Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This group of amendments relates to codes of practice under section 9(2) of the Bill. I regret I am unable to accept amendments Nos. 19 to 21, inclusive, and 23. On Committee Stage, concern was expressed that the list of matters that could be covered in a code of practice was too prescriptive and that section 9(2) be amended to provide that other matters relevant to the conduct of mediation be included. To address that concern and following further discussions, as has been outlined by Deputy Wallace, I have tabled amendments Nos. 24 and 25. These amendments provide for the insertion of an additional paragraph (h) in section 9(2) which allows a code of practice to include such other matters as may be relevant to the conduct of mediation. That addresses the issues of concern. I believe amendments Nos. 24 and 25 are probably preferable to Deputy Wallace's proposal in amendment No. 20 that the words "but is not limited to" be inserted in the introduction of section 9(2). The legal concern is that the use of those words could potentially extend the scope of the subsection beyond matters relevant to the conduct of mediation. There is no great difference in terms of substance between amendment No. 25 and amendment No. 20. On balance, I hope Deputy Wallace can accept my proposal.

With regard to amendments Nos. 19 to 21, inclusive, acceptance of the amendments would mean that each and every code under section 9 would have to cover all matters listed in section 9(2). As I mentioned earlier, our intention is to have a code of conduct applicable to all mediators, with a possibility of more specialised codes for mediators who may be involved in specific areas of specialty. Deputy Daly appears to recognise the problem that this would give rise to because she proposes in amendment No. 23 to insert the words "where relevant" in paragraph (c), where reference is made to procedures to be followed by mediators in the conduct of a mediation involving children. The use of the words "where relevant" here could weaken this provision by permitting mediators to decide when such procedures were relevant. My view, and it was a view expressed on Committee Stage and I hope it still is the view, is that the code should apply in all respects in cases involving children.

I realise the points I am making are probably technical in nature, but we could well have amendments that we probably did not intend to have. I do not say that with any disrespect to Deputy Wallace because what we are trying to do is achieve the best possible practice. In that regard, I prefer amendments Nos. 24 and 25 to amendments Nos. 19 to 21, inclusive, and 23.

See this speech in context