Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this motion and thank the proponents of it for putting it before the House. The Fianna Fáil Party supports the notion of mediation services, as set out in the motion. The only problem we would have is that we would criticise the Government's delay in the publication of the mediation Bill, the general scheme of which was agreed in 2012. The proper codification of mediation services in Ireland would have the potential to reduce business and legal costs in a significant way and bring about a reduction in the time parties to disputes spend in court. I concur with many of the points made by my colleague, Senator Conway.

A pilot mediation programme conducted in the Dublin district and circuit courts in 2013 resulted in 831 concluded agreements, which resulted in saving an estimated 11.3% of court sitting time and annual savings of €119,000 plus in Courts Service costs, in addition to €225,000 in legal and board costs. We urgently need the enactment of the mediation Bill to make these cost savings widely available as well as delivering faster and better quality outcomes for those involved in disputes.

A draft general scheme of a mediation Bill was published in 2012 by the Department of Justice and Equality. The aim of the proposed Bill is to encourage and facilitate the use of mediation in resolving civil, commercial and family disputes. It seeks to provide an effective and efficient alternative to litigation by reducing legal costs and speeding up the resolution of disputes. There are a few important points I wish to put on the record. As currently drafted, and subject to the Bill going through the Houses, the scheme of Bill introduces a new statutory obligation on solicitors and barristers to inform their clients, prior to commencing court proceedings on their behalf, about the possibility of using mediation as an alternative means of resolving a dispute. That is a central plank of the proposed legislation. It provides that all mediation related communication between parties shall be confidential, an essential ingredient. It also provides that it is for the parties themselves to determine the enforceability of any agreement reached as a result of the mediation. It further provides a statutory basis for the courts to invite parties to consider mediation and adjourn court proceedings while mediation is ongoing, echoing existing procedures in the court rules.

This is not world breaking news, although it is in the mediation circle, but if we consider the high profile case involving our international and famed golfer currently before the courts, it was decided to give the parties another six hours or another day and, hopefully, the matter could be worked out through mediation. That makes a good deal of sense, rather than the adversarial position that is sometimes adopted in courts. The Bill also introduces an obligation on mediators to provide the parties with information on their training and qualification. The Bill contains a provision that allows parties to request a mediator at any time during the mediation process to make proposals to resolve the dispute, which the parties can then accept or reject. Such a request would effectively convert the process into conciliation. Conciliation is a particularly popular mechanism for resolving disputes in the construction industry, as has already been set out. The provision in the Bill is not expanded in detail and therefore it is likely to be the subject of further debate as it is developed. I urge that the Minister would introduce the Bill in the Seanad first and then by the time it gets through both Houses, certain improvements and changes can be made to the Bill.

The Bill is not intended to replace existing systems for resolving disputes outside of courts systems, such as those operated by the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the Labour Court in the employment field, or the Private Residential Tenancies Board in regard to landlord and tenant disputes. It would work in tandem with them and not as a replacement for them.

The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, of which I am a member, has already completed pre-legislative scrutiny of the concept of this Bill. However, the Government has yet to indicate when the Bill will be published in full and brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas. I hope the Minister of State will clarify that here tonight, as has been requested also by Senator Conway.

I am sure I do not have to remind the Minister of State that the Fine Gael-Labour programme for Government called for the encouragement and facilitation of mediation to resolve civil disputes, which is an aspect of their proposals with which I on this side of the House, and we as a party, would concur. The programme states that mediation will deliver significant costs and time savings for businesses and the State and that the Mediators Institute of Ireland, known as the MII, has demonstrated that significant savings can be made through mediation.

Mediation is a voluntary process of conflict prevention and resolution that allows the parties an opportunity to address their issues in a confidential, private and safe environment. Mediators are trained in conflict resolution skills and techniques and have the expertise needed to give people the best possible opportunity to resolve their disputes. I am not an expert on family law; it was not my forte, and when I was studying law family law was not even on the curriculum. However, having been a practising solicitor for many years, I have found from my experience that it is essential in the very sensitive and tense negotiations in family cases in particular, and sometimes also in commercial cases, that people can stand back from the fray and try to settle these disputes outside the court. The adversarial system often drives a wedge between parties and sometimes that gap cannot be bridged.

I support the motion. This is a welcome development and we urge the Minister of State, in so far as he can, to fast-track the Bill through the Houses of the Oireachtas. I would like to see it introduced in this House first. We need extra legislation in this Chamber.