Cyprian Brady (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)

I agree wholeheartedly with the previous speaker on the sensitivities surrounding this Bill. Most Members know people who have gone through the drawn out process of adoption, or people who are going through the process as this Bill is going through the House. The Minister of State recognises those problems and the pressure couples are under while they are going through that process. The process is cumbersome for many reasons. Almost 400 children were adopted from abroad in 2008. Some countries have provided more of those children than others.

Until the 1990s, Ireland was a country that sent its children abroad to be adopted, but we have changed and become a country that takes in children from abroad for adoption. There are almost 5,600 children in care in Ireland, approximately two thirds of whom are in long-term foster care. I have always admired people who foster children because it is a very tough thing to do, knowing that after building up a loving relationship with a child, ultimately, that he or she will move on. Those people who are involved in fostering have to be admired for their commitment and the effort they put into it. These are the changes that have taken place in this country over the past 20 years. I find it hard to justify that we have not ratified the Hague Convention despite signing up to it in 1993. It is about time we did, and I very much welcome that this is one of the prime features of the Bill.

The Hague Convention has three main objects: first, to establish safeguards to ensure that inter-country adoptions take place in the best interests of the child and with respect for his or her fundamental rights as recognised in international law; second, to establish a system of co-operation among contracting states to ensure that those safeguards are respected and thereby prevent the abduction, the sale of, or traffic in children; and third, to secure the recognition in contracting states of adoptions made in accordance with the convention. The whole thrust of the Hague Convention is that it has the welfare of the child at heart, which is something we cannot lose sight of in the Bill and which has to be at the core of what we do. I read a quote which stated that the whole purpose of adoption is to provide a family for a child, not a child for a family. Whatever steps must be taken to protect the child's rights and welfare, we must be extremely careful.

To be fair to the Minister of State, it is not an easy thing to do. We have all had contact from various different groups, individuals and couples, and some of the stories are quite harrowing. As the previous speaker said, going through a long process of adoption has a major effect on the individuals concerned, as well as on their wider families and, as I have seen from the correspondence and e-mails I have received, on their friends and wider circle. People become very concerned for the couple at the centre. Those sensitivities and that pressure must be recognised and acknowledged. If this Bill does anything, it must streamline the system which is in place and ensure that there is a way forward for couples who wish to adopt with an end in sight, and not have them start out on a journey which does not have any end, which is part of the problem for many.

I understand the Bill affects cases which are under way, some for up to four or five years. It is incumbent on the Department and the Minister to get as much legal advice as possible with regard to how this legislation deals with such cases. Given the effort people have made and the serious amount of money they may have spent in the process, all of this must be taken into account whatever changes are made in this area. The reorganisation and streamlining of the system is crucial.

The Adoption Board has done great work over the years. When one considers the changes that have taken place, there has been a significant strain on the resources and services which the Adoption Board was in a position to provide. It is crucial not to lose the expertise that has grown up in the Adoption Board not only among those people who are involved directly, such as the staff, but also among the consultants and those who advise the board. That expertise and experience must be retained in the new adoption authority of Ireland which is being put in place under the Bill. No more than in any other walk of life, those years of experience cannot be exchanged overnight. Experience builds up over a long number of years and it is crucial that it is kept in place.

To return to the ratification of the Hague Convention, the convention recognises that inter-country adoption suits some children but does not suit all. If we are to keep the welfare and well-being of the child at the heart of what we do, whatever mechanism is put in place to scrutinise, investigate and ensure that the information being provided on both sides is correct, we must recognise that it will not work in all cases, which is just the way matters pan out because that is life. It may suit some people but it will not suit others. However, we have to build in the safeguards and strengthen the regulations that are in place at present. This legislation will ensure that where information was not correct or where, for whatever reason, a particular adoption does not work, there is a mechanism to deal with that swiftly and effectively. This is in the interest of both sides, the child as well as the new parents, but it is also in the interest of the place where the child is coming from. It is something we must ensure.

Over the years, the support services have been under significant strain. They play a major part in the post-adoption situation. The services which are available are crucial both for the child and the adoptive parents because people can find themselves in a situation where they come across something they had not bargained for and cannot handle. The support services have to be strong enough to deal with such situations. In a case where an adopted child has other siblings, it is crucial that the whole family unit is catered for by whatever support services are available.

A section of the Bill deals with alternative countries, and those countries that are part of the Hague Convention - Brazil, Thailand, South Korea and the Philippines - are suggested alternatives. However, there is also scope for the inclusion of non-convention countries though the use of bilateral agreements. The onus is on us, as a state, to ensure that those countries we deal with fulfil all of their obligations, particularly in regard to the welfare of the child. We must take responsibility. It is very difficult for a state to assess the mechanisms of another state, including their legal and justice systems, and we must be extremely careful in this regard. Signing up to the Hague Convention will ensure that those countries we deal with directly fulfil all the requirements.

In the case of countries such as Russia, Ethiopia and China, for example, is very difficult for us to have such certainty. This is also the case for Vietnam. The number of children coming from Vietnam has grown in recent years and we must ensure that whatever steps we take on this side comply with our requirements under the Hague Convention, but also that whatever systems are in place in the other country would have at their heart the welfare and well-being of the child. We should not lose sight of that, which is why this legislation is so crucial now. We cannot afford to lose sight of that core value and any steps to be taken are welcome in that regard.

A long, drawn-out adoption process can be hard enough and the Minister of State has indicated that he is taking legal advice on dealing with transitional arrangements. People may have gone far down the road and invested much personal time, money, effort and emotion into it so this must be taken into account. I understand there are difficulties and some people may not ultimately end up where they thought they would be. There may be alternatives that can be taken advantage of, although transitional arrangements can be very sensitive.

With regard to the grandfather clause, the retention of the awareness of where an adopted child comes from is very important and appears to be becoming even more vital. There was a time when the suggestions were for a complete break. Friends of mine have adopted from abroad and made a point of ensuring the child is aware of where he or she came from and the culture and heritage there. It is crucial for the development of a child and the retention of such a connection only strengthens a family unit. The family may come from a completely different culture but the connection must be maintained.

This is a particularly sensitive area and in fairness to the Minister of State, he is aware of these sensitivities and has taken them into account. The two main thrusts of this legislation - the ratification of the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption and the setting up of the adoption authority - will improve what is a very delicate and sensitive mechanism. I wish it the very best.

See this speech in context