Last month, a man who was alleged to have threatened to rape and kill his former partner was allowed to cross-examine her in court. This is a man who was accused of trying to kick in her front door and break into her home while young children were present. He is accused of sending her an image of a handgun and saying he would rip her teeth out with pliers and stick a gun down her throat. He was allowed to cross-examine this terrified woman because no solicitor was available to represent him.

On Friday, a woman who had taken out a barring order against her son was verbally abused by him as he cross-examined her. The man had to be removed from court by prison officers. This woman had to sit in court while a man she lived in fear of harangued and abused her. This woman, who had shown immense courage by taking out the barring order and going to court, has been utterly failed.

Yesterday in the Central Criminal Court, half of the rape and serious sexual assault cases due to go on trial were adjourned because of the dispute. Six of the 13 cases were affected. These vulnerable complainants are now in limbo. They have no idea when these cases will be heard. This is not the first time this has happened. Back in July, the Social Democrats’ leader, Deputy Holly Cairns, raised this very issue with the Taoiseach. She told the Taoiseach that just two out of the 12 rape cases in the Central Criminal Court were able to proceed. Most of them were adjourned because of this row between the Minister and solicitors, and nothing effective has been done since then to resolve this.

I do not need to tell the Taoiseach how difficult it is for victims of rape and sexual assault to come forward and how few of these cases are prosecuted. It is a scandal and outrage that this disruption is being allowed to continue. The open warfare between the justice Minister and solicitors has to end. Victims of crime are being caught in the crossfire. Both sides need to talk to each other. The last time the Minister met with the Law Society was in July. Today, hours before his justice committee appearance, he sent a letter saying he is open to a meeting. The Minister is treating this dispute like it is a game. It is now time for the Taoiseach to intervene and show leadership. There is no good reason not to. He did so with the public sector dispute last week, and he needs to do it again now. He needs to step up, take action and protect victims of crime from further trauma. Will the Taoiseach show leadership and personally intervene to ensure this dispute is resolved?

I thank the Deputy for raising a very important issue. In my view, the cases he raised are harrowing. I have, perhaps, a slightly different perspective to the Deputy in that I think solicitors should attend those cases. The dispute, and the nature of it, does not justify the absence from such cases. That is my perspective.

I also put it to the Deputy that, perhaps, he and others in the Opposition should show some leadership on this issue. For years, people have questioned and complained about the absence of reform within our legal system and our legal service. People have raised serious issues at various committees, in the public accounts committee and everywhere, about value for money. To go back nearly 20 years ago to early on when the Personal Injuries Assessment Board was established, where did the attack come from to undermine that, which continues to this very day? It came from the legal profession. I do not say that with any joy, but that is the reality. That was a reform to deal with personal injuries.

From looking at the Department of justice’s review of the old system of criminal legal aid, which necessitated the reforms the Minister introduced, it appears to me that it raised serious issues. The review highlighted, for example, more appearances and longer trials due to an appearance-based fee structure. That is at the kernel. This is, fundamentally, a money dispute. Multiple payments were being granted for no stated reason and multiple solicitors were being assigned to the same defendant for charges heard on the same day, resulting in multiple payments for the same case. These are serious issues that, collectively in this House, we should be engaged with, rather than saying that it is all the Minister’s fault and that no one else has any contribution to make to what represents a more sensible reform of the legal system, with better value for money for the taxpayer who is paying for it.

The investment that has taken place is quite significant. Criminal case volumes in the District Court have decreased over the years but the expenditure on criminal legal aid in the District Court has increased from about €19 million in 2015 to over €41 million in 2025. The Minister, Deputy O’Callaghan, has introduced an 8% increase in criminal legal aid fees payable to the solicitors and barristers in the Circuit Court and higher courts from 1 July 2026. That represents the total restoration of the criminal legal aid fees cut under FEMPI. So, it is very regrettable. I believe it to be unnecessary that some solicitors are choosing to withdraw their services. The overall budget for the-----

Thank you, Taoiseach. I call Deputy O'Callaghan to respond.

-----legal area has increased dramatically also.

This is not reform; this is chaos that has been created. Why has the Minister for justice not met with the Law Society, given how serious this is? Since July there have been no meetings. Only now is he saying that he will meet it. Why has he let this go on for so long? What is the Taoiseach going to do about this? Surely he agrees that what has happened and what people have been put through - people who have gone through hell are now being retraumatised - is not acceptable. Is he going to intervene to stop this happening any more? There is a role for him; he is the Taoiseach of the country. What has happened to people is utterly unacceptable and I am sure he can agree about that. What is he going to do? This cannot keep on dragging on. We cannot have people, who have gone through hell, being put through more trauma in the courts. It has to stop. Will the Taoiseach stand up and do something about this?

First of all, I support the Minister's reform initiative. That is the first point. I would make the point that more than 3,385 certificates have issued. These are invoices for payment for legal aid, with an approximate value of €1.7 million since 1 July. That just represents payments for the District Court alone. There has been ongoing engagement. The Minister met with the Law Society twice. There have been further meetings between officials in the Department of justice, the Minister, the Law Society and the Bar Council in relation to the changes to the criminal legal aid fee structure. The Minister wrote to the president of the Law Society today to indicate that he is happy to engage on any minor changes required to the new scheme, particularly in the area of the children's court. The Minister has already changed aspects of the scheme since it was first introduced. He has increased the flat fee from €455 to €520. He has agreed to split the payment of the fee and has confirmed that separate and distinct cases appearing for the first time on different days would attract a new legal aid certificate for the same accused person.

Just one note of caution - there is competition law around all of this too, in terms of who has responsibility collectively to represent any groups-----

Thank you, Taoiseach. The time is up. Deputy Bacik is next.

It is a point that people should not lose sight of either.

For victims and survivors of domestic violence and sexual offences the experience of undergoing a criminal trial and being subject to cross-examination as a witness in a criminal trial as a complainant has been described as a second victimisation. Even more deeply traumatising is where the cross-examination is not carried out by a lawyer but by the defendant - the accused or the alleged abuser - in person. That is why we were all so shocked last week to hear about the horrendous ordeal of the woman complainant in the District Court whose partner had allegedly threatened to rape and kill her in the most graphic and horrendous terms. He was unrepresented legally in court due to the criminal legal aid dispute and he subjected her to personal cross-examination in the court room. For any complainant in a case like that to have to face the accused in person across the court is unthinkable. My heart goes out to her and to all of those victims, survivors and complainants who have been affected by the withdrawal of legal representation, including those whose cases were adjourned yesterday in the Central Criminal Court.

These cases illustrate the sharpest impact of the criminal legal aid debacle, a crisis in the courts that is the direct creation of the justice Minister. Despite his insistence that his new criminal legal aid scheme is working, the courts are at a standstill. There is chaos since he introduced the change in July and that is the reality. It is a change he justified by relying on statistics showing a high rate of adjournments. He ploughed on with this, even when it was pointed out that the law requires an adjournment in many criminal cases and that adjournments are given very frequently where the State is running late and has not yet served the book of evidence. Now the worst impacts of this stalemate are being felt by the most vulnerable people involved in the system.

The Minister calls the latest withdrawal of criminal solicitors unnecessary and regrettable. It is deeply regrettable but he appears to be in denial about his own role in escalating this situation. Yesterday he said, when asked, that he was happy to tweak the new regulations. Why has he not acted before now to defuse matters? He has not met the Law Society since 27 July. He has just sent a letter at 1 p.m. today to the Law Society saying that he will engage with it, which is very little, very late.

It is cynical.

It is very cynical. We saw the same pattern in the public sector pay dispute with the Minister, Deputy Chambers, waiting for strikes to bring the country to a halt before committing to meaningful engagement and the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, similarly waiting for escalated action. This has become the modus operandi of Fianna Fáil in government. Ignore the warnings, dismiss concerns, engage in denial and only engage meaningfully when crisis is reached while denying all responsibility.

This will only get worse. Vulnerable people are at risk. Victims of crime cannot be collateral damage in a proxy war between Jim O'Callaghan and the Law Society or indeed, a proxy battle for the leadership of Fianna Fáil. We are seeing one arm of the State, this Government, effectively hamstringing another, our justice system.

Will the Taoiseach take responsibility for the actions of a Minister in denial and instruct the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, to engage meaningfully with the legal profession to ensure that vulnerable people in the justice system are protected?

As I said, I support the reforms. Not once has the Deputy mentioned the need for reform. Not once has she said there is an onus and a responsibility on solicitors either. She referenced cases that are indeed harrowing and horrific. I put it to her that in such serious cases, solicitors should attend. The substance of this dispute does not justify solicitors not attending the cases she has movingly and eloquently articulated. That is my position.

The Deputy has said a number of things are not correct. First, the Minister has an obligation to act when a report and review indicate a significant need for reform. It has always struck me over the years that the most difficult area in which to implement reform is the legal arena. There are always plenty of defenders in the House of that particular area. I believe a legal system is vital to our democracy. A criminal justice system is vital to our democracy. However, that does not mean it is immune from reform initiatives. We need reform in this area.

As I said, the review highlighted significant issues. For example, it showed that cases with criminal legal aid took an average of 313 calendar days to complete, compared with 133 days for cases without. These are significant issues and governments have an obligation to do reform. Investment and reform come together. The weighted average appearances for cases with criminal legal aid is five while the weighted average appearances for cases without criminal legal aid is just over three. Deputy Bacik wants the Minister to just ignore that. She has not referenced that at all. She said it is all the Minister's creation. On another day, if the Minister ignored a report, others would come into the House and ask why he left that report sitting on his desk.

I genuinely make the point that we need reform in this area. The Minister did change. The Deputy is saying he did not make any changes or whatever. He increased the flat fee from the original €455 to €520. He agreed to split the payment of the fee. He confirmed that separate and distinct cases appearing for the first time on different days would attract a new legal aid certificate for the same accused person. He has written to the Law Society indicating that, particularly in the context of children's court, he is prepared to make further changes. I do not want to make the thing more complicated but there is an issue around the degree to which the Law Society can represent, and I may be wrong here, solicitors in the collective in terms of the competition authority's perspective on all this and individual entities. Some of these firms have significant turnovers. That needs to be acknowledged. They are entitled to that and to earn a good living. They are entitled to fair earnings and a fair living.

Thank you, Taoiseach. I call Deputy Bacik.

Surely the Government on behalf of the taxpayer is entitled to reform systems to get better value for money.

With respect, of course we support reforms that will make the system run better for everyone involved. However, it is how you carry out the reform that is the point here. The Minister has simply refused to engage and is in denial about the impact of the change, the current debacle and the stalemate. Last week the Taoiseach lectured public sector workers. He is lecturing us today in the Chamber. The reality is that in order to make reforms work you need to engage meaningfully and that is what the Minister has patently failed to do. He has not met the Law Society since 27 July. He has just, at 1 p.m. today, issued a letter to the Law Society saying he will engage. I think he will instruct his officials to engage with the Law Society. That is welcome but it is very little, very late. Meanwhile, the impact is being felt. In June there were 10,300 legal aid certificates issued and a 90% drop the following month at 702. There are real concerns that future prosecutions are being put at risk. Not alone are those currently before the courts facing enormous delays, and impacts if you are a victim, a survivor or a witness who has taken time off work, but there are also future prosecutions and people held in detention.

The Taoiseach to respond.

Just as the Taoiseach eventually engaged meaningfully and was brought to the table last week, let us see engagement that is meaningful now.

First of all, I do not lecture. I am not lecturing the Deputy, and I did not lecture public service workers. Since I came back into Government in 2020, we have expanded-----

What were they striking for?

-----the public service significantly. We have had two national pay agreements. We will have a further national pay agreement following, hopefully, good negotiations that are under way between the public service trade unions under the WRC with the Government under the aegis of the Minister for public expenditure, Deputy Chambers.

In respect of this issue, the Minister has engaged. I have said this to the Deputy already. Just because she keeps on saying the opposite does not mean it is true. The Minister has engaged and he has changed the scheme. He has written to the Law Society as of day again but he also had met it twice, in May and in July, and made changes, and is prepared to make further changes but the essence of the reforms are here to stay because we do owe it to the taxpayer.

The Deputy said she is in support of reform but I had to drag that out of her. The Deputy has made one phrase in four minutes.

We have always said it.

Thank you, Taoiseach.

The Deputy said that she supports reform as well, but not now please, and that this is too good for her in opposition to turn.