Children and Adoption Bill [HL]

Our Amendment No. 14 in this group is similar in some ways to Amendment No. 5, moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Morris. We agree with some of the things that she has said. Our amendment differs in two very significant ways. We on these Benches are convinced that the value of mediation has been seriously underplayed to date. We are convinced that all parents seeking to go to court for a contact order to resolve their disputes should be forced to at least consider mediation as a way of agreeing the way forward. That should apply to those who are self-funded, as well as to those who are funded by public funds, which would save the courts valuable time if the contact arrangements were to break down in future, even for those who were self-funded. However, we agree with the Government that you cannot force people to take part in mediation; that is why we do not support Amendment No. 27, proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Morris. A good mediator will achieve a very high rate of success in getting parents to agree to try mediation following an information meeting, but we do not feel that it is essential that both parties attend the same meeting to obtain information about the benefits of mediation. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, for thinking again about that part of her amendment and, by implication, agreeing with that part of ours. In some cases, attending the same meeting could actually get in the way of either party concentrating on the matter in hand—for example, if there had been extreme bitterness or even fear. The heightened emotions of two warring parties are not conducive to a serious and calm consideration of the benefits that their child might reap if the two parties can successfully mediate. It might also take up the time of the mediator and distract her from the job in hand—which is, of course, to convince the parties to give it a try. That is why we inserted subsection (5) of our amendment. We inserted subsection (6) because we do not want to put any barrier in the way of parties agreeing to mediation. The cost is not great, and if the Government really believe in the benefits, surely it could be considered a good investment to prevent the waste of future court time. What would the Government do if someone refused to pay? Would they lock them up and put the children in care? It really is ridiculous to say that you are convinced of the benefit of something like that and then put up a barrier against it. I know that the Government do not have a bottomless purse, but the financial benefit to the country of getting this right without going to court would be very considerable. I hope that the Minister will accept that.