Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)

I extend my condolences to the family of Daniel McAnaspie. Like others, I met his family members on the street outside Leinster House when they were exhausted from searching for him. We should all be conscious that he was one of 20 children who died in the care of the HSE. This makes our meaning clear when we discuss protecting children under the Constitution.

It is appropriate, if not poignant, that the Deputy presenting the motion is Deputy Howlin, who was the Minister for Health in 1993 when Mrs Justice Catherine McGuinness presented her groundbreaking report, which proposed a constitutional amendment. It is worth reminding the House that, before and after 1993, there have been three referendums on the rights of the unborn child. This country has been convulsed by debates on zygotes, the morning after pill and the pregnancies of poor, young, tragic girls. We have had that debate three times, but we have never had a constitutional referendum on the rights of born children, children who are a part of our community and are at risk from whatever quarter. That is negligence.

I urge the Minister of State to step outside the box and consider what is occurring tonight. We have an opportunity to live up to the recommendations and words of his predecessor, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, who stated in 2007 that the time for oratory was over and that we needed to present the people with a constitutional amendment on which they could vote.

I compliment the committee, which invested superhuman effort to deliver for the Oireachtas and the people an amendment that captured all of the complex issues relating to the protection of children. Its members have done the country a great service. Across the Chamber, it is our turn. We cannot do it solely as Members of the Opposition and I welcome that this is a joint Private Members' motion. We should not make a political football out of the matter and no one wants to, but is it the case that the Government is so sclerosed or scared that it cannot agree? Consider the prize. If the motion was agreed across all parties, consider the strength it would give to the commitment to protect children in 2010. We could go to the people and convince them of how important it is that we have all come together to ensure the committee's work is not put away for another day and is, instead, acted upon.

We must take the initiative and ensure a debate on the rights of children in our communities who are at risk as we speak, often within their families. There is much discussion on church and State involvement in brutality and barbarism, but the greatest area of danger for many children is within their families. This is our chance to help them and I urge the Government to move beyond party political point-scoring. It should take on board the genuine intent of presenting the people with an amendment that could make a significant difference to the safety of our children.

See this speech in context