Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

As always, the Minister is very welcome, as are his officials. I appreciate the work of all the staff in the Department who supported and helped the young people in organising Comhairle na nÓg and ensuring their voices got heard in their campaign Let's Go Mental. It was very good to be part of something so positive regarding mental health. I congratulate those concerned.

With regard to Oberstown, I thank the Department for facilitating the committee's visit. The Children (Amendment) Bill is progressing. I thank the Minister for taking my amendment on board and keeping his word on bringing forward the subsequent amendment earlier today on Committee Stage.

I have a concern following our visit to Oberstown in regard to the educational attainment of children there. Some of the figures provided to Oireachtas Members were stark. There are children who enter with a cognitive age of 14 and a literacy age of nine. This points to wider failings in our educational system. Perhaps we need to examine what is occurring not only at the point when children enter Oberstown but also at the steps that lead up to that point.

I am concerned about decisions at judicial level on where children are to be sent. I am going to do some work on this personally. There is anecdotal evidence that girls tend to be sent into special care rather than Oberstown. There are only six places in Oberstown for girls. I am concerned that if only one girl is sent there, she is effectively put into solitary confinement. I am also concerned about the number being sent on remand. It is an issue we might be able to explore further.

The Children (Amendment) Bill must be applauded. I hope it will come into law very soon. We had very constructive engagement with Dr. Fergal Lynch last week on child care. I will not go back over the points made and the work of the interdepartmental group.

I was very concerned to hear on the news earlier in the week that the Government is considering increasing child benefit by €5. This is an incremental increase. I would like to be giving out lots of money everywhere but believe that if there is a priority, it is to invest in services that lead to better outcomes for children. When the cuts were being made, we were lectured — I will use that word wisely — to the effect that all the evidence proves investment is the answer. I acknowledge that what is occurring is not in the hands of the Minister but I am concerned.

With regard to special needs, is the interdepartmental group considering an anticipatory model for special needs? All the evidence shows that we should be considering this model for child care.

I would also like to raise the issue of child abuse material, particularly on the Internet. I produced a considerable report on this and was delighted to see that many of my recommendations have been taken on board in the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill. Thanks to this committee, I attended the European Forum on the Rights of the Child. The Bill uses the term "child pornography". I ask the Minister to suggest to the Minister for Justice and Equality that we call the phenomenon what it is, child abuse material, as requested by Interpol and Europol. In some ways, the term "child pornography" makes one believe there is consent whereas "child abuse material" names it for what it is. I ask the Minister for his support on that issue.

I thank the Minister for his answer in regard to question No. 6, on guardians ad litem. I very much welcome the reform he is proposing and look forward to seeing the heads of the legislation. With regard to my question on the constitutional amendment on children, I very much welcome the Minister's interpretation. On a side note, perhaps he or somebody else can give me advice. The President signed the legislation into law on 28 April but the Statute Book information in the Attorney General's office, with which I had been in touch, states the legislation is "subject to legal challenge". The office stated we have to wait for a reprint of the Constitution. For that reason, I contacted the OPW, which tells me that it does not intend to reprint the Constitution for some time, or basically until the marriage equality legislation is sorted. I have determined that we reprinted the Constitution after every other referendum, yet we decide we can wait where children are concerned. I know this is outside the Minister's hands but I am being sent from one party to the other on the matter. The Attorney General's statement on the website that the legislation is subject to legal challenge sends a wrong message. It is not subject to legal challenge, it is in law and the changes need to be reflected.

I am very happy with the Minister's response to me on the issue I raised. Can I presume the interpretation he has given us is shared by all Departments? He said the amendment sets certain standards relating to determining the views and best interests of children in specified proceedings which both comprehend existing provisions and require that all future legislation must comply in the areas concerned. My question for the Minister is on the Department of Social Protection and the Gender Recognition Bill and the issue of the voices of those under the age of 16. During the pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill, children asked to be heard. They were told by an Oireachtas committee that we do not hear from children. I have all the documentation to show that. The Norwegian Government announced earlier this week in heads of a Bill that it is to allow children from age seven to have their gender and identity recognised where there is parental consent. There is a missed opportunity. It is our first opportunity to give life to the amendment on children but we seem not to be doing it.

While I welcome the Minister's answer on adoption, I am waiting to see the Bill. There are approximately 50,000 to 60,000 people who are waiting for the relevant information. Complex constitutional issues continue to be raised but the reality, which I can state as a hobbyist genealogist, is that I can actually find out an individual's identity if I have enough money. With enough money I can order enough birth certificates under a certain name for a given period and area to allow me to work out a mother's identity. One could end up on somebody's doorstep asking her whether she is one's mother. Senator Averil Power and I have been trying to prevent door-stepping, unless one has a very common name. However, if one has a not-so-common name and enough money, one can do as I describe. We saw how Ms Catherine Corless was able to order certificates for the babies buried in Tuam.

For me, the right to identity is the issue. We talk about the right to privacy but it is about a balancing of rights; one right does not trump the other. I continually feel the advice being given is purely accounting for the right to privacy. Very often, if one talks to the groups of parents who gave up children, one learns some gave them up voluntarily while others gave them up without consent in the sense that we would understand "consent" today. We have to push harder on the issue of adoption and ensure people have a choice.