Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I very much appreciate the objective of the Deputy’s amendment but there are a number of reasons I wish to put forward for my disposition not to accept it. The amendment would impose a significant additional function on the proposed mediation council in respect of complaints and disciplinary matters.

Following publication of the report of the then Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality on the draft Bill in 2012, my Department engaged in consultations with various bodies in the mediation sector to discuss the issue of regulation of the sector.

The outcome of the discussions was an oversight body, termed the Mediation Council in the Bill, and it should have the following functions: promote public awareness of, and provide information to the public about, the availability and operation of mediation services in the State; maintain and develop standards in the provision of mediation services; prepare codes of practice for mediators for approval by the Minister and oversee application of any approved code; establish and maintain a register of mediators who have subscribed to an approved code of practice; and advise on the establishment and operation of mediation information sessions in family law cases.

Mediation bodies pointed out that many mediators are members of regulated professions and are already subject to oversight and regulation by the regulatory bodies concerned. Moreover, the various mediation bodies have their own training frameworks, education courses, continual professional development, as well as disciplinary codes. I should point out that provision is made in section 9 for codes of practice, as we have already discussed, to include complaint and redress mechanisms and I am not convinced that the council should be given additional oversight in the Bill.

I would ask the Deputy to accept what I say having regard to the requirements of the council.