Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I note that Deputy Wallace has indicated his intention to withdraw amendment No. 12 and I welcome that.

I merely wish to make the point that should section 9(1) be changed to impose a duty on the Minister by inserting "shall" rather than "may", it would exclude the likely probability of there being more than one code of practice. I listened to the point raised by Deputy O'Callaghan, but the fact of the matter is that there are different practices and codes that are required for different areas of practice. I mentioned just one, which was the matter of children in mediation. I believe that unduly restricting the Minister in section 9(1) excludes that possibility, which is more than a possibility - it is a likelihood.

I want to make the point again regarding the education and training, which has been mentioned, as well as the qualifications. I draw the attention of members again to the role of the mediator under section 8(1), with specific reference to 8(1)(b) and 8(1)(c), by which the mediator would be required prior to the commencement of the mediation to

(b) furnish to the parties the following details of the mediator that are relevant to mediation in general or that particular mediation:(i) qualifications;

(ii) training and experience;

(iii) continuing professional development training,and

(c) furnish to the parties a copy of any code of practice to which he or she subscribes in so far as mediation is concerned.

That deals with the matter of qualifications and training and with the issue of experience and expertise and, therefore, I believe it caters for the points being raised by the Deputies in a number of the amendments.

With regard to education and training, I accept the point raised by Deputy Wallace. However, it is probably premature in this Bill and therefore inappropriate to deal with it at this stage. The minimum requirements of the Mediation Council of Ireland, about which there is some reference in the Bill, would deal with that. This would be an issue for the council. I refer to the Schedule of the Bill, which will impose a duty and obligation on the council to maintain and develop standards in the provision of mediation, including a system of training, education, professional development and the acquisition of expertise. I am not against the point Deputy Wallace is making, but I do not think it is appropriate in this part of the Bill and I do not think it is appropriate for this Bill. Rather, it is a matter for the Mediation Council. As the Deputy knows, the council will be of consequence in terms of the evolving nature of mediation and the law. I ask the Deputy to accept our bona fides in this regard.