Seanad debates

Tuesday, 18 July 2017

Mediation Bill 2017: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Ivana BacikIvana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and congratulate him on his recent appointment to the justice brief. I also welcome the opportunity to debate the Bill. The Labour Party supports this important Bill. We are conscious that it is overdue, as others have said. We have been working on it for a long time. Indeed, looking back through my files I saw that I had addressed the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators about the Bill in April 2015. The Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, of which I was then a member, had conducted pre-legislative scrutiny and held hearings on the heads of the Bill in March 2012, some three years prior to that. I believe Senator Conway was a member of that committee as well. It has taken a long time to progress it, but it is welcome to have it before us today. It is unfortunate, perhaps, that we are rushing to deal with it in two days, given how long the gestation period has been, but we are all conscious that it must be supported and passed.

When the hearings were held by the joint justice committee all the stakeholders gave evidence, including the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution, Family Mediation Ireland, Dublin Solicitors Bar Association, the Irish Commercial Mediation Association and the Mediators' Institute of Ireland. All of them stressed the importance of having legislation in place to underpin what is already quite an extensive ongoing practice of mediation in this jurisdiction. They made the point, which I founding striking, that Ireland could and should become an important centre for international dispute resolution and that the introduction of comprehensive legislation underpinning the practice of mediation would be an important step towards achieving that goal. It has a huge economic benefit for our country. It was agreed in the programme for Government in 2011 that the Government would support, encourage and facilitate the use of mediation. We are also aware of the Law Reform Commission report of 2010 which also fed into this Bill.

The Minister has outlined the purpose of the Bill. The hope and expectation is that the Bill will bring about reductions in legal costs, speed up the resolution of disputes and, importantly, relieve stress for parties involved in court proceedings. Another point stressed by the bodies that made submissions to the hearings I mentioned was that it would provide greater access to justice for people in a more affordable and effective way, notwithstanding the practical points made by Senator Colm Burke about delays in the system and the important points raised by Women's Aid and so eloquently by Senator Ruane as to whether mediation is appropriate where domestic violence is alleged. Section 3 precludes mediation in domestic violence cases but, as Women's Aid points out, there are other proceedings where domestic violence might be alleged which are not caught by the exemption in that section. I believe there is provision in the Bill under which the Minister may consider other types of proceedings in which mediation would not be appropriate. Clearly, as the Law Reform Commission acknowledged in 2010, where the safety of a party or their children is at risk the dispute, even if it is not directly a domestic violence dispute, is not suitable for mediation. That must be kept under review, even if the Bill is not to be amended.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.