Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government should publicly apologise for the indefensible and incompetent manner in which it has dealt with the issue of Vietnamese adoptions. It has neither acted in the best interests of children nor in the interests of prospective Irish adopters. The Minister of State with responsibility for children has serious questions to answer.

For five years there was a bilateral adoption agreement between Ireland and Vietnam. By 31 December 2008, 636 adoptions effected in Vietnam by Irish adopters had been recognised by the Adoption Board. At the start of 2009 there were an estimated 330 prospective adopters declared suitable to adopt by our Adoption Board who expected to adopt in Vietnam and who were assessed for adoption on the assumption that they would do so. For five years it was known that the bilateral agreement would terminate by 1 May 2009. However, the Government gave no warning or notice to the hundreds of people under adoption assessment by the HSE who intended to adopt in Vietnam that, following their obtaining a declaration of eligibility and suitability to adoption from our Adoption Board, this State would create any difficulty in their completing such adoptions.

The expired bilateral agreement contained provision for the establishment of a review group composed of Irish and Vietnamese officials to monitor the workings of the bilateral agreement and the adoption process in Vietnam involving Irish adoption applicants. During the five years of the agreement's operation no report was ever published by this group warning of any difficulties. It is clear that up to March 2009 the Government intended to put in place a new bilateral agreement with Vietnam. The Minister of State with responsibility for children informed this House that at the beginning of March a new proposed draft agreement was forwarded by the Government to the Vietnamese authorities. Vietnam received the new draft agreement approximately seven weeks before the expiration of the original agreement and at that stage it was understood that the main difficulty related to the short period of time available to put in place a new agreement before 1 May 2009. It was only in August 2009 that the Minister made known the fact that, as a result of two international reports on Vietnamese adoptions, one of which was a draft report prepared by International Social Services, questions were being asked about the probity of the Vietnamese adoption process. It took six months from the receipt by the Minister of State of the draft ISS report to announce a Government decision not to enter into any further bilateral agreement on adoption with Vietnam.

The Minister of State with responsibility for children should publicly answer the following questions. In his statement issued last Thursday, 14 January, he stated: "When any Government enters into a bilateral International Adoption Agreement, there is an expectation that the Government has satisfied itself that current policies and practices in the country of origin are robust." What steps did the Government take to so be satisfied prior to entering into the bilateral adoption agreement which expired on 1 May 2009 and prior to furnishing to Vietnam a new proposed draft bilateral agreement in March 2009?

During the currency of the expired bilateral agreement, what action, if any, was taken by representatives of this State appointed to the Ireland-Vietnam review group to ensure that Vietnamese adoption practices met appropriate standards and what reports, if any, on this issue were made to the Minister of State with responsibility for children or his predecessors? Why has the Minister of State with responsibility for children refused to publish full details of meetings held by the review group and the reports, if any, furnished by it to him and the Department for Health and Children and why has the Department refused to make available relevant information and documentation when sought by me under the Freedom of Information Act?

The Minister is only now critical of the link between the provision of humanitarian aid in conjunction with adoption services by an adoption agency licensed by this State to assist Irish applicants in effecting Vietnamese adoptions. Why is this the case when the expired bilateral agreement, under which the agency operated, expressly envisaged the provision of such humanitarian aid and rendered it impossible for Irish applicants to effect Vietnamese adoptions without making a specific humanitarian aid payment?

What consideration, if any, was given by the review group during the lifetime of the expired agreement to any difficulties arising as a consequence of the link between humanitarian aid and adoption services? Why did the Minister for Children give assurances to 20 couples at an advanced stage in the Vietnamese adoption process after 1 May 2009 that satisfactory arrangements would be made to facilitate them completing Vietnamese adoptions and why have no such arrangements been made? As a result of publication of the ISS report, has Vietnam refused to continue negotiations on the conclusion of a new bilateral agreement with this State or has the Government simply decided to suspend indefinitely negotiations on a new agreement? What consideration, if any, did the Government give to negotiating a new agreement incorporating provisions to address any concerns resulting from the ISS report and the creation of structures to properly and transparently monitor the workings of such agreement?

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Shatter should conclude.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is nothing to prevent the Minister negotiating and completing an agreement with the Vietnamese that is compliant with the Hague Convention on intercountry adoption. France, Spain, Italy and Canada, who have all ratified the Hague Convention, are continuing to facilitate adoptions from Vietnam and to ensure the necessary standards to protect the welfare of children are properly applied. As a consequence of the incompetent manner in which the Government has dealt with this sensitive issue, hundreds of Irish adoption applicants are now left in limbo and hundreds of children for whom adoption would provide a better life may remain in orphanages.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Shatter has gone far over time.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will conclude with two more sentences. Substantial HSE social work resources have been wasted in the assessment of adoption applicants with a focus solely on Vietnamese adoptions instead of a focus on foreign adoption generally. Many of those left in limbo are now confronted with the prospect of their declarations of suitability and eligibility expiring and will have to apply to the Adoption Board for extensions and, in some cases, to the HSE for updated assessments. Adopters are entitled to answers from the Minister of State.

Barry Andrews (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue and affording me the opportunity to update the House on this matter. The Adoption Bill 2009, which will give force of law to the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, is continuing its progress through the Oireachtas and the debate on Second Stage is scheduled to resume on Thursday. A core principle of the Hague Convention, which represents the international standard for adoption, is that intercountry adoption should be child centred. The child's interests must be paramount throughout the adoption process. The legislation and specifically the regime of the Hague Convention is designed to provide an assurance for individual children, their families and the State, that appropriate procedures have been followed and that adoptions are effected in the best interests of the child. As such, it is our intention that all intercountry adoptions must meet the standards of the Hague Convention.

Against this background, and after serious deliberation, the Government decided on 13 January to suspend indefinitely negotiations on a new bilateral intercountry adoption agreement with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. As a result of this decision, all intercountry adoptions from Vietnam will be suspended until such time as the Adoption Bill 2009 has been enacted and both Ireland and Vietnam have ratified the provisions of the Hague Convention.

Having met with many individuals and representative groups throughout this process, I am fully aware of the great disappointment this decision has caused and will cause for those hoping to adopt from Vietnam. It is important to reiterate that this decision was not taken lightly and was based on information brought into the public domain by the Vietnamese Government in the first instance and subsequently by UNICEF with the co-operation of the Vietnamese Government. Serious questions regarding adoption practices in Vietnam were raised in these two recent reports. Such information cannot be ignored and the Government was obliged to act on foot of this information.

Of greatest concern is the question of whether the child is adoptable. The issues of consent and the exchange of fees were also raised. Where questions on these fundamental issues remain, it would be remiss of the Government to allow adoptions from Vietnam to continue. The Government has committed to providing technical assistance to the Vietnamese authorities in the area of child welfare and protection to help prepare the way for ratification of the Hague Convention should the Vietnamese wish to avail of such an offer. Based on my discussions with the Vietnamese authorities, I am confident that Vietnam will ratify the Hague Convention in the near future, at which time I would hope and expect adoptions to resume.

To state as Deputy Shatter has that the Government gave no warning to those hoping to adopt from Vietnam that a new bilateral agreement might not be put in place is not just wrong, it is most disingenuous. On several occasions in recent months in both Houses, I stated that real concerns had been raised in the context of intercountry adoption from Vietnam and these would have to be addressed before a new agreement could be entered into. When I shared a television studio with Deputy Shatter last October, I clearly explained the difficulties in putting in place a new bilateral agreement and said that there could be no certainty about the successful conclusion of the process.

Deputy Shatter contends that the Government was dilatory in dealing with the UNICEF ISS report. He claims the report was received last August and that it took the Government six months to act on it. I remind the Deputy that the report was finalised in late November. I said last October that I would await the finalisation of the report before making a recommendation to the Government. I did not think it was correct to make a decision on the basis of a draft report that could not be made available to the adoption community. The timeframe for the publication of the report was beyond the control of the Government. The time that elapsed between the circulation of the draft report and the publication of the final report is a matter for the ISS. To my mind, it involved dialogue with the Vietnamese Government and the embassies based on the ground in Hanoi.

Following the Government decision, I met representative groups last week to update them on the situation. I shared with them the contents of my statement prior to its circulation to the media. The Adoption Board has agreed arrangements for people who had hoped to adopt from Vietnam. All couples or individuals who possess a declaration of eligibility and suitability for Vietnam may select a new country from which to adopt, subject to submitting the usual change of country report to the Adoption Board. They may also retain their current place on the helping hands list for Vietnam, which is being maintained. In the event of Vietnam reopening, those on the Vietnamese waiting list whose declarations have not been used in the meantime to effect an adoption in another country will be in a position to proceed without delay, having regard to their position on the Vietnamese list. All couples or individuals who have a declaration of eligibility and suitability for Vietnam but have sought to change in recent months will be in a position to avail of the foregoing arrangements.

At all stages of the process, which has caused great anxiety and ultimately disappointment for couples or individuals hoping to adopt from Vietnam, I have consulted the adoption community and informed them of my actions. I have no difficulty in standing before this House and accounting in full for the decisions I have made. I suggest that Deputies on all sides should continue to have regard to the sensitivity of the matter at hand and respect the position of children who have been adopted into this country from Vietnam in recent years. We all have a responsibility to these children. The status of their adoptions is not in question. The adoptions have gone through a lengthy legal process and have been entered into the register of foreign adoptions. The Government must do its best to ensure that the interests of any child being adopted by Irish citizens are promoted and protected. Deputy Shatter mentioned that 20 adoptions were at an advanced stage when negotiations were suspended. It continues to be the position of the Government that it will try to facilitate the finalisation of such adoptions, subject to the serious legal difficulties that apply.