BARRISTERS HAVE described as “unsatisfactory” a meeting with Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to discuss legislation aimed at regulating the legal profession.
A report on the meeting between the Bar Council and Mr Shatter, which took place last Wednesday, has been circulated to all members of the bar. It was attended by Paul O’Higgins SC, chairman of the Bar Council, its director Jerry Carroll, Declan Doyle SC and David Barniville SC.
According to the report, the Minister said he hoped to start introducing the Legal Services Regulation Bill this week. He hoped to bring it to committee stage in February with a view to it being passed quickly.
He also said he would be bringing forward amendments, but did not say what they would be.
The Bar Council asked the Minister why he had chosen the establishment of a legal services regulatory authority, four members of which would be drawn from the legal professions and seven appointed by the Government.
The council said this model had not been recommended by the Competition Authority, whose report had been mandated by the EU-IMF troika.
Mr Shatter said the programme for government had referred to independent regulation of the legal profession. He told the Bar Council the measures reflected Government policy and he had discussed the Bill with the troika when they were in Dublin in October and it had approved it.
The council also objected to the new disciplinary tribunal proposed in the Bill, which will also contain a minority of lawyers’ representatives and a majority of Government appointees. It also expressed concern at the cost of the new structure.
The barristers welcomed the proposals on transparency in legal costs, but questioned why the proposed legal costs adjudicator hearings would be in private, when the existing taxing master hearings were in public and open to the media.
“Overall the meeting as an exercise in consultation was unsatisfactory,” the report stated.
“The Minister’s response to some of the critical issues . . . was that the approaches taken in the Bill . . . represented decided Government policy.”