David Norris (Independent)

I thank Senator Quinn for this opportunity to make a small contribution to this debate. I admire his handling of the subject because, unlike the tweedledum and tweedledee of the Government and the Opposition, he did not spend time in carping negative comments and tried to put forward a sensible and practical suggestion that addresses the real social situation. The House should always operate in this fashion. I find myself in a difficult situation because I would prefer to abstain on this issue and say "a pox on both your houses". However, I must vote one way or the other.

Senator Quinn raised the subject of change. The moment I saw the figure of €800 per month I thought of how things have changed and the rocketing price of houses immediately came to mind. I agree with the Senator that the crippling burden of mortgages is something that is driving women who do not necessarily all want to work. I am in favour of choice. Young women should have the choice to go out to work if they want but being a full-time mother is a reasonable, decent, professional and multifarious occupation. It is not right that people are squeezed in this way. The Government should listen carefully to Senator Quinn.

The motion and amendment reflect the way in society has radically changed. One issue I will raise again falls under the umbrella of securing child care and its enormous costs. Senator Maurice Hayes referred to an issue I raised on 8 March 2005 and I ask the Minister to examine the case of the four autistic children without prejudging it. Their parents have tried for a long time to get access to services for them. I know it is difficult. Four our five years ago I did battle in this House on an Adjournment matter regarding the parents of two autistic children who had access to some services, including speech therapy. These services were withdrawn because of a bureaucratic redrawing of boundaries and the parents had the awful and tragic experience of watching their children regressing. If autistic children are not constantly kept up to the mark, they tend to go backwards, particularly if they are at a certain stage of development. We fought to get something done in the past and Senator Ross has raised the issue of autistic children repeatedly.

This debate is extraordinary. Senator Maurice Hayes dealt with the matter in an economic setting, claiming that it would cost €500 to keep a child in care. I would have thought the figure to be €800 or €1,000. He made the point that if this money were given to the parents they could look after their children much better. The sequence of events worries me. I have personal experience of Ireland's child care services, though not as a parent. In other circumstances I have been involved directly in regard to the welfare of children and their parents. I found the service providers to be caring, professional and competent. I have also found them to be arrogant, bullying and ignorant. They are more interested in their status than the welfare of the child. I have had direct experience of this.

I am bewildered. I do not know whether in this situation we are meeting the arrogant, bullying face or the caring, professional, competent face of the authorities. We, as legislators, should know which, because the sequence of events is so worrying. These parents dealt with the child care people for 18 months. They then went on radio to publicise their plight, as was their right. Within a matter of days their children had been taken from them. Within a week they had been required to undergo psychiatric assessment, despite the fact this had been done within the previous year and they had received a report saying they were perfectly all right. This is terribly worrying and we would be negligent if we did not draw it to the attention of the relevant Department and seek to ensure agreement, as framed in this motion by both sides of the House. Despite their spats, I believe both are interested in the welfare of the child.

I am glad to have had the opportunity to draw attention to this matter. I am not for one side or the other. I do not say these are dreadful, malign people, but suggest that the matter should be examined.