Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I wish to share time with Deputy Catherine Byrne.

I welcome that, at long last, the Bill is before the House. It is exactly ten months this week since it was introduced in the Seanad. We have been given various reasons for the failure to bring it before the House but in the meantime, our bilateral agreement with Vietnam is lapsed and we have to wait for the ISS report to be finalised. Given that the Minister of State received a draft of the report in August, it seems odd that he did not attempt to use the draft recommendations to fast-track a new bilateral agreement with Vietnam. On a day when yet another report on institutional abuse is being published, it is appropriate that we discuss the consolidation of our adoption legislation, which dates back to 1952. People suffered terribly in Irish institutions. Adoption is supposed to be child centred and I accept that the Bill endeavours to meet that goal. Thankfully, people in this country are willing and able to accommodate children who are housed in institutions in other parts of the world.

The Bill's flaws have been clearly identified. I hope Deputy Noel Ahern's advice will be heeded in the context of Government amendments. The flaws are not contentious and can be addressed with the co-operation of Members, such as Deputy Shatter, who have a sincere interest in improving the Bill.

Why does the Bill only cover signatories to the Hague Convention or countries with which we have bilateral agreements? The convention does not specifically exclude non-signatories. Vietnam probably will not ratify the convention before 2011. The existing delays are already frustrating people who want to give children a better life and a home. The essence of the Bill will be lost if we have to wait another two years.

The Minister of State told the international adoption agencies' annual conference on 10 October that there would be no transitional measures. However, the convention's guide to good practice advises:

States are strongly encouraged to consider dividing procedural changes into two categories: those for adoption cases already in process at the time of entry into force (or other changes) and those for new cases beginning after entry into force ... States must, however, clearly indicate which cases will be considered "in process" when the Convention enters into force.

It is unfair to tell people who have invested considerable time and emotional energy into the adoption process that they have to go back to square one. The children are left in limbo as they await the signing of a new bilateral agreement. It is essential that we reach agreements with Ethiopia, Vietnam and Russia. It appears Vietnam is prepared to enter into a new bilateral agreement once we pass this Bill because we will then be Hague proofed.

If we can reach a consensus on the amendments needed in the Bill, why can we not work towards new bilateral agreements in tandem with our deliberations in this House? A previous Minister of State at the Office of the Minister for Children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, stated that a grandfather clause would be provided for those who have adopted already but that is not set out in the Bill. Such a clause makes practical sense for those who have already adopted and we should be able to accommodate it without dispute. The failure to include it in the Bill was clearly an oversight.

Reference has been made to waiting times and our cherry picking of the convention in order to create a less onerous schedule. The proposed structure requires adoption agencies to be vetted by the HSE but if the new adoption agency has a straight relationship with a properly certified agency, why involve the HSE? The post placement reports on Russian adoptions indicate that the HSE has fallen between two stools. In a reply to a parliamentary question I asked in October, the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, assured me the matter was being addressed. However, the social workers assigned to overseeing adoptions must also perform other tasks of a pressing nature. Unless an agency or a unit within the HSE is dedicated to this area, processing will once again give rise to inordinate delays.

I recently met 11 sets of parents who were in the process of adopting children from Vietnam. Nine of them had already adopted one child and wanted to adopt again, while two had not yet adopted. One prospective mother who was far advanced in the process and had already been to Vietnam was distraught by the fear that the transitional arrangements would push her back to square one. Another couple had not progressed far. Couples who have reached a certain stage in Vietnam should be allowed to start from this position if they choose to adopt in another country with which we have a bilateral agreement. I ask the Minister to take account of these practical considerations before Committee Stage.

See this speech in context