The Gazette 1995

GAZETTE

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1995

! that the Society was not in touch with j the members of the profession. He felt that efforts would be more effective if the structure of the Society was changed. Gerry Brady also expressed concern about the finances of the Society. He said that the Society was not member friendly and he also expressed concern about the numbers entering the profession. Oran Ryan, ' asked the question: "Has the Law Society become too cumbersome and is its management structure suitable to serve its members?" He criticised the number of committees and the number J of staff employed. He felt that the | Society should be reorganised in light ! o f the new Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994. Peter OBoyle referred to the Bye-laws of the Society and felt J that amendments to the Bye-laws were Í needed consequent on the passing of the new Act. Í I The discussion was then opened to the j floor. Gerry Hickey stated that the Í motions were very general and unspecific and that specific proposals ; for change should be produced first to | enable a constructive debate to take I place. Laurence Shields, Chairman of the Finance Committee, denied that the finances of the Society were "out of j control" and referred to the detailed | debate on the Annual Accounts for I 1993 which had taken place at the Half Ye^r Meeting in Galway in May 1994. | Barry Galvin said that none of the proposers had addressed the issue of what needed to be done and how to do it. He did not disagree with the desirability of a review and the need for change but he did disagree with the proposition that it was necessary to have an independent lay person outside our own profession to chair the review group. He proposed that the motions be amended to delete the reference to an "independent lay Chairperson" but that to create a time limit for the review and recommendations for change should be put before the Half Yearly Meeting in April/May 1995. Mr. Galvin's amendment proposal was seconded. Michael Nugent said that while the consensus of the meeting was clearly in favour of a review of the structures of the Society, what was now at issue

j was whether or not the review group should be chaired by someone outside I the profession. Anne Colley spoke in | favour of an independent lay j Chairperson being appointed. Ken I Murphy said that outside consultants Í were not the answer and that an examination of the structures could not ignore the views of the ordinary members of the Council who were democratically elected by the profession each year. He suggested that ! a review group be set up which would j be representative of the profession as a ! whole as well as the Council and which could present a written report with recommendations for change to the next general meeting of the Society. The President, from the Chair, said it was impractical to propose that a new | Director General to replace Noel Ryan not be appointed until the review group had completed its work. He said that the Council had to appoint a new chief executive as soon as possible to j manage the Society's administrative structure. He sought a consensus that the terms of appointment of the i Director General should not preempt i the scope of the review or of any j decisions to change the structures of ! the Society which might be made by a subsequent general meeting or by the ! Council. He was concerned that as ! clearly there was a consensus for a structures review that the wording of the motions, in particular the provision j relating to the chairperson should not I be divisive at this stage. He said the reality was that any recommendations for change made by the review group would have to be debated at a ' subsequent general meeting, when members would have the opportunity to express their approval or j

(b) Examine the administration, finances and accounts of the Law Society with the objective of better serving the solicitors' profession in modern Ireland; and that the enquiry report back to the half-yearly general meeting to 2. "That, as a matter of urgency, the Bye-laws of the Society be amended, after examination, to suit the structure and administration of the Society in modern Ireland." The Annual Accounts were approved and the date of the next Annual General j Meeting was fixed for 23 November, 1995. The prize bond winners were announced. (See next page). The follow- ing results of the Council elections j 1994/95 were declared at the AGM. be held in Dublin."

j

j

! j

!

Mr. Patrick A. Glynn was deemed to have been elected.

No. Elected

No. of Votes

1. Barry St. John Galvin 2. Michael V. O'Mahony

1,294 1,271 1,255 1,224 1,201 1,157 1,133 1,125 1,099 1,088 1,084 1,051 1,025 1,015 1,012 1,001 1,000

3. John Shaw

4. Anthony H. Ensor

5. MoyaQuinlan

6. Donald P. Binchy 7. Eva Mary Tobin 8. Patrick O'Connor 9. Michael G. Irvine 10. Geraldine M. Clarke

11. Ward McEllin 12. Ken Murphy

13. Niall Gerard Casey 14. Andrew F. Smyth 15. James MacGuill 16. Owen M. Binchy

17. Elma Lynch

j disapproval of the recommendations.

|

18. Laurence K. Shields

999 993 992 982 978 974 936 926 923 910 908 906 852

19. John Costello 20. Michael Carroll 21. Patrick Casey 22. Francis D. Daly

After a two hour discussion the j following resolutions were passed by a | large majority on a show of hands:

23. Fionnuala Breen-Walsh

| 1. "That the Law Society do j

24. Terence McCrann

immediately set up an enquiry to:

j

I j Í

!

25. Philip Joyce

26. Gerard F. Griffin

(a) Examine the structure of the Í Council of the Law Society with j the objective of better serving j the solicitors' profession in modern Ireland;

27. Stephanie M. Coggans

28. John G. Fish

29. Keenan Johnson 30. Brian J. Sheridan

17