Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

We, too, strongly support the amendment and welcome the Bill. I ask the Minister to respond to me by advising how his change of the numerical order of the amendment will impact on the overall intention of the Senators' amendment. As I understand it, they recognise that these measures are already in the Bill but that this will copperfasten the idea that legal advice should be given to those to whom mediation is being recommended, that it is not always in their interests to go down that route, and that they might have to reconsider it.

One of the strongest recommendations for supporting this amendment should come from the fact that it is supported by Women's Aid, an organisation that is working on the ground and has experience over many years of the circumstances of dealing with this horrendous social issue, which is on the increase and is a very worrying response of modern society to both women and children and family life in general. The question of having no other option but to go into mediation should be considered, and not just on the basis of reducing legal costs, although I accept that is important.

There are all sorts of ways of reducing costs or making things more efficient. However, families should not be forced into situations that might be dangerous or not in their best interests or circumstances that might put them in any way at risk. In addition, mediation should not be forced upon them. I can certainly think of a few cases I personally know of where mediation would not work and could put women, children or the abused parties at risk, so it is very important that clause is there and is copperfastened in legal language. I commend the Senators on tabling the amendment but I ask the Minister to explain clearly the impact his moving things around and renaming them will have on the overall intention.

See this speech in context