Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:

“ “civil dispute” means any civil dispute to which this Act applies by virtue of section 3;”.

I have three amendments in this section, amendments Nos. 1, 4 and 7. The whole purpose of the grouping is to seek to clarify that the Bill applies to a wider group of disputes rather than only those in which civil proceedings have been issued. We feel that the use of the word "proceedings" is likely to cause confusion for the public and for the mediators themselves and could give rise to a belief that in order for the protections of the Bill to apply, proceedings will have had to have been issued. It is to try to clarify some of those points. I know the Minister has tabled amendment No. 3 to change the definition of proceedings to civil proceedings that may be initiated before a court. What I am asking the Minister to clarify here is that this amendment means that the Bill applies to any dispute in which there is a potential to litigate, that the proceedings do not have had to have been issued. Could he clarify that in the context of this amendment and what kinds of disputes he thinks would be excluded from the provision? Notwithstanding the Minister's amendment, the argument remains that for the avoidance of doubt in the public's mind, a "dispute" is better than "proceedings". It heads off any potential confusion. This is a critically important Bill as far as we are concerned. We want to encourage people to use mediation as an alternative to court.

We do not want people thinking it has to go through the courts process. There are situations in which this could cause irrevocable damage, for example, a dispute between neighbours. If somebody starts litigation it is very hard to come back from that and go into a mediation process. We want people to know they can get to mediation before the issue goes to court and that they can have an early intervention to de-escalate things. In that sense, I think "dispute" is a better word. I know Deputy Wallace has "dispute" rather than my wording, which is "civil dispute". I am open to that argument.