Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

That provision is in keeping with the rest of the Government's legislation. As the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue, said when he held that portfolio, it would totally contradict the principle behind the Act not to bring that provision into force. The Minister of State said he hoped he could persuade the Cabinet to introduce this provision, which highlights the fact that he should be a member of the Cabinet. This provision brings home the need for a Minister for children in Cabinet. I would be happier to see the Minister of State in the Cabinet than many of the others there now.

The reasons given for the delay in introducing this legislation are part of the wider failure in our society to recognise the unique rights of children. These reasons do not stand up to scrutiny. If cost is a factor against raising the age of criminal responsibility, the Government would not be able to pay for family conferences and that provision is just window dressing. The reference to cost also contradicts many of the provisions in the Government amendment — for example, that it has done such great work with the probation and welfare service.

It is ridiculous to say the seriousness of the offences is the issue. The issue is whether the child has the intellectual and legal capacity to bear that criminal responsibility. I welcome the Minister of State's comments about the rehabilitation legislation. I intended it in the broader sense that the Minister of State applied because the rehabilitation aspect of the Children Act is limited.

That should be extended but rehabilitation legislation should also be brought in for the general population. I know of a case involving someone who committed a once-off offence which was out of character but that is on the person's record for life. It affects the person's ability to get a job and so on. There should be a system similar to the English one the Minister of State described.

I did not have a chance to discuss educational programmes and so on as mentioned in the motion. The Minister of State, however, is familiar with the work of the Carline Centre for Learning. The centre fights for funding during the year, and from year to year. It needs definite guaranteed funding to help it to fully realise its programme, which it cannot do now as it has to cut back on programme materials.

The issue of cost in respect of the Children Act is bogus because family conferences, which have been enforced, are its most costly feature. The Government should bring in the legislation in full and provide the necessary resources.