Dr. Geoffrey Shannon:

I will just look at the issues. I am grateful for the questions, which I could spend all day responding to because they are so rich in terms of the issues they raise. I will start with Deputy Troy's questions about the implementation plan. Of course, I would like to see an implementation plan concerning my recommendations; that goes without saying. Anybody who writes a report always likes to see it implemented. I am reassured that many of the recommendations I have suggested in the past are reflected in the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, as published. The concerns I had about child trafficking are captured to a certain extent, in addition to child pornography, grooming and jurisdictional issues.

There is merit in having an annual review of recommendations. As regards how I came up with these recommendations, I engaged in extensive consultations for my report. It comes back to a question raised by Senator Colm Burke. With regard to the emergency care order pre-birth, I consulted widely on that issue in gathering data. I consulted with members of the Judiciary on cases coming before the courts, not only in the Dublin area but also outside it. The Deputy's question is a legitimate one and I will come back and deal with it specifically. I consult all the stakeholders and then look at the issues. I try to frame a recommendation that reflects international best practice on the issue raised.

I am profoundly concerned about direct provision. It would be disingenuous of me, as an independent expert, not to articulate that view. Earlier this morning, I articulated the issues surrounding that. These practices have the potential to become the subject of tribunals in the future.

I welcome the establishment of the working group and I also welcome the opportunity to present my views to the group. What I present to the committee this morning is my considered view as to why I believe that the practice, while it may be cost-effective in the interim, in the long run it may end up costing the State significantly. I refer to the commission of investigation into the Tuam mother and baby home. The Minister is to be commended that €21 million expenditure has been allocated because it will be a robust system. However, what we should be trying to do is to ensure that this will be the commission of all commissions and that it should be the last commission. I would much prefer to see money invested in the protection of children in the future rather than on an historic inquiry. We are storing up trouble for the future in the case of the direct provision system. That is how I would characterise it and I do not need to add anything further.

I refer to Deputy Troy's question about the Child Care Actin light of the Roma cases. Undoubtedly, the lack of clarity around the protocols did act as a catalyst for at least one of those cases. The public need to be reassured in the aftermath of the Roma cases. As a citizen listening to the media commentary one would be left with the impression that the agents of the State, the Garda Síochána, took these kids into care without due consideration. In my view they did so for all the right reasons. We heard reference to the fact that they may very well have been criticised if they did not take these children into the care system. We need to publish protocols and to make them available in a manner that is understandable to the public so the public knows when these provisions will be activated. I make a number of further recommendations in my report which I urge should be implemented.

I do not intend getting involved in the politics of alcohol but my recommendations on alcohol have not been ambivalent. Norah Gibbons and I chaired the review into the deaths of 196 children in the care system. One finding that stood out is the failure on the part of society to comprehensively address the alcohol problem leaves the State services dealing with an insurmountable problem. We cannot have an ambivalent approach when it comes to alcohol or alcohol-sponsorship, particularly in the area of sport. For example, I was struck by what Deputy Byrne said and I agree completely with her in terms of breast-feeding in that it is a case of how it is portrayed. If we link alcohol to the advertising, children get the impression that this is something trendy. This is my concern. I am aware of the fact that there will be trade-offs. I say this from the position that I do not have to make those difficult decisions but I reiterate what I said to the committee last year.

On the question about Internet safety and the issue of bullying, I will link this question to Deputy Neville's question. I addressed Deputy Neville in my last year's report when I made a comprehensive submission to this committee on cyberbullying. I referenced the fact that mental health issues arise and that it is not a straightforward issue. None the less, I said that, in my view, the law had not kept pace with technology in the general area of Internet safety. I welcome the fact that the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Fitzgerald, has introduced comprehensive legislation on sexual offences.

Cyberbullying is a problem. I was asked last year to speak at a conference on this issue organised as part of the Greek Presidency. This problem is not confined to this jurisdiction and it exists elsewhere. We need to look at how we respond to it. I refer to some very good research on the subject. I have suggested that homophobic bullying needs to be tackled with a zero tolerance approach. We have seen in the media in recent hours that it is a societal issue. I refer to the extraordinary work done by BeLonG To and GLEN in addressing this issue which society must deal with. I agree with Deputy Neville that cyberbullying may be part of a broader problem. I agree with Deputy Troy that it needs a legislative response.

Deputy McLellan asked how has the best-interest principle been implemented following the referendum. The referendum result has yet to be ratified. The legislation emerging post the ratification of the referendum has reflected that principle. I wish to put on the record that there has been a lot of misinformation in the aftermath of the publication of the children and family relationships Bill. I suggest that as part of the three legislative consultation processes that two separate drafts have been put into the public domain so there has been wide consultation. Some people are saying that this legislation will be rushed. The legislation has had two airings already and it is commendable that the first draft was significantly changed in the redrafting into which was added the right to identity in the donor-conceived register. That is the advantage of having a pre-legislative consultation process. I refer to a very progressive provision in the Children and Family Relationships Bill. Head 34, as it was, addresses the best-interest principle in a pervasive type of fashion so this is being reflected in our law and it will be very positive once it has constitutional standing.

I share passionately all Deputy McLellan's views on direct provision. Few people who have worked in this area believe it is satisfactory. I share the Deputy's views on the need for supports for those with a disability. This issue ties in, to a certain extent, with the recommendations that I make on the Child Care Act. I refer to those parents who find themselves unable to cope and because they are unable to cope, their children may end up in the care system. It is not just a question of support but rather targeted support to meet the needs of adults. That is what we need to examine. Too often in the past, our approach has been to throw money at an issue when, in fact, a more targeted approach would generate much greater returns.

I also agree with Deputy McLellan's view on the need for a greater link between the agencies. She suggested we look at other models. I have examined many models, including the Australian and New Zealand models. This also ties in with my recommendation for structural reform as well as legislative reform. It is not just about legislation, which is only one part of the issue.

I agree with Senator van Turnhout that we need robust, independent oversight of the direct provision system. There is a counter-argument that these children are really not in State care. I would passionately say that these children do not enjoy life in a family unit. It is exactly what Deputy McLellan said, that vulnerable women and children are in close proximity to other individuals, the type of individuals whom we would vet if given the opportunity. I suggest that there should be an independent complaints mechanism, whatever shape that takes.

Senator van Turnhout also asked about my views on marriage, which have been grossly misrepresented. A number of years ago I put together a piece in which I had described marriage as the gold standard but I mentioned it in the context of that institution as being available to all citizens. I see it as being manipulated by some people and I do not intend to include it in today's discussion. However, it is important to clarify that point for the record.

A great deal of progress has been made. We need to be fair and objective. I refer, for example, to the establishment of a separate Minister with responsibility for this issue. We have also had a referendum on the rights of the child. However, much work remains to be done. It would be disingenuous of us if we were not to acknowledge the fact that progress has been made. When we make progress, it is important that we should acknowledge that fact. The next big body of work relates to the Child Care Act. The latter is our fundamental instrument of child protection and in my opinion it is in need of significant updating.

Senator Colm Burke posed a really good question. Just to explain, this is not a recommendation which occurred to me overnight. It is one which I framed having discussed matters with many of the key stakeholders involved. I do not have to hand the statistics the Senator is seeking but I agree that it is important to gather the relevant data. If the Senator is asking why I made the recommendation in question, the answer is that I am of the view that we need a proportionate response to a child protection issue that is likely to emerge. I happen to think that it is not proportionate to seek to take a child into care where a mother is in labour. That is my view. When I started examining this issue, I discovered it is becoming much more prevalent. It needs to be addressed, taking into account all of the caveats the Senator highlighted. I am of the view that what I propose is much more proportionate response. The birth mother will, at least, have the opportunity to respond and to defend her situation when she is not in a hospital bed. That is why I am suggesting this may be a better way of dealing with the matter and taking into consideration all of the caveats the Senator outlined. I agree with everything he said - which is legitimate - but I am suggesting that this is probably a more proportionate response to the child protection issue that is emerging. I agree that further work needs to be done on this matter.

I passionately share Deputy Catherine Byrne's views on LGBT children. I have had the absolute pleasure of working with BeLonGTo. When I was compiling my report last year, I spent a great deal of time considering the issues with BeLonGTo. By working with such an organisation, one obtains an appreciation of what are the issues. I also travelled internationally to discover whether there are other models in operation. I spent a great deal of time in connection with my report for last year looking at the discrete issue. I am really concerned that some schools should be aware of the fact that all children should be treated equally, regardless of their sexual orientation. There is much to be done yet on this front, particularly in terms of education. Many children will be aware of their sexual orientation at 12 years of age and they spend those formidable years in a school context. The research conducted by Dublin City University, the Supporting LGBT Lives study etc., all point to the need to ensure that teachers are equipped with the necessary resources to ensure that the school environment is safe. A child falling out of school because he or she has been bullied or targeted for bullying is really regrettable because it is not possible to get those years back. We need to redouble our efforts in this regard. In fairness, however, much has been done. The publication of the report by the Department of Education and Skills on tackling this issue is a major step forward. The current Government has been very impressive in the context of tackling this issue and is to be warmly congratulated for engaging directly in respect of it.

I fully agree with the Deputy in respect of prenatal care. I wondered whether I would address this kind of topic but I felt I had to do so because as I was writing my report, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child published its general comment No. 15. The issues the Deputy articulated so eloquently are very clearly reflected in the latter. What struck me when I read general comment No. 15 was the referencing of the World Health Organization's research and data and the fact that there is a direct correlation between breast-feeding and lower levels of obesity. That is quite a stark revelation. I am of the view that there is a reluctance to tackle the advertising issue in this area. If we are going to place children's health at the centre of our decision making, then we are going to be obliged to make some tough decisions. This was one of the recommendations in my report which generated a great deal of debate on publication. This meeting presents me with an opportunity to articulate why I felt it necessary to include it.

On Deputy Neville's question regarding involuntary admissions, I completely share his view in respect of consultation. A great deal has already been done but a lot more must be done in the area of mental health, particularly in the context of involuntary admission. The judgment I cited in my opening statement is very interesting in that it considers the issues the Deputy raised. In the instance in question, the court felt that the approach adopted under section 25 of the Mental Health Act was sufficient to incorporate, in a proportionate manner, the welfare and the views of the child.

Those are brief responses to the questions that have been posed. Lest there be any doubt, I wish to place on record my opinion that enormous progress has been made in so far as children's issues are concerned. I am privileged to have the opportunity to bring these further recommendations to the committee. My headline recommendation relates to direct provision and many members, including Senator van Turnhout and Deputy McLellan, referred to it. I am of the view that we need to redouble our efforts on that front.