full restoration of fees.
I agree this has been going on for too long, which is why I was really pleased to be able to make progress for the first time in this year's budget just yesterday. It is not possible for me to confirm to any organisation what may or may not be in the budget. What I can do, and certainly did do in this instance, was to reassure people, insofar as I possibly could, that this was a priority and something I was working on and that I was actively engaged on with my colleague in the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. He made it clear that he supported and wanted to work with barristers and solicitors working in the criminal legal aid profession. It is important that young, new barristers and solicitors take this path. I know this has been a disincentive for many people, which is why it is just not about the restoration of fees but also making sure the structure is correct and the way in which they are paid and the system itself is fair, quick and efficient, that people are not left waiting and they know there will be decent pay at the end of the day. When one looks at the overall figures, a higher percentage of those engaging in criminal legal aid cases probably take in less than €50,000. I acknowledge that this has been an ongoing problem, which is why I am pleased that we have made progress. I stress that this is the start of a process and I will be engaging immediately with the associations to make further progress as quickly as possible with the timeline I gave the Deputy.