Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Neville for sharing his slot with us.

At the outset, I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, on bringing forward this proposal. It is sound advice that one should make haste slowly when addressing issues of constitutional reform and, certainly, haste has been made slowly on this issue. There was much work done in bringing this to fruition by the Minister and her predecessor in government, former Deputy Barry Andrews, and I am sure many others have contributed along the way. The accusation cannot be made that this is something done a whim. It is something that has considerable thought put into it and I congratulate the Minister on bringing forward the proposal and, indeed, for publishing the draft adoption legislation which is an aspect of this area of child welfare that we need to address.

It is not often that there is an issue in this House of which all parties are in broad principle supportive but it is true to say that society has been scandalised in recent decades by the seemingly endless revelations regarding the failures of individuals, institutions, State bodies and, indeed, families to adequately address the needs of children. If this debate and this constitutional amendment will bring some sense of healing and appropriate care for children, then that is a welcome development.

There are a couple of observations which I would like to make. It is long overdue that the State visited the import of the McKenna and Coughlan judgments. The McKenna judgment deals with the spending of State funding on referenda and the Coughlan judgement deals with the issue of broadcasting. We need to underpin those judgments with legislation. It is absurd, at a time when society at large, but particularly their representatives in this House, are almost ad idem in respect of support for the referendum, that broadcasting institutions, including those with a public service remit, RTE, must give equal time to those who advocate a "No" vote. That is a clear absurdity. Legislation, if it were to be introduced, should take cognisance of the views of this House on how that breaks down in respect of broadcasting time entitlement. Equally, there is the issue of public funding. As I understand it, there is to be no public funding spent on this campaign other than in establishing the commission etc. However, it is also absurd, on a matter of such critical importance, that the State, if it were minded to spend public funds, and although the Executive and the Legislature would have almost 100% backed the proposal, would have to fund a campaign against its own specific proposal. That flies in the face of democracy. These two judgments will have to be revisited and underpinned by legislation. It is a failure and an implicit criticism of the Legislature that it regularly gets cowed by, on the one side, a strong Executive and, on the other, fear of the courts on whether an issue is legal or constitutional, and fails to do its job. I would like to hear the Minister reflect on this issue in her concluding remarks. In the context of the referendum which I support, there is a view out there for which I have some sympathy that if this House had legislated for child welfare all along, if it had the courage to amend the adoption law to take adequate account of those who are failed by it currently, particularly those who are in long-term foster care, and if it had challenged the courts to recognise that this is the interpretation that the Legislature wishes to have of the Constitution and let us see how that manifests itself, then we would have been doing our job better in this House.

There is a danger of referendum fatigue. Most recent referendums have struggled to get a 50% turnout. There is a case to be made that the Referendum Commission which will be established to deal with this is something that could be established on a permanent footing. It might take account of voter education on various issues and deal with how the electoral register is compiled, and a range of other functions could be assigned to it. I go back to the point I made at the outset, that we should make haste slowly in amending the Constitution. I am not entirely convinced about the merits of the Constitutional Convention but there is a solid case to be made to expand the Referendum Commission in terms of a range of other functions that it could usefully perform if we are to avoid the alarming drop in voter turnout in referenda.

See this speech in context