Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the introduction of the Bill to the House. As the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and I well know, we have had exchanges over the past couple of years on this issue. I congratulate her on allowing it to be discussed in the House. I welcome in particular the role of the Ceann Comhairle in this. He and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle are to be commended for allowing a legitimate debate to take place in the House, notwithstanding the separation of powers to which reference was made by the previous speaker, but recognising that the Legislature has a role to play, independent of the courts. Of course, the job of the courts is to administer, and rightly so. We also have a Constitution in this country. Not all other countries have a written constitution and they build their case law in a different way. We have a written Constitution and, in particular, we have a constitutional protection of the rights of the child, which has been referred to by the Minister and other speakers.

The fact of the matter is that this is a much-required reform of the family law courts, for a whole lot of reasons. It is required for the protection of parents, mostly mothers, but also some men, who have been unfairly treated in the courts and have been brought from Circuit Court to District Court and High Court and back again on the basis that the jurisdiction was not the appropriate place to deal with the case. That costs colossal amounts of money - well in excess of €100,000 in many cases. That left in its wake the destruction of trust in the system by people who found themselves, as they saw it, unfairly treated, and they were.

As we know, the correctly maligned parental alienation clause has been introduced to this country. It has not been recognised anywhere, but has been successful in its efforts to deprive children of their mother or father. To my mind, the most insensitive thing to do is to remove a child from its mother or father, in particular when there are no real valid reasons to do so other than an adjoining dispute relating to property or whatever. It comes down to custody as a means of last resort in order to win a case.

Everybody in this House has dealt with these cases. It has horrified me to see some of the things that have happened, and continue to happen, behind closed doors. In order to avoid having to come to a conclusion, people refer cases in one direction or another, up to the High Court or down to the Circuit Court or District Court or whatever the case may be. That all costs money and creates further delays. It prevents the administration of justice in a way that is clearly available to all to understand and recognise as authoritative and consistent. Consistency is something that we all try to welcome. We all encourage it because that is the strength in the system.

All due credit to the Minister for staying with this concept over the past couple of years, pursuing it vigorously and taking on board the submissions that she received and we all received from members of the public who were directly affected by the proceedings in the courts.

I will comment briefly on the parental alienation concept that has been established in the courts. This has never been peer-reviewed and has never been accepted by peers anywhere in the world. The concept has been discussed all over the globe - throughout Europe, in this country, in the UK and in the US - and the same questions come up every time. The person who first invented the clause had a very chequered history in the context of the attitude to children and to women. I will go no further than to say that because that is a fact, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and I know. I welcome the fact that this issue is being addressed at long last. I hope that if flaws are discovered that imply there should be a further visitation to correct any provisions that may be insufficient to deal adequately with a situation as presented, that should be done whenever that occasion occurs.

I hope this legislation will have long-lasting effect, and I believe it will. It deals with the present and the future. It deals with the need to have specialists in the court area. One of the contentious issues has been the issue of specialised reports and expert reports which, in many cases, could not be challenged and became the rule of the court rather than advising the court. That was commented on by a Supreme Court judge in connection with another issue whereby expert advisers will now be coming to court themselves. He rightly commented on that. I hope this puts an end to that concept as well.

Like everybody in this House, I have dealt with hundreds of cases of marital breakdown. We know that happens and, with the best intentions in the world, it will continue to happen. However, it is possible to go through the procedures in respect of reaching a peaceful and fair settlement. Most people will agree to that, if allowed to agree to it. However, if they are not allowed to do so, and it becomes a battle in the courts, it does not always happen.

I welcome the Bill. I hope it succeeds in doing what it is suggested to do and that it brings a long-awaited settlement to the issues that were contentious through the years.

See this speech in context