Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

-----to apply under section 117 on intestacy for provision if no provision has been made for them. It is balanced because it relates to only when the court is of the opinion that it would be unjust not to make the order. The court may, on application of one of the children of an intestate who dies leaving a civil partner and children, order that the provision be made for that child out of the intestate's estate only if the court is of the opinion that it would be unjust not to make the order after considering all the circumstances.

It is, in effect, to protect children in these circumstances that this action is being undertaken. It goes back to the point I made at the start of this discussion, on Committee Stage and Second Stage in that we must strike a balance between the constitutional requirements relating to the protection of marriage. It has been defined many times that marriage is between a man and a woman and this was confirmed in a recent Supreme Court case among other cases. That is the reason we must have these distinctions.

This is couched in such a way that the court must satisfy itself that it is making this order in circumstances only where it is just to make that order and not unjust. I strongly suggest that the amendments from the Deputies are trying to replicate what is already there with regard to spouses. With regard to the protection of children, which goes to the core of my proposed amendment, we must ensure children have additional rights in order to apply for provision that would not be made for them in an intestacy position.

See this speech in context