Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I refer to the Taoiseach's remarks about the St. Andrews Agreement, which everybody supports. The leader of the DUP wants an election to do what he intends in respect of the Ulster Unionists, which is understandable. When the Taoiseach spoke about this previously, he raised the possibility of the Attorney General advising him to hold a referendum in this jurisdiction arising from the St. Andrews Agreement because of the confusion and lack of clarity. Given legislation has been published in Britain to enable elections to be held on 7 March 2007 and the Assembly to return, surely no complication should arise in respect of having a referendum in this jurisdiction. Is a referendum on this issue necessary because of the legislation and the subsequent election in Northern Ireland?

With regard to the referendum on children's rights, the Taoiseach will be aware Article 42.5 of the Constitution allows the State to intervene where it is called on "to endeavour to supply the place of parents where parents, for physical or moral reasons, fail in their duty towards their children". A number of organisations are calling for this provision to be replaced with an amendment which would state, "In exceptional circumstances, where parents fail to protect the welfare of their children, the State shall take such action as is necessary to ensure such protection". Has the Taoiseach a view on that? Has the Attorney General advised the Government regarding that wording?

I refer to the issue of soft information, which should be a vital part of any referendum in this area. It is estimated a conviction is only secured in 5% of child abuse cases. For instance, the third anniversary of Ian Huntley's conviction is approaching. He was repeatedly questioned about charges relating to sexual activity with minors, indecent assault, burglary and rape. In 1998 and 1999 he was questioned on four separate occasions about rape. The flow of soft information is, therefore, crucial to a referendum on children's rights. When Deputy Enright raised the issue, she was told constitutional issues would restrict the use of such information. Is that the case or has the Taoiseach been advised to the contrary? If a referendum is held, will the issue of soft information be included in the context of what I described in the British case, where clearly soft information regarding the danger posed by a particular personality had been gathered but was not made available? Is there a constitutional restriction in this regard? Should soft information be available? If a referendum is held, will it be included in the wording?

See this speech in context