Dr. Niall Muldoon:

To take Deputy O'Sullivan up on that, she also asked about public organisations. I have engaged with both the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and the Department of Education and Skills to assist us with the second phase of our work on extending capacity around child-friendly administration in public services. What we have done in our first phase has been to talk to parents and children about how they find public services and what flaws and strengths they have seen. We now want to talk to public servants in the Departments and have received consent to that. We are about to move that on. From our point of view, it will be a very positive statement if we have a commitment from the Departments to work with us on moving child-friendly administration and children's rights and best interests forward in their work. We will be moving that on as soon as possible as part of our strategic plan. Once we have chatted with the public servants, there will be a third phase where we ask them how best we can help them to roll this out through the Departments.

We will ask if what will help them would be a questionnaire or a set of questions to ask every time a child is involved. We often look at a complaint about a decision and see that the child was never even considered in the process. It makes sense that if one follows the child, one will make a totally different decision. It might be a matter of a set of questions we put up on best interests.

That brings me on to the family law courts where there is a set of eight conditions one looks at regarding what is in the best interests of a child. We might work with the Departments as to how we would do that. It is hard to say what it is going to look like at the end because we want to engage with them and make sure it works for them, but we are pleased that we have had a very good start from their initial agreement to work with us on it. That is very positive.

The apology legislation is something we have been hoping to bring forward over the last couple of years. We have decided to commit to it now through the objectives. It ties in very clearly with the statement of the previous Minister for Health, Deputy Leo Varadkar, last year on open disclosure. The idea here is that we find a way, as is done in Canada and a number of other countries, to apologise to the individual involved as public servants without the threat of that being used against one in court. It is about finding the right way to do that. From our point of view, we have so many parents where such an approach would cut it off at the pass. An apology by its very nature acknowledges the harm or the hurt. Those concerned do not necessarily need to go to court to get that. The old-fashioned idea of deny and defend has to go. It applies across many issues and it involves leadership and may require somebody taking it on. I was pleased to see it on the agenda last year. I do not know if it is still in play within the Department of Health but it is something we will be working on to get the best measure for it in the future.

We are starting to look at child protection and children in court and are now 12 months down the line from the point where the constitutional amendment took force. I think it was April last year. We are starting to look to see whether children's voices are being heard properly within court and whether it is working the way it should. The question is whether resources are in place and how this is being done within the courts system. It is something I have on my radar to look at. I will hold back on saying whether it is working at this stage. I need to look into it a little more. It is certainly a matter we will not let slip. It is a very important step and if we get it right, we can roll it out into other public service areas. If we can find a way to hear children's voices properly in court and realise their best interests, it will make it easier to do that in other areas.

Both Deputies who spoke referred to digital media. Dr. McAuley might deal with that.