Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 13, lines 26 to 28, to delete subsection (1) and substitute the following:“9.--(1) The Agency shall, in performing its functions under section 8(1)(a), (b) or (c) in respect of an individual child or family, regard the best interests of the child as a primary consideration.”.

This is a very important area - the best interests and views of the child. Section 9(1) of the legislation reads: "The Agency shall, when making decisions in relation to the performance of its functions under section 8(1)(a), (b) or (c), have regard to the best interests of the child in all matters." That is weak. The words "have regard" mean "take into account", and that falls far short of everything we have addressed heretofore. I am mindful of having been in this room over a two-year period attending some 62 meetings as a member of the all-party group that worked towards the wording of the children's referendum, and this critical area was addressed during that time. It was part of the discourse in the very successful promotion of the children's rights referendum. It is very important, and this does not reflect the spirit of the all-party consideration of the best interests and views of the child. Therefore, we have put forward wording that better encapsulates the spirit of the all-party position in terms of the children's referendum and all the debate that has swirled around it since.

So it is that we propose the deletion of the wording of section 9(1) as presented in the draft legislation, and the placing instead of the following: "9.-(1) The Agency shall, in performing its functions under section 8(1 )(a), (b) or (c) in respect of an individual child or family, regard the best interests of the child as a primary consideration." There is a huge gap from the wording of having "regard to the best interests of the child in all matters" to a situation where we would "regard the best interests of the child as a primary consideration".

This has been an accepted approach to this issue. I had understood all along that we had a cross-party understanding and acceptance that the best interests of the child were, indeed, the primary consideration in all matters pertaining to the child and its future. I will not labour the case. The Minister is at least as familiar, if not more familiar, with the arguments around this than any of us here. I believe she will know the case I am putting to merit her most favourable consideration. I believe that anything less than affirming the best interests of the child as a primary consideration is to dilute that absolute requirement, as I see it.