Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am very pleased that Professor O'Mahony has had the opportunity to appear before the committee to provide his explanation of his report which is distinctly different from its interpretation in the issues paper provided to the committee. I agree that non-regulation is not fair. I agree with him on the need for bespoke legislation to deal with that. I also agree with Mr. Justice O'Donnell who said we need that legislation now more than ever. I do not come from a legal background which is why I value so much Professor O'Mahony's legal expertise and insight which he is providing today.

I have three questions arising from his contribution today. The first relates to citizenship and the proposal around being provided for in advance of the child arriving here.

That would hugely reduce stress on families, and it would be a very progressive and positive move. Hypothetically, is that soon enough if we are to make a determination on citizenship? What happens if, for some reason, a determination fails?

With regard to the Verona principles, we do not want a child ending up stateless. A child will obviously have assistance from the country in which he or she is born. From an Irish perspective, what happens if the determination is no? If so, is it too late?

In terms of the advice on the protection of an international surrogate mother, Professor O'Mahony said it may still leave some children in the situation in which they find themselves in today. Is there a way of dealing with that? There probably is not. If we apply standards, unfortunately some cases may not meet them. What happens in such a situation? How do we factor that in retrospectively? Is that possible? Is it fair? Is it legally possible to apply standards retrospectively? If so, how will that affect children who have already been born through surrogacy?

In terms of an age limit of 16, earlier today the Ombudsman for Children said he feels the age of 16 is not legally practical and does not know where it came from. The age of 18 is the age of adulthood and consent. The ombudsman feels that if we put in the age of 16, we could perhaps have a negative impact on other children's rights at the ages of 16 and 17. Professor O'Mahony has proposed we do not have a limitation. Does that same concern arise? Does he feel that by removing the age limitation, we will remove that whole question for other rights as well?