David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Daly has made my case for me here because she has more or less indicated that a sincere, voluntary apology is much better than a forced one. We are trying to encourage sincere, voluntary apologies. In the example I gave of a child, I probably should have carried on to say that a parent would be better off to try to elicit a voluntary, sincere apology rather than forcing the child to give one. That is why I have a problem with this set of amendments. All many people want is a sincere apology. If a patient felt that a doctor or other person was only apologising to him or her because he or she had to, the patient might conclude that the apology was meaningless and decide to sue. If people feel the apology is sincere and real, they may decide not to take things any further, conclude that a genuine mistake was made and go no further with the matter.

This is a philosophical argument in some ways but an important one. What we want to get to and start with is a sincere voluntary apology. Starting with mandatory will lose the argument completely, as Deputy O'Callaghan has pointed out. I ask Deputy Daly to consider what I have said and withdraw the amendments. The matter will be examined again if it does not work. The Deputy might be surprised. Internationally, sincere and meaningful apologies reduce litigation. International apology laws do not make them mandatory either.