Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I too am happy to speak on the Children (Amendment) Bill. We are almost fiche bliain ag fanacht ar an mBille seo. It is important for us to have a review of legislation and we discussed the point on reviews of legislation here some weeks ago when Deputy Pringle put some amendments down, I believe, to the Children (Amendment) Bill. Clearly, there were inadequacies, weaknesses and flaws, not by design or deliberate action, but this can happen with legislation. The best laid plans of God and man can go wrong, as we know. The best laid pieces of legislation can be challenged, fragile and can be quite inept and not adept enough in dealing with situations. People have to deal with the traumatic death of a person, and the sudden or violent death of a young person is far more tragic. Every life is the same and counts as far as I am concerned from the womb to the tomb but in the situation of daoine óga, is uafásach ar fad é. I know the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be aware of cases when wearing her other hat as a practising lawyer, but I also see that Senator McDowell and Deputy O’Callaghan have had a very significant input into this legislation and have put forward some amendments.

The Cabinet initially approved the proposal by the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, to support the Children’s (Amendment) Bill after the Independent Senator McDowell brought it forward. However, the Minister has proceeded by making several key amendments to the Bill and these will be discussed on the next Stage. The objectives of the original Bill are well-meaning. Its clear aim is to address the negative impact that court rulings are having on grieving families and parents who are unable to remember their deceased child’s name or legacy. The original Bill’s aim is to give power back to those parents so that they can remember their children or family members in the way that they want to, which is very important.

Other Deputies have referred to the tragedy which we have had of 12 and a half months now of the lockdown where people have been unable to be with their loved ones when they closed their eyes for the last time or took their last breath, have not been able to have a proper mourning space and time with family, or indeed had proper attendance at funerals. Is mór an trua é sin. It is heartrending. I have listened to different psychiatrists, people who are far more qualified than I am, who have spoken about the long-term impact of this. I heard a former governor of Mountjoy Prison on the radio this morning talking about the trauma. He has dealt with many different situations. We are all well aware of the trauma of dying on one’s own and people being unable to mourn properly, or to have the dignity of a proper funeral which is something that we are so good at in rural and urban Ireland. When the chips are down every community, whether urban or rural, gives a great dig-out to the family who have lost a member. It is a big part of our culture, heritage and traditions in Ireland an tsochraid mhór mhaith and these are very important parts of this.

The current position under the Children Act is that it is an offence to publish anything that could lead to the identification of a child who has been the victim of a crime. This is an important point as we have seen court cases, perhaps not of children, where names got out on to social media and this damages the integrity of the court process and system.

In October 2020, the Court of Appeal ruled that these restrictions also apply if the child is deceased or has already turned 18 years of age. The Children (Amendment) Bill 2020 will amend section 252 of the Children Act 2001, which was ruled upon by the Court of Appeal. This section prevents the identification of the deceased child in criminal proceedings for the offence against the child.

Any crime against a child is heinous and we can see why that section is there but we need to get the balance right in allowing the family to have their proper respect, their love to continue and to have a grieving process, but also to deal with the person or persons who are being charged before the court. The Bill, when enacted, aims to allow grieving parents to speak publicly about their deceased child. At the time, the court rejected an application by The Irish Timesand several other media outlets to allow them to identify a woman who killed her three-year-old child. She was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity following a short trial last year. Is rud uafásach ar fad é sin freisin but if it is a case of insanity nobody can explain or legislate for that either. It is vital that we pass this legislation. There is goodwill throughout the House to try to make this Bill as robust, sensitive, understanding and as well-meaning as possible. Some 19 years is a long time to wait for it but we are here now, thankfully, and we need to deal with it as best we can and to have it passed without delay. The Bill was introduced after the Court of Appeal ruling that the dead child cannot be identified when someone is charged. It was bound to happen and it has happened. Before that trial began two High Court judges ordered that the victim should not be identified and this meant that the woman could not be named. We understood the very good reasons for that but we are here now and in spite of Covid-19 this Bill is progressing through the House. I certainly do not intend to delay it in any shape, make or form and I wish it God’s speed and hopefully it will go through all Stages here, including Committee Stage.

It will be passed.

Some good amendments will be tabled. They will be debated and, I hope, taken on board. I also hope there will be a review clause included in order that we might assess how the legislation beds in and functions, what impact it will have on trials and, above all, the impact it will have on grieving families. The names of their loved ones can be spoken and remembered and their lives can be celebrated, short and all as they may have been. We definitely have to have a review, and not a review after six months but after two years. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context