Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the amendments. Obviously, I welcome that it is intended to strengthen the voice of the child in the legislation. It takes on board comments that Deputies from all parties made during the course of Committee Stage and Second Stage.

I have a number of queries. That point about a regulatory format for the process is important. It clearly seems, at least to me, largely to envision providing for situations in which a guardian ad litemwould be involved. However, in so far as I can see, it does not use that phrase in any of these sections whereas, although I could be mistaken, the phase "guardian ad litem" is specifically outlined in the entitlements in the original 1991 Act. I would be curious to know whether there was a particular reason - perhaps I have missed it - the phrase is not used and whether there is a wider category of person who are considered.

I would also be curious to know about amendment No. 18, which has been ruled out of order. It is one of Deputy Rabbitte's amendments, and she can correct me if I am taking this up wrong. I understand the intention is that judges would retain a discretion to keep a child, where he or she has been made a party to proceedings, as a party of the proceedings after an order has been given entitling him or her to a guardian ad litem. Therefore, such a child could both have a guardian ad litemand be a party to proceedings where the judge felt that was appropriate. I understand that is not currently possible. I merely want to know whether the Minister gave that any consideration, particularly in light of Deputy Rabbitte's amendment, if I understand it correctly.

See this speech in context