Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I join with others to express my broad support for the Bill. It is significant and a long-awaited milestone in the reform of the family justice system in Ireland. My colleague, Senator Ruane, who is also a member of the Committee on Justice, has tracked the Bill for a long time. She would like to have been here for the debate today, but cannot attend. She is, however, engaging an line-by-line reading of the Bill and is looking forward to engaging constructively in great detail in the coming weeks with the Minister and colleagues across the Upper House.

The Bill promises a lot of important reforms to the family justice system, ones will make progress in addressing the deficiencies in the existing system which was not designed with families, in particular children, in mind. Specialised family courts systems have become standard practice across Europe and many common law jurisdictions. While Ireland is behind the curve, I welcome that the Minister and his Department have undertaken a lot of work to address this. It is important to commend the former Minister, Deputy McEntee, who did important work to push this forward and make the system fit for purpose.

We know many things might be in programmes for Government, but Deputy McEntee pushed this up the agenda to make sure that we are now at a point where we are debating a Bill. I commend the Minister and Deputy McEntee in that regard. I welcome that the Bill will establish family courts, with family courts at District, Circuit and High Court level becoming separate divisions within the current court structures. Other Senators have spoken about ensuring that the family court follows through at the level the cases are taken and having specialised Judiciary and legal practitioners, which will make the system more child and family friendly and less adversarial. The Bill will also streamline family law proceedings. The long delays in proceedings can often add greatly to what are already difficult and distressing times for people who, as eloquently described by the Acting Chair, will be together for a long time. Going through one or two years of difficult court proceedings can be damaging to lifetime relationships. I hope that the streamlined procedure will also mean that proceedings become less costly for the individuals involved as well as the State.

I welcome that the Bill provides for the establishment of a family law rules committee, which will develop a set of overarching rules and practice guidelines and help to build consistency in the new system in terms of procedures and judgments. The inclusion of national practice directions is important and positive and is helpful towards moving towards more consistent decision-making while retaining judicial independence. This is an area of concern. There are anecdotes about what judge a case gets and how he or she might approach it. There should not be a roulette system for how a case is handled. People should know the principles and practices that will be put in place and the kinds of consideration that will be applied consistently. This is important. Practice directions can often be developed more quickly than legislation or court rules and could help to ensure the system remains dynamic and informed by best practice.

I have a concern connected to one of the recommendations of the gender equality committee, of which the Minister may be aware. Better practice is badly needed in respect of court-appointed psychological assessments. These assessments are not clearly regulated and can be inconsistent. I know of cases – we cannot mention specific ones – where they have been used in an abusive way, with children weaponised and partners put through assessments multiple times. For example, a partner in a custody case who was better resourced was in a position to suggest a psychologist to the court and have that psychologist assess another individual. There is a major concern about something that should be a constructive element – psychological assessment – being weaponised. I wished to signal this as an area that may need to be addressed through the family law rules committee and, possibly, this legislation. I will revert on this matter.

Regarding the occasional abuse of the court system as opposed to just its inefficiencies, delays and inappropriateness, the Minister and Senators will be aware that a number of advocacy and campaign groups around domestic violence have advised that there are areas of the Bill they believe need reform and strengthening in order to reflect the needs of domestic violence victims. Domestic violence is a feature of a not insignificant number of relationships that break down. These groups are a key user group and it is important that they be listened to. When the Seanad pushed for the inclusion of coercive control as an offence – that measure came from the Seanad – one of the important messages was that the Government needed to listen to those with expertise in this area and to consider those who were using the system and their needs. I hope that we can strengthen the Bill in this respect. There will be opportunities to do so.

The provision of out-of-court therapeutic family supports and alternative dispute services will be critical to the success of any new family court system. These should be free, accessible and carefully designed. For example, mediation is only appropriate sometimes.

I have many points to get through.

Advocacy groups have highlighted that the legislation does not adequately provide for the development of some of the necessary resources and structures around the provision of ancillary supports and services.

Legal practitioners have signalled a concern about the number of cases that may go to lower courts and the impact of this on, for example, the number of sitting judges needed at those levels to ensure sufficient capacity. We must not create a new bottleneck. Instead, there must be matching resources. In 2020, Ireland had one of the lowest number of judges per 100,000 inhabitants in the EU. The Department is awaiting research on this matter but the blunt figures point to a need for judges. Senator Wall referred to legal aid. Strengthening its provision and resourcing will also be important.

The family law complex at Hammond Lane will be critical physical infrastructure in making all of this work in a meaningful way.

Senator Ruane has repeatedly highlighted the collection of child maintenance and legislation on same. This issue has been dealt with inappropriately through the courts and through difficult processes in the social protection system. Regrettably, there was not a clearer outcome from the working group on child maintenance regarding a child maintenance body, but the Minister may be aware that Senator Ruane has proposed legislation that has the support of the cross-party women's caucus in the Oireachtas. We are considering what legislative measures could be put in place. Given the difficult process of going to court, a legislative measure that removed that legal context from child maintenance would be positive. We may try to address the matter as part of this Bill.

We in the Civil Engagement Group look forward to engaging with the Minister on what is a positive initiative, one that has significant potential to be transformative for families.