Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

There are 1.1 million children living in Ireland. At any one time, 6,000 of these children are in care and, of these, 2,000 have been in care for more than five years. Our child services are doing their very best to look after our troubled, neglected and abused children. They may be a very small cohort but they require huge intervention from the State. I have direct experience in this area. I agree with some speakers who argued that we need more resources. There is absolutely no doubt about that. I also agree that we do not get it right all the time, but this is one of the most emotionally tough areas in which to work. The State does not try to replace parents. In the vast majority of cases, the families of vulnerable children are getting support from State agencies. Thousands of children and their families are receiving a lifeline every day from State agencies under tough emotional and economic conditions for both the families and the people providing the services. The best interests of the child are always served by those who work in this field.

I would never put down the hard work and dedication of the people in this field.

The best interests and welfare of children are covered by legislation such as the Children Act 1991. Prior to that child protection was based on legislation enacted in 1908. We have come a long way in recent years. The referendum will help give the courts more guidance on how to look after children via both the Constitution and the subsequent legislation which will follow.

For the vast majority of children, regardless of the referendum, parental rights will remain paramount. The referendum will change nothing for them. Sadly, for a small cohort of traumatised children we must give them equal rights to their parents in order that the courts have the power to protect them. The intention of the amendment is to protect a small group of children.

This is not about dysfunctional families. What I might consider to be a normal family, someone else might consider dysfunctional. This is not about putting one set of values above another. When the State intervenes in children’s lives in this country it is to help the parents and children. In a small number of cases it is to save the children from neglect, often what is criminal abuse and neglect of a small cohort of children who are the backdrop to many of the cases to which reference has been made in the Chamber. I am pleased that we are doing this work.

I have spent years watching judges, social workers, child care workers, public health nurses, care assistants and doctors striving to be fair and impartial in what are huge emotional and legal issues. I urge that we would not allow the referendum to become a sterile legalistic campaign. The referendum and subsequent legislation could save the lives of a small number of children. For years we said children must be seen and not heard. The referendum and its accompanying legislation will show that we want both to see our children and to hear what they have to say. That is what we should support in the context of the referendum.

I am delighted that for the vast majority of children this country is a great country in which to live. My children are all under the age of 11. They think their new found children’s rights is about putting chocolate muffins into their lunch box. I do not wish to be flippant about what we are doing but this is a great country for children. What we are doing is building on that so the small number of children know we believe in them and are there to help them and look after them. In some respects the referendum is a celebration of what we are doing for children. We should campaign on that basis.

See this speech in context