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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3172 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

I think it is important that the mediators, those who are responsible for organising the sessions, tell the people who are appearing very clearly what mediation is about. It is a fairly new process. Many people are already confused by the legal system, and there is potential for further confusion about the mediation process. They should be told - I am sure they will be, but the point does need to be emphasised - exactly what it is about, what the prospects are and very specifically what the limitations are and what options are out there. This is very much the case for all people, but especially for that very large section of the community who appear in courts and who know very little about their options and how they may proceed in those courts. It is a very important thing that ought to be done in the general administration of this system. I am confident that that will happen; but we must take every measure to ensure that it does, just as one further step to develop confidence in the system. It would be unfortunate if, after appearing in a mediation session, people did not realise exactly the scope and the limitations of the system.

MR MOORE (5.38): In rising to support the Mediation Bill, I must say that I am very pleased with the response of Mr Humphries on some of the issues that I raised with him. He has drawn up the amendments taking into account issues that were raised with me, between us and with other members of the community. This is an important new step forward in mediation and the way we conduct our business, particularly the business of conflict. For so long the outcome of conflict as dealt with by the legal system has been about winners and losers. Mediation, in fact, can have an outcome like that; but generally it is about looking for a way through, so that people who are involved in the process are not put into that sort of black-and-white category. There is no doubt that the legal system has sometimes been able to find a way to provide that sort of outcome, but it has been in the unusual case. This Bill facilitates a more important process. I hope that it assists in leading towards a less litigious society and a society in which there is less conflict.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (5.40), in reply: I thank members for their support for this Bill. As with the Coroners Bill that was before us this morning, it ought to be supported because it is the product of very extensive discussion with those interested in this area. Although the number of people who have an interest in this area is relatively small, the interest is quite intense. The desire by many in the community to see effective mediation mechanisms established is quite significant, and I think it holds enormous promise for the improvement of the operation of our system of resolving conflict within the community. Mr Wood made quite apposite comments about access to justice being denied where cost was an issue. I have no doubt that if mediation is developed, both independently and as an adjunct to access to justice through the courts, we will see a considerable improvement in people's access to timely and inexpensive justice through the alternative of mediation.

I attended a conference here in Canberra a few months ago that was attended by people from around Australia. They talked about the success and the development of court-annexed mediation. In all jurisdictions there was considerable progress made towards getting people not just to think, "Here is our case, here is how we initiate the process of bringing this before the court and here are the steps we go through to lead to a decision by a court at some point". Usually, that point is quite distant from the point

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