Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The very frequently quoted line from our Proclamation mentions cherishing the children of the nation equally. That certainly has not happened in our history but this is an opportunity finally to get it right. The Minister and her Department have done amazing work to ensure the wording is as near perfect as is possible in the circumstances. It goes a long way. I take on board the support from the various reputable organisations involved in children's rights, which is an affirmation of the Minister's work. Those organisations have been calling for stronger protection for children's rights for a long time.

The Ombudsman for Children gave the bottom line as the need to enshrine key children's rights and principles in the Constitution in order to underpin a fundamental shift in our law, policy and practice regarding children. Of course, the irony cannot be lost on us in the Chamber tonight. We are now actively promoting children's rights and seeking to include them in the Constitution but only five or six minutes ago I was speaking on the tragedy and horrors of what went on the Magdalene laundries, when children and young girls were confined, deprived of their rights, stripped of their identity and dignity and subject to humiliating and degrading treatment at the hands of adults. We know about the direct adult involvement, whether it was of members of religious orders or the different involvement of people in State organisations and Departments, or the gardaí who facilitated that abuse and allowed it to continue. For those few individuals who managed to escape there was the horror of being brought back by gardaí.

I am struck by another irony associated with the laundries and industrial schools. The family is central to our Constitution yet many families put their children into those institutions and allowed them to stay there for indeterminate times - one turned the key and forgot about it. That is not to take from those families who cared and visited, as is so powerfully conveyed in much of the work the Justice for Magdalenes group has done. That was not the end of it, of course, because we cannot say there was abuse only in the laundries and industrial schools. It went on in families, sports clubs and organisations and in residential care homes. The two reports, HIQA's national standards for the protection and welfare of children in July and the independent review report on the deaths of children in care, show a litany of failures of instances of how children were so badly treated. This Bill, along with the National Vetting Bureau Bill, the Criminal Justice (Withholding of Information on Offences against Children) Bill, the Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill and the Mental Capacity Bill, will go a long way. The hope is that the measures will ensure not only adequate but thorough protection for all children. It all comes back to resources and the need for them to be in place to match what is intended.

I refer to the terms of the Bill, the "imprescriptible rights", or rights that will not diminish over time. The Minister has mentioned "all" children. Will this term apply to those children living in the State who are not citizens of the State, in particular, to unaccompanied minors? We know from the Irish Refugee Council that the rights of these children are not being respected. The council's recent report detailed children in our State asylum process who are living in extreme poverty in overcrowded accommodation and with inadequate food. These are the children in the direct provision centres. The report reviewed the conditions over a ten-year period. One of the points that struck me was that children were described as "alienated", as a result of enforced poverty and social exclusion. There was a real risk of child abuse because of the overcrowding in the centres.

A myriad issues arise in that regard.

There have been improvements in the asylum process, but the process can take four years, if not longer. Some of the children born here have lived here all their lives. I am aware of the improvements, but these children are suffering in the meantime. I hope the Bill will cover them and also include those children whom we know have been trafficked.

Some reservations have been expressed about the possibility of high handed interference and intrusion in family life. We are aware of cases in which this has happened. There were some horrific cases in the United Kingdom where families were torn apart and children taken from their families. There was an abuse both of the rights of the children and those of their families. Some parents and individuals have a real fear in that regard. I hope the terms "to such extent", "proportionate means" and "due regard" take this into account. I hope they are sufficiently adequate to ensure no family will feel threatened by what the Bill proposes to do.

People can be vicious. I was a teacher and the Minister was a social worker. We know about the making of allegations and the way in which situations can be misused and abused by young people. Care must be taken to ensure balance in order that no family is broken up or a child taken from a family needlessly and that no child is left in a position in which he or she should never be left in. We know there are such examples. We always presume that a child's best interests are served in the family, but that is not always the case and the Bill is doing something to address this.

I am very interested in the adoption issue and aware that work in that area will accompany the Bill. It is welcome that married parents will be able to decide to have their children adopted and that children who have been in foster care for many years can now see light at the end of the tunnel. It is important also to acknowledge the work of foster carers. There are people who foster who do not want to go any further in the process, but there are also those who are fostering with a view to adoption. The reference in the Bill to a considerable period is welcome because a child can be in care for a number of years, there is a process to be followed and then a further process where the child is with the prospective adoptive parents. I am glad there will always be provision for children to maintain contact with their birth parents, but it is welcome that there will be a greater possibility for giving a second chance to these children. We know there are parents who will not parent and parents who cannot do so for a variety of reasons. Such parents need support. I hope the legislation will help parents with particular difficulties such as addiction who need support for a particular period, but it does not mean they are giving up on their children or do not want anything to do with them. Support is needed to ensure they can fulfil their duties. Sometimes there is too much emphasis on rights rather than responsibilities and this is one area where we can see this.

I am also conscious of the father where a couple is unmarried. There are various men's organisations who cater for unmarried fathers who have been done a terrible injustice by the State. Their rights, responsibilities and interest in their child have often been disregarded. I hope they will be covered by the legislation and that they, too, will be eligible to participate in the fostering and adoption process.

I have mentioned the extent of addiction in the north inner city and the number of grandparents and extended family members who take on the responsibility of caring for children. I would hate to think this work would be undermined in any way and hope it can be supported by the Bill.

The Bill states the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration. I like the reference that where a child is capable of forming his or her own views, his or her views shall be ascertained and given due weight. There is a balance to be struck in that regard. There is a song with the line, "You say it best when you say nothing at all". Social workers are trained professionals who can read situations and sometimes words do not reveal much; a child's silence can reveal more. If we want to protect children and vulnerable persons, they must be covered in the Constitution. The Minister is trying to do this in the Bill which reflects what we value in society. The Minister is including such provisions in the Bill because we did not value children in the past. I hope we have got it right this time.

This morning I was handing out certificates in a local primary school in the North Strand. The children received a blue flag and a green flag. I looked at all of them, some of whom had just started school. I am always struck by the line in Yeats' poem about the childish day being turned to tragedy. One hopes none of their days will ever be turned to the tragedy that comes with being abused and left in a situation they should not be in. I acknowledge all of the Minister's work on this legislation which goes a long way and I will support.

See this speech in context