Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Fáiltím an deis labhairt ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo sa lá atá inniu ann. I welcome the opportunity to speak to this important legislation that has been finally and thankfully brought before the House. It is the first legislation to be brought before the House in the Thirty-second Dáil, which is fitting. One of the first jobs done in the Thirty-first Dáil was to provide for the putting of the referendum of children's rights before the people. There were a number of delays that were beyond people's control and legal challenges to the outcome of that referendum, which delayed this legislation coming to the House. I welcome its introduction to the House on behalf of those people who do not have voice in here, those people who will be impacted most by it.

I congratulate the Minister on her appointment to this important portfolio of children and youth affairs. It was interesting and welcome that the previous Government in its wisdom, led by the Taoiseach, promoted this portfolio to a senior Department and to a senior ministry. That development was long overdue. Any society can be judged by how we care for people such as children. It was a sad reflection that it took until that day for that to happen. Perhaps we were blinded by some of the silliness of the economics in the Celtic tiger years but, thankfully, common sense has prevailed and this responsibility has been elevated to a senior ministry. I am delighted for the Minister, Deputy Katherine Zappone, and congratulate her on her appointment. I wish her every good will in this very important endeavour for the years ahead. It is a top priority. I always promote option politics where we as Members of a House or members of the party identify our top priority. The care of children and how we deal with them and face the challenges and issues presenting is the top priority for this society at this time, and this being the first legislation before the new Dáil is very telling in that regard.

I have been asked, on occasion, what was my proudest achievement during the past five years of the previous Dáil and without missing a heartbeat I can state, without fear or favour, that my single greatest and proudest achievement was the role I got to play in the passing of the referendum on children's rights and in convincing people to support it. I do not believe there was a radio station in the country on which that I did not end up debating this matter. It was a personal privilege and honour to be in a position to do that and to get the referendum result over the line. I remember some critics, people like Kathy Sinnott and John Waters, trying to put across the image that the referendum would result in the big bad State prowling around in the dead of night taking children from the family home and putting them into an awful place, that of State care, and conjuring up frightening images of the State care that they alleged could do so much damage to these children. Thankfully, today, when we talk about children in the care of the State we are speaking, for the most part, about children who are living with ordinary families throughout the country who have decided, for whatever reason, to share their home with children who cannot be in their own home. I happen to be one of those fortunate and privileged people who get to share my family home with children who, for whatever reason, cannot live in their own home or stay with their own birth mother or father. That is an honour in itself. It is also an incredible education. One of the bigger challenges during the referendum campaign was to explain to people that State care means children in the care of ordinary families who are delighted and honoured to share their home with children who are not so fortunate as to be born in their own home.

I recall a well known and high profile television presenter who said that this referendum would only impact on a tiny number of children and asking what was the importance of it. That completely missed the point because those 5,000 or 6,000 children in this State who cannot live in their own homes are the most special, the most vulnerable and the most important children in the State. There is an obligation, an onus and moral responsibility on all of us to rise to that challenge and ensure we do everything for those people who do not have the good fortune the vast majority have, which is to be cared for and loved in our own home.

Some 73 years ago Abraham Maslow identified a hierarchy of needs in his paper entitled, A Theory of Human Motivation. He identified the top need as the physiological need for food and water, the second need as one's personal safety and to be in an environment where one is safe and secure and the third need, which is particularly relevant in childhood, as being the need to belong, or as he called it "belongingness". It is a powerful driver in all of us and we probably do not take enough time to stop and think about it because we all have the good fortune of being reared in our own families and having that sense of identity, having our surname which gives us a connection to it and which, as we grow, extends beyond our family to our community and the clubs to which we belong. It is a powerful driver for children to have such an identity and that sense of belonging.

Children who come into the care of the State and cannot be with their own birth mother and father, for whatever reasons, end up dealing with that challenge of the need and desire to belong. Prior to the passing of the referendum the reality was that those 5,000 or 6,000 children who were in the care of the State, in foster care living with foster families, could not have been adopted by those families until they reached the age of 18 because it had to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that up until the age of 18 they had been abandoned by their own parents. The only real possibility of that was letting them arrive at the age of 18. For the first 18 years of their lives they were denied a sense of belonging, which we all take for granted, being part of a family unit and sharing in the love, joy, challenges and drama that goes with being part and parcel of one's siblings and family. It was vital for those children that this referendum got over the line. Children in the care of the State, many of whom have come to families from maternity wards, are reared and grow up with the family but they cannot be fully part of that family in that they cannot share the family surname. When they go to school they have a different surname from their siblings but they want to be part of the family and to have that identity but the State denied them that. Therefore, it was crucial that we got the referendum over the line.

We are now discussing the legislative implications of the referendum and, finally, giving effect to it so that children can be adopted by these families and achieve the sense of belonging they seek to satisfy that all-powerful third sense identified by Maslow 73 years ago.

I listened with interest to much of the debate yesterday. Many of the specifics of the Bill have been well addressed in the Chamber and I do not intend to go through it piece by piece or repeat many of the points made. I noted the tone of the debate yesterday and the caring contributions from all sides of the House. There was a unity of purpose there and everybody acknowledged that this was a good news story and a positive development for our society. We are all as one in seeing that develop and grow. Certain other issues were referred to such as the challenges for tracing, which the former Tánaiste, Deputy Joan Burton, mentioned yesterday. She said she would like to see an amendment on that added to the Bill, which is a very worthy proposal. We should give tracing much more consideration. It is difficult to balance the rights of the parent who wants to remain anonymous, give up a child and have no more to do with him or her and the rights of the child to know who he or she is. It goes back to that driving sense, which is the third strongest, of belonging, identity and knowing who one is. That is a challenge the Minister is going to lead and I look forward to assisting and playing my part in that in any way I can.

I always preach solution-led politics. We can all identify the problems and criticise and complain but coming up with solutions is the really challenging bit. The onus is on all of us in that regard. If we are to identify a new type of politics in the House, I promote that politics where we all put our heads together. None of us on any side of the House has a monopoly on wisdom but we all have a story to tell, an experience to share and knowledge to bring to the topic. Society has a need - we have to lead on it and drive the change - to look at the reasons children are coming into the care of the State. There has been an increase of almost 25% in the number of children who have come into the care of the State since 2007. The figures are probably close to 7,000 at this stage. It may not be a bad thing that the numbers are increasing. There is a variety of reasons the numbers are increasing and not all of them are negative. There are issues and challenges there to do with poverty, deprivation, education, health and well-being as well as a variety of cultural and other challenges in this day and age. People are realising they do not have the wherewithal to raise the children they have brought into the world. While they might have the physical capacity to do it, they do not have the wherewithal afterwards. As parents, we all understand the challenge involved in rearing children and the responsibility that goes with it. We must have a more sincere debate on those reasons. There is a great deal more awareness today. To be fair to school authorities, communities, relations and family members, a great deal of what went on in homes before was hidden behind closed doors and people did not talk about it. People are now more willing to embrace the challenges and recognise where people are failing as parents and being more proactive about getting involved. That may be one of the reasons for the increase in numbers of children in care.

I am conscious of the time available. One other issue I want to debate and flag with the Minister today involves post-adoption services. While we very much welcome the ability of parents to adopt and foster children and while the Bill addresses longing and belonging, it does not address a lot of other issues. A big problem for people who have been able to adopt children has been the lack of post-adoption services in Ireland, in particular outside the greater Dublin area. If one lives in the greater Dublin area, one has access to a range of services through the wonderful work Barnardos does. If one lives outside the greater Dublin area, however, there really are no services. If one looks at England, one sees Family Futures, a powerful organisation doing wonderful work dealing with children who experienced early trauma in their lives. As those children hit their adolescent and teen years, it becomes very difficult to deal with the challenges that arise. Adoptive and foster parents and those of all hues need to get support for themselves and, more importantly, the children. The range of post-adoption supports is really lacking here however. Those intervention services constitute one of the most pressing issues which requires to be addressed at this point in time. We all know the argument about investing today and reaping tomorrow. Directing our focus, energy and minds towards that and addressing those issues today can lead to savings, not only economic, but of heartbreak, and benefits in terms of quality of life and all that goes with it, including for society. It is not easy to wake up one day and realise that one is not in one's own home and that the person one thought was one's Dad for however long is not one's Dad and that one's Mum is not one's Mum. There are also issues that come up from one's childhood and trauma. It is an area I look forward to discussing further with the Minister. I again wish her well in her term of office.

See this speech in context