Barry Andrews (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)

I thank Senators for their extensive contributions on these two amendments.

Gay men and lesbians make very good parents. It must be made clear they always have and always will. We must also acknowledge that many same-sex couples foster children. They are entrusted to them by the State through the Health Service Executive proving the State does not have any set view on this matter. The argument that same-sex couples cannot be good parents is contrary to the case.

I agree with Senator Healy Eames that adoptive parents must go through a more rigorous process of selection to become parents. There is nothing to stop natural parents becoming parents whereas adoptive parents must go through an extraordinary and difficult ordeal. Biological parents, therefore, do not have an advantage over adoptive parents in parenting.

The constitutional position is the background to this debate. In my view, marriage is preferable to cohabiting for adoption purposes because of the obvious permanence. This is without any reference to sexual orientation. A married couple provide that level of permanence in the assessment of suitability and eligibility for adoption that is carried out by the Health Service Executive. While a couple is preferable, single people are allowed to adopt.

While marriage continues to be defined as it is in our Constitution, adoption will not be available in those circumstances. If there were an amendment to this constitutional provision, this debate would be moot. As Senator Alex White said, the civil partnership Bill will be introduced soon. According to the programme for Government, it was intended to be introduced at the earliest possible date but in the past three months the legislative programme has been more than somewhat put to one side because of the extraordinary economic circumstances. The Gilligan-Zappone case will also give a much clearer judicial interpretation on where the family stands constitutionally.

Regarding Senator Mary White's comments, from my work with young people as the Minister of State with responsibility for children, I have noted young people find it difficult to come to terms with their sexual orientation and, in many cases, they self-harm. This is a challenge for teachers and youth workers to recognise and acknowledge.

We do not want the message to go out from the House that with the route we are taking on adoption there is an adverse comment on sexual orientation. Through the fostering process, it is recognised that we have no problem with gay men and lesbians being parents or minding children.

The UK situation was referred to by some Senators. The UK, however, does not have a constitution and, therefore, is more free to legislate in these areas.

Senator Mullen relied on several surveys for his argument while warning about relying on other surveys. The facts are clear — we have an adoption system and there are clear categories of who can adopt. The adoption legislation incorporates that within the constitutional framework and that is the basis for the Government's consideration of this. It is child-centred legislation.

An interesting point was raised about adopting a natural child of a gay partner. I have not scoped this out clearly and we need far more consultation on it. Would it include an adopted child of a gay partner or just the natural child? I agree with Senator Alex White that the amendment in the name of Senator Bacik anticipates legislation that has not yet come before either House. As such, it would be extremely difficult to incorporate the provision in the amendment in law without even mentioning the points I made previously.

The other amendment deals with the question of cohabiting couples. I may have read it wrong but the import of this amendment appears to be that there should be discrimination in favour of same sex cohabiting couples, while opposite sex cohabiting couples would not be able to adopt.