Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 2878 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I wish to draw members' attention to the fact that mediators will be registered, not by the Minister but by approved agencies. Both government and non-government agencies have expressed strong support for the view that endorsement of an appropriately skilled mediator is a function best left to the particular agency engaged in mediation. I support that view, as it will ensure that the experts in the area of mediation are making the relevant decisions.

In order to facilitate access to mediation services, my department will keep an up-to-date list of registered mediators, which will be available to the public. A person seeking registration will have to meet the competency standards as prescribed in the regulations. Those standards are the ACT competency standards for mediators, which have attracted considerable interest across Australia, particularly in New South Wales, where they are the basic competency standards which community justice centres in that State use for the accreditation of mediators. Members will note that mediators will be approved for a maximum of three years and must be reassessed as competent, according to the standards, after that time. This will ensure that, over time, the quality of mediation provided by registered mediators in the Territory will be maintained at the level required under the competency standards.

The provision in the original Bill with regard to the confidentiality of anything said or done during a mediation session remains unchanged in the present Bill. However, that privilege is not absolute. The circumstances when the privilege will not apply are the same as those under subsection 131(2) of the Commonwealth Evidence Act 1995. In this way, the Bill provides for consistency between the Commonwealth and the ACT in regard to the exclusion of evidence of settlement negotiations.

Although this Bill is small in terms of its volume, it nevertheless heralds the beginning of a new era in enhancing access to justice in the ACT. Its importance must be seen in the context of the Government's general concern about the escalating cost of access to justice through litigation. In tabling the original Bill, I quoted the words of His Honour the Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Gerard Brennan. I believe that his words merit repeating. His Honour said:

If no new methods of dispensing justice are devised, the number of cases requiring resolution by trial will increase, trials will become more difficult and more time consuming and, in consequence, the cost of litigation and the amount of public funds that will have to be spent on litigation will escalate.

The aim of this Bill is precisely to meet the concern expressed by His Honour - to enhance an alternative method of resolving legal disputes through mediation. I am looking to extend the use of mediation in the ACT, including the option of court-linked mediation. This Bill represents the first stage in that process. Future stages will involve an acceptance by the courts, their clients and the legal profession that mediation is a viable alternative to litigation, and I will be working towards that end. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Wood) adjourned.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .