Séamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on and support the Bill. I compliment the Minister on the introduction of such a balanced wording. I acknowledge the broad support for the amendment proposed in this legislation in the Houses of the Oireachtas and the country generally. That bodes well for the referendum on 10 November when I hope there will be a positive outcome, as I am sure there will be.

I would like to set out the background to the forthcoming referendum. During the years we were all rightly shocked by the findings of various reports such as the Roscommon, Kilkenny, Ryan and Cloyne reports. The attitudes that allowed such abuses to continue had to be challenged and overcome. The Bill which sets out the wording of the amendment to be put to the people in the proposed referendum is an important part of that process. Obviously, it has to be read alongside other legislation, including the Children First Bill, the vetting Bill and the forthcoming legislation to establish the child and family support agency.

The referendum has been a long time coming. The first recommendations for constitutional reform in this area were made by the task force on child care in the 1980s. Various committees have produced reports since. At international level, in 1998 and 2006 the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child added its voice to the calls for the constitutional position of children to be strengthened. A number of High Court and Supreme Court cases have also raised concerns in this area. There have been many indications that the current constitutional position presents a difficulty when particular cases have to be dealt with. Thankfully, the Minister has introduced this legislation, which means a referendum will take place on 10 November.

There is no doubt that the constitutional amendment will make children more visible and ensure decisions are made in the best interests of children. It recognises that children have rights and that all children are equal. It allows the rights of children to be balanced against other competing constitutional rights. It introduces the best interests principle, to be used as a guide when decisions are being made to resolve disputes in areas such as adoption, guardianship, custody and access. It also includes the principle of hearing the voice of the child in judicial and administrative proceedings and is active in the area of supporting families and protecting children. It applies the same standards to all children and places an onus on the State to support families and adopt a proportionate response to parental failure.

The language used in the wording of the amendment is balanced. It refers, in the first instance, to "all children". It sets out what the State has to do "as far as practicable". It makes it clear that these provisions will apply to parents who "regardless of their marital status, fail in their duty towards their children to such extent that the safety or welfare of any of their children is likely to be prejudicially affected". It provides that the response of the State must be "proportionate" and in line with "the best interests of the child". I do not doubt that a great deal of thought and preparation went into such a balanced wording.

The question of adoption is dealt with in the Bill. At present, it is virtually impossible for a child to be adopted if his or her parents are married. Approximately 6,000 children are in care, approximately one third of whom have been in long-term care for more than five years. Many of them have little or no contact with their parents. If the amendment is passed and the subsequent adoption legislation enacted, children in care will be eligible for adoption. That will clear the way for the Oireachtas to introduce legislation that will allow any child to be voluntarily placed for adoption, which will be a welcome development also.

I would like to refer to the question of resources which has been mentioned by a number of speakers. It is fine to introduce a constitutional provision of this nature, but we need to ensure the actions of the State correspond to the provision in question. We need to focus on poverty-proofing future budgets, for example. Educational services in certain areas are not adequate and, unfortunately, have disimproved in recent years. Larger class sizes and the lack of special needs assistants are having an impact on vulnerable children. There are long waiting lists in the health area. I am contacted on a daily basis by parents who are waiting for ear, nose and throat services for their children. Urgent cases can now wait for 18 months, while less urgent cases can wait for as long as four years.

These are areas that need to be addressed and improved by the State. Approximately 200,000 children in this State live in either consistent or relative poverty, which is an area that also needs to be addressed by the State. Resources need to be made available to ensure what we have in the Constitution actually corresponds to what we are doing in practice on the ground, particularly for vulnerable children.

See this speech in context