Ms Éimear Fisher:

I would like to draw the committee's attention to head 15 because that might reassure members. While the general scheme provides for a presumption in relation to the appointment of a guardian ad litem, the general scheme itself provides in subhead 1 that in any proceedings before the court under this Act in respect of the protection of a child, the court shall in so far as is practicable give due consideration, having regard to his age and maturity to the views of the child. That is very strong. While there is a presumption in relation to the appointment of a guardian ad litem, and that is one thing, in terms of actually hearing the voice of the child, this amendment of section 24 of the Act says the court shall in so far as is practicable give due consideration to the views of the child. One way of giving consideration to the views of the child is through a guardian ad litemand there is a presumption of appointment of the guardian ad litem. The court has to consider the most appropriate means for hearing the child's views. If in the view of the court the child is of such age, maturity and level of articulateness that it does not believe that a guardian ad litem should be appointed, then the court will have to give reasons that cannot be done. There is the prescription in respect of hearing the views and then there is the question of how they should be heard. If there is a presumption of the guardian ad litem being appointed and the guardian ad litem is not appointed, the court has to give the reasons. I hope that clarifies the matter.