Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the comments of Deputy Ó Snodaigh and the intention behind them. We had an opportunity to debate these issues in the earlier Stages of the legislation and I am unable to accept the amendments. I will make two important points.

First, I wish to make the point quite clearly that in section 3(1)(h), on the matter of the scope and extent of the legislation, there is a deliberate exclusion of "proceedings under the Domestic Violence Acts 1996 to 2011". This is an important and deliberate exclusion.

Second, it is important we underscore the fact that mediation is, and will remain, a voluntary process, and this is made clear in the definition of "mediation" in section 2. While the role of the mediator is to assist the parties to resolve the dispute at hand, it is really a matter for the parties to make the decision as to whether they will engage in the mediation process. Members will recall that the Bill was amended on Committee Stage to ensure a coherence and consistency between its provisions and the existing mediation related provisions in the Family Law Acts, including those under the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act 1989 and the subsequent Family Law (Divorce) Act 1996. Sections 5 and 6 of the 1989 Act require solicitors acting for both the applicants and the respondents in judicial separation cases to discuss the matter of mediation and the options with their respective clients and provide them with names and addresses of organisations and persons deemed suitably qualified to provide the services. Sections 6 and 7 of the Family Law (Divorce) Act 1996 imposed the same obligations on solicitors acting for the parties in divorce cases. Neither of these Acts excludes the mediation obligation on solicitors in cases in which domestic abuse is alleged or safety issues are put forward by a party. There are no such exclusions in the 1989 Act nor in the 1995 Act because mediation is by its very nature a voluntary process. This will remain the case under the legislation before the House, and that is important. A party who has experienced domestic abuse is unlikely to enter mediation unless he or she does so, for example, to protect children from the ordeal of court proceedings. The amendments in the name of Deputy Ó Snodaigh's colleague, Deputy Jonathan O'Brien, would not alter existing obligations on solicitors to discuss the options of mediation with parties to cases in which domestic abuse is alleged. This would require amendments to the 1989 and 1996 Acts, not this Bill.

I caution against any action that might be regarded as hasty or not properly thought through as far as these issues are concerned because. Mediation, as we all know, and this goes to the heart of the legislation, offers a less adversarial, less stressful, speedier and more efficient alternative to court proceedings in family law cases, especially cases in which children are involved, in order that the legacy of the adversarial nature, hostility, bad blood and bitterness that often results from drawn-out, lengthy, delicate, sensitive and, indeed, hurtful court proceedings can also be avoided.

See this speech in context