Mr. Mike Allen:

The legislation of the late 1980s defines homelessness and gives the authority to the local authorities to deal with the issues. It was very important and groundbreaking legislation at the time. It understands homelessness as something that happens to an adult individual. It refers in passing to "any other person who normally resides with him or who might reasonably be expected to reside with him". In the interim, since that legislation was passed, we have had all the revelations about the abuse of children in State and other institutions.

We have had Children First legislation, the approach to which social workers and others have fully adopted, and the children's rights referendum, but none of it has carried into practice. In an ideal world we would not have to deal with this issue, but in a world which would be a bit better than what we have, we would go through a major process of rethinking homeless legislation through consultation on how it would be drawn up in a way that would reflect the reality of how it would affect children. It is interesting to note that while family homelessness is a big issue in the United States for instance, in most European countries it is not an issue in the way we are experiencing it. It is a unique experience.

The proposed Private Members' Bill which is referred to in the Ombudsman's report proposes to insert into existing legislation that the local authority would have to take into account the best interests of the child. It is a clever and elegant piece of work. It is not the perfect solution, but the children in homeless accommodation cannot wait the four years it would take to do the perfect job. Therefore, it is important legislation. I know that it has not been supported by all parties represented in the Houses, but to see it become law and carried through into action would make a significant difference.