asked the Minister for Justice if, in view of the widespread public concern in the matter, he will undertake to reform the present structuring of the legal profession in the interests of justice, equality and the welfare of all members of society.

While I am not aware that there is widespread public concern in relation to the present structuring of the legal profession, this is one aspect of the general question of the provision of legal services which I have under continuous review. I have not at present any proposals for change in this area.

What has the Minister in mind when he says that this is an aspect which is under general review? Does this mean that nothing is being done about it?

If the Deputy would put his question without trying to answer it for me he might get a more reasonable answer. The pros and cons of changes in the structure of the legal profession are perhaps too complex to be usefully commented on at Question Time, but I am not suggesting that there is no need to question the present structures. The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure have in the past been requested to examine the present position but they have not as yet submitted a report. I propose to ask them at the first available opportunity for this report.

Would the Minister be concerned if a trend emerged which allowed for less easy access to the legal profession than currently exists and for access perhaps primarily from a stratum of society which might not necessarily comprehend the total social spectrum within it?

As I said this is an extremely complicated question.

Would the Minister be concerned about a trend along the lines I have suggested?

There are a lot of things about the matter that I would be concerned about.

I trust this question will not be regarded as being hypothetical. Would the Minister bear in mind that the present structure requires that the judiciary be consulted about any changes, but existing law gives the predominant power in the judiciary to the barristers' profession, when evaluating the weight of any recommendation to him from the committees to which he referred, which are notorious for bringing in recommendations long after public opinion has overtaken them?

The Deputy can certainly be assured that I will bear what he says in mind. The Deputy is aware that there are quite a number of the legal profession on this committee.

The point I am making is that there are two branches of the legal profession and the one that is opposing change represents a minority of legal practitioners.

Would the Minister use his good office to ensure that access to the legal profession is made more readily available to all sections of the community by the extension of higher education grants to the professional courses involved in the legal profession?

I understand that there is concern at what the Deputy says, more so in very recent times.

In view of these expressions of concern would the Minister seriously consider setting up a fairly widely representative commission to examine access to and the role of the legal profession?

We are spreading our wings a bit now.

Would the Minister not spread his wings a bit on this issue?

I am quite prepared to consider what Deputy Desmond says.

(Cavan-Monaghan): In relation to the Minister's reply to Deputy Desmond, the Minister is aware that under the new system university degrees will normally be required and I assume, and would ask the Minister to confirm, that university grants will be applicable to that course.

That is a separate question.

Not alone is it a separate question, but it is a question that should be directed to another Department.