Solicitor Strike: Tusla have been privately retaining solicitors

0:00The Pat Kenny Show on News Talk. With an ongoing legal aid dispute, Child and Family Agency Thusler has had to dip into its own pockets and privately retain a number of solicitors for vulnerable young people. Ono Sullivan is a partner in powdery solicitors and has been privately retained by Thusler and he joins me now to explain what's going on on. Good morning. Good morning, class. Thanks for having me on. Tell me this, dude. Thusler normally secure representation through, if you like, the public system for children in their care who require legal representation. Yes, Pat. So I would have worked down in the children's court in Smithfield for, to go to about five years exclusively, representing young people who have been open up in our fences. And that would have included children who would have been in the care of Thusler. And under the previous system, they would have, and this is, they're automatically entitled to legal aid. But unfortunately, at the moment, given the current dispute, there are no solicitors working

1:03down in that area at present, especially those with the relevant expertise and juvenile justice. And so it would have been unusual for Thusler to reach out for, to privately retain a solicitor to look after the court appearances and court work with regards to the children in their care. It's not a move I'd imagine that they've taken lightly. I know that they have to act as the responsible adult for the children in their care. And as such, due to the concerns that they would have around children in their care, their safety and their well-being and the fact that they couldn't access a solicitor on this new scheme, they've unfortunately left with the decision to dip into their own resources, which we all now are already overstretched in order to cover the legal fees for the children in the court because the scheme that's been introduced but the Department of Justice is failing them. And will the Department of Justice come to this particular party anyway? Because an offer has been made and we know it's still the subject of ongoing dispute between

2:04the solicitors and the minister. But is the minister prepared to offer, as part payment perhaps to your company, is he prepared to pay? It's specifically in relation to my representation, hey, by two-slit, no, I haven't heard anything from the Department of Justice in relation to that. All that the only communication is to two-slit who have agreed to cover the fees. I suppose where we're asked is that the whole thing is we're waiting for, I suppose, the Department of Justice to come and directly engage with us as per I suppose the teacher can to punish us comments during the week. The law authority president suggested the mediators trying to bring us to a close and we've narrowed it down to two net issues which even could be implemented on an interim basis. If that were to be done and the Department were to engage with us, that would mean we could all go back to work. These children would have representation before the children's court. It's very important that they do for the simple reason that we need to move quickly with

3:09children, particularly these vulnerable children in the children's court. The intervention is important to try and divert them away from criminal activity and the negative activity that came in the coming court. What are the two net issues that remain? The two net issues path that remain are simply this that the current scheme as it stands is a flat fee of 520 euros to cover everything. So that's all cases that a person could have before the court and all appearances. It's unworkable and it effectively means that we would be having to work for free when it comes to an umbrella case. I know if they particularly with children because the children's court takes a lot of cases to try and bring things to a conclusion that more of a supervisory role there. When you say two net issues, isn't that the big issue? The way the minister characterized it is you could divide the docket into its constituent parts if there were many charges and get paid for each one which he saw as maybe a scam. He may not have used that word but that was kind of the inference that I drew from it and he wanted to stop that scam.

4:11When you talk about two net issues that is the nub of it, not just one side issue that needs to be resolved. It's the crux. See I think there's perhaps a misunderstanding of how the criminal defense district court system works in that we're not being paid separate certificates for every charge that appears before the court. There could be a group of charges all related to one case that would attract one certificate and what we're saying is where there are separate and distinct cases that occur on separate dates because they will all have their own different bodies of work to be completed, reviewed to be disclosed to be reviewed guards, BLA as well, that they would attract a separate certificate and to I suppose alleviate the minister's concerns about these handfuls out of hundreds of thousands of cases that he's referred to. We're suggesting a cap of five and then on the other hand where cases of longevity and complexity do go on, that after a number of appearances what's been suggested is ten, another certificate will issue because at the moment under the current scheme as it stands, once we reach the six

5:11the parents and every parent's after that, every other person in that courtroom is being paid except for the person representing the accused and it's just unworkable in that instance. So we feel that these are quite reasonable and even if they were implemented on an interim basis so that we can all go back to work that the parliament has said it's conducting its own full review of the entire criminal legal aid system, that could be implemented on an interim basis and see what happens with the full review. A number of solicitors have signed back up to the ministers offer, have they not and then there are maybe 20 might have signed up and 80 are left out standing, is that about the ratio? I tell you, the vast vast majority of solicitors are not working at present. I think that is evident from the amount of certificates that have issued during this dispute has been a drop of about 93%. I know there's a number of people have come back to work but it's still the very few. The vast majority are not working. It's a case that's unfortunately the criminal system and the courts are in a sense of collapse. The minister has said it's working

6:14effectively. I've been in the children's court a couple of times this week and last week I've been the only representative there looking after a particular case. All of you, our children appearing are unrepresented and we're all reading stories in the news of all these people having to go before the court's unrepresented. It is not working. What happens then they get bail anyway and maybe many of them are saying this is great. No possibility of any punishment for the moment. It's deferred until this lot sort out their issues. I get to go free. Yeah, like there's going to be a massive backlog of cases as a result of this. COVID-level style backlogs. Unfortunately, children are going to suffer in the children's court with the cases that they have and victims of crime are not going to have their opportunity to be heard and to bring some conclusion to their cases. The judiciary are being important. A very difficult position by this minister. Not only do they have to deal with the cases that are before the courts and do it a very important role, but they're also nearly trying to help people navigate the system and the hearings in the absence of a solicitor as best they can. That's not something that they should do. I feel they've been left down as well. There's an awful lot

7:17of people being affected by this. Unfortunately, it rests with the minister to try and rectify it. We have made suggestions. We made them months ago at the end of July. There doesn't seem to be anything going back from the minister for justice. The T-shirt and the t-shirt have said direct engagement is best, but we haven't heard anything from the Department of Justice. We all want to go back to work. We all want to represent the people that we've represented before and other people need our help. I mean, solicitors aren't popular. It's not a popularity contest. However, we do a very important function. When they need a solicitor, once they can get somebody who is.the expertise and is working in the field so that they can be properly looked after. Finally, a question for you. I mean, your colleagues who are trying to fight the minister. Do they see you as a kind of a striped breaker? Myself? No, because this is a case where it's not in relation to legal aid. This is very much around legal aid and some private work has been completed by people. Unfortunately, they are. They're very understanding of the fact that when

8:23you have a care team ringing you up, extremely concerned about the safety and well-being of a particular young person, they're desperately asking you to get involved, try and help that they understand that in certain circumstances, you would have to act, but this is focused around legal aid. Myself and my colleagues are very strong in this in that we feel the current scheme, which is a one-size-fits-all for something that just does not have one-size. It's going to be unworkable. It's going to fail the very people it's meant to protect. It's going to collapse like the family-loss scheme where a flat family was introduced and 60% of the practitioners withdrew from that then. Unfortunately, look, thank you very much for joining us and throwing some lights on the subject, but kids who are in the care of Tussler are getting representation from Ono Sullivan. The Pat Kenny Show Saturday and Sunday from 10am on News Talk, Conversation Pants.