Alex White (Labour)

The Minister might have anticipated amendment No. 14 in some of his remarks a few minutes ago, but it is a considerably different proposal to that made in amendment No. 2, which had to do with a third category of possible inter-country adoptions. I will not press that amendment at this stage but reserve my position for Report Stage. Amendment No. 14 is a proposal akin to a grandfather clause, if it can be described in that way. The intent is similar to that of amendment No. 50 tabled by Senator Fitzgerald. It would allow for families who have already adopted a child from a country that has not approved the Hague Convention or with which Ireland does not have a bilateral agreement to conduct a second or subsequent adoption from that country. It would be something akin to an interim measure while those families are growing and developing as families. No adoptions can be completed by first-time applicants to that country, and if this amendment was not accepted or the issue not addressed in some other way, a child who has already been adopted from that country and is now an Irish citizen would be precluded from growing up with a sibling from his or her country and culture of origin. The basis of this amendment is to allow for such adoptions in what are essentially exceptional circumstances.

I understand what the Minister said in reply to the previous amendment. It is his view that we should have a regime whereby either the Hague Convention or a bilateral agreement applies, and to do otherwise would be to dilute the regime we are seeking to introduce. That argument has considerable force. However, the Bill itself, in section 81, does allow for arrangements in exceptional cases with a non-contracting state. Thus, according to my brief consideration of section 81, we are already contemplating in this Bill, quite rightly, allowing for adoption from countries that are not party to the convention and with which we do not have a bilateral agreement. In fact, it is at section 81 that Senator Fitzgerald's amendment is directed. Either amendment would deal with the point I have mentioned. Perhaps the Minister will address this.