Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This group of amendments relates to the mediator’s report to the court under section 17. It provides that where the parties decide to engage in mediation following an invitation by the court, and they subsequently apply to the court to re-enter the proceedings, the mediator will prepare and submit a report to the court outlining the outcome of the mediation. I take the point with regard to having the report in writing.

Following publication of the Bill, a number of submissions to my Department queried whether the mediator’s report should refer to unresolved matters as currently required by section 17(1)(b)(iii). I have accepted that it should not be necessary to refer to such “unresolved” issues and that is the purpose of amendments Nos. 36 and 38.

As regards amendments Nos. 33 and 34 tabled by Deputy Daly, I am not disposed to accept them as of now but I take the point she makes. Subsection (1) requires the mediator to prepare and submit a report to the court and this already implies that the report must be written. Moreover, inserting the words “short and neutral” in regard to such a report, as proposed in amendment No. 34, is unnecessary since paragraphs (a) and (b) already indicate the content of such a report.

As regards amendments Nos. 35 and 37, tabled by Deputies Wallace and Daly respectively, I am willing to give this issue further consideration because I do not believe there is much between us. The key issue here is the requirement in subsection (1)(b)(iv) that if no mediation settlement has been reached, the mediator’s report should contain a statement as to whether the parties engaged fully in the mediation or not. I recognise that this provision raises sensitive issues for mediators. Deputies will be aware that a broadly similar provision is already to be found in section 28 of the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011, which requires the chairperson of a mediation conference to include in his or her report to the court a statement as to whether the failure of mediation is substantially due to the conduct of one or more of the parties, and in that case specifying the identity of such party or parties.

I would ask Members to acknowledge the sensitivities here. I am willing to give the matter further consideration. I acknowledge the importance of the points raised in terms of facilitating further discussion and in assisting me to come back on Report Stage with a form of wording that should meet the concerns of Deputies as indicated in amendments Nos. 35 and 37. I would hope to come back with something if Members are minded to leave matters over until Report Stage.