Ms Éimear Fisher:

In relation to the ability to cross-examine, we took on board many of the views that were expressed during the consultation and also the various pronouncements made in judgments throughout the years. Allowing the guardian ad litem to cross-examine was seen by one eminent judge to give the guardian ad litem a status akin to a party in the proceedings. That was changing the role of the guardian ad litem significantly from being a person appointed to express the views of the child, pass on his or her feelings, wishes and views and give assistance to the court in its professional assessment to having a separate role as a party to the proceedings. It was seen, if I am correct in this, and we considered in depth something that was said by the President of the District Court that this was akin to giving the guardian ad litem party status. In such circumstances, giving such status was moving too far away from the express purpose of the Bill of giving effect to the voice of the child.

There always has been since the 1991 legislation a provision to provide for the child to be made a party to proceedings. As Carol Coulter said in her Child Care Law Reporting Project, this provision is rarely used. That provision will continue through this Bill as well and the child can be made a party to the proceedings. Where this happens and legal representation is appointed, the cross-examination will take place. Given the concerns have been raised and having listened to the various interventions this morning, that is perhaps too nuanced and we may need to clarify that more. We can talk to the Parliamentary Counsel on that. We were concerned that the purpose of the guardian ad litem might be diluted, which I totally understand.

Deputy Ó Laoghaire made a point about professional reports. The matter may need to be considered. The professional reports in the particular head he mentioned relate to the production of the GAL's report to the court. Where those reports on the child had previously been acquired by Tusla, for example, it was felt that it would be unfair to have the child be the subject of further reports. There is a head that allows for any issue to be brought to the attention of the court and for the court to request any report that it deems necessary. Perhaps the provision may be too nuanced. We need to consider the provision again but we will take on board the views expressed by members.