Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

Yes, it was, and it is a problem. No such social worker should be carrying out adoption assessments. Second, there should always be a senior social worker or a child care manager in charge if there are personality difficulties. Those are the people to go to and that should be made known. Anybody going through an assessment process should be told that if a difficulty arises, they can talk to such and such a person and they will not be prejudiced by having that conversation.

The reality is - and I say this categorically from my experience going back over a number of years - these committees never act as moderators to resolve difficulties in respect of individual social workers. They only come into operation when the assessment report is complete and there is a draft recommendation. In my view, these committees were formed by the Health Service Executive as cover in case something went wrong. The HSE does not want responsibility for anything, it wants to be able to say that if somebody was recommended as suitable, it was not the responsibility of the HSE's social worker and that it was this adoption committee of outsiders who copperfastened it. We do not need these committees; they have no role and no function. I am sure the Minister of State means this in good faith, but I have absolutely no doubt that this particular provision, if the Minister of State goes into the history of the drafting of the legislation, is a result of lobbying by the Health Service Executive.

The other odd aspect of these committees is that they apparently live in perpetuity. According to the Minister's amendment the committee is appointed and has no particular life span; it could go on for ten, 15 or 20 years with the same group of people. There are no provisions as to what one does to sack someone who behaves inappropriately on a committee. There is no provision as to whether every five or six years, say, the membership should change. Nor are there provisions to ensure gender equality of some description on the committee. The Minister of State stated that he tabled the brief amendment to which he referred as a consequence of the amendments I tabled, but it is not adequate. This is an ill conceived, ill thought out part of the legislation. Its provisions are based on the influence the Health Service Executive has exercised over the drafting of the legislation. Not only do these committees serve no purpose but there is express provision for the making of payments for travel and subsistence. We have 11 people travelling around the place incurring unnecessary expense for the taxpayer and not advancing one whit the protection of the welfare of children. I wish the Minister of State had taken on board the amendment we are proposing.

The Minister of State said in reply to Deputy O'Sullivan that where there is an outside accredited agency carrying out assessments, it must, because of provisions in the Child Care Act, come back to one of the committees. The accredited body or its social worker cannot make a direct recommendation and report to the adoption authority. That is hogwash. Under the current system independent adoption societies can carry out assessments which go directly to the Adoption Board; they are not being second guessed by adoption committees. These committees only apply within the life line of the HSE. This provision is absolute nonsense. If it were legally valid, every adoption completed as a result of a report as to suitability, be it a domestic or foreign adoption, with the assistance of an adoption society as opposed to the HSE would presumably have questionable legal validity, as might the adoptions that have followed the creation of the HSE. If that is the advice the Minister of State has been given it is complete nonsense.

The formula depends essentially on what is prescribed in the legislation. If we were to be stuck with this, the accredited body should of course be able to carry out its assessment and make a direct recommendation to the adoption authority. The Child Care Act is not a constitution; it does not have some overriding impact on the adoption legislation. That can stand on its own. I do not accept these provisions and I will press the amendment.

See this speech in context