Dr. Conor O'Mahony:

I would echo Deputy Ó Laoghaire's comments in respect of the strong UCC representation.

To answer his question, the Child Care Act is very specific on this. It provides for the appointment of a guardianad litem or a solicitor for the child. It is an either-or situation, so a child would not have both in a single case. The evidence is that the mechanism in the Child Care Act whereby a solicitor can be appointed for a child is used very infrequently. In recent years, it appears that there was only one judge in the country who was inclined to make use of that particular mechanism. The guardian ad litemis the primary vehicle in a set of proceedings through which the views of the child would be communicated to the court. There would always be a social worker involved on the Tusla side and there would be a solicitor representing Tusla in the proceedings. A social worker would invariably be involved in presenting the evidence to the court on behalf of Tusla as to why the child should be taken into care or why there should be a supervision order put in place. It is important to say that the social worker is not impartial. While social workers may characterise themselves as being in the court in order to represent the child's best interests and they may have spoken to the child and may communicate that to the court, they are in court seeking a particular outcome. It is almost equivalent to asking the mother or father in a private case what are the views of the child. That is why the guardian ad litembecomes so important because he or she provides independence in terms of an analysis of the child's best interests and communicating the views of the child. The social worker has a stake in the outcome, as it were, whereas the guardian ad litemis independent.