Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Yes, quickly. I thank Senators for their supportive comments.

It was always my intention, after we published the Bill, and I think I said it in my speech, to give people an opportunity, particularly people who work in the areas and organisations with an interest in the areas, to come back to us with their observations on the provision. I am conscious of the need to provide a proper balance, of the need to protect the best interests of children, and of the need to ensure that we have a scheme that does not result in information being published that should not be published, or indeed that it does not create pressures that would inhibit individuals who need the assistance of the courts from taking court action.

The difficulty here has always been to strike a balance because there is a risk that we could, in attempting to give some additional access to courts in these areas and creating a degree of transparency, make it so conditional that after the legislation is enacted that cases continue virtually automatically to be heard in private. It was important to find the right balance. I am very appreciative for the various submissions and comments that we have received. I hope that we have now, in a sense, tidied up aspects that gave rise to concern. The provision is positive. We will have to wait and see if the Bill is enacted with the provision, not further amended, and how it works in practice. That is an important issue. We need some insight into that and I hope that we now have the balance right.

We cannot have a system where, because it is so conditional, every family law and child care case, virtually automatically, takes place in private. We also cannot have a system where everything is heard in public in circumstances where individuals are so stressed that they could not cope with reporters in a court and where a child's best interests or welfare could be detrimentally impacted upon.

Of course we must have very careful rules with regard to publishing. One of the things that has occurred to me that would be very useful in the context of dealing with matters is that following the enactment of the legislation, there could be some agree protocol with media outlets as to how they will report family cases so as to ensure that there is a degree of consistency in non-disclosure of sensitive information or of anything that could identify individuals. That would be an additional positive development if that could come about.

I hear what was said about Dolphin House. If I had my way, and if I had an unlimited sum of money, I would have dedicated new courts built across the country providing all of the necessary facilities, all of the consultation rooms, back-up mediation services, welfare services and judges specially appointed due to their specialist skills in these areas. That would mean we would have both the personnel and the buildings. However, we are operating in an environment where there is very limited funding available to provide all of the additional consultation services in Dolphin House. The provision of the inhouse mediation service has been a big step forward. Principally, it assists estranged parents, be they married or unmarried, to resolve issue relating to children. That is a great step forward.

Unfortunately, I cannot give guarantees on when the structure of our courts system will change and provide all of the adequate 21st century facilities that should be there because we are hamstrung by our financial capacities. As Minister, I will do what I can in this area but I do not want to hold out hope or mislead anyone on what is possible. Of course, the court structure will become a further issue of discussion as we travel the route of consultation in advance of providing a separate family court structure. It will take some years before the State is financially able to provide the type of desirable facilities that can be found in other countries such as Australia and some parts of Canada and the United States. In some parts of the UK work has been undertaken, particularly in the county and magistrates courts, to provide better facilities. I am very conscious that many have complained about facilities in the UK at the moment. I am afraid that is issue of court facilities is one to be addressed on an incremental basis. It is not an issue of direct relevance to the Bill but it is an issue that is of relevance to individuals who are engaged in family disputes.