Alex White (Labour)

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 16, line 30, after "Convention" to insert the following:

"and includes an adoption from a country other than one a party to the Hague Convention or a bilateral agreement if the Authority considers that the adoption can be effected from a third country in a manner compatible with this Act".

This issue that arises from widespread concern expressed by those with an interest in adoption. The general response to what is being achieved with this important and comprehensive legislation has been welcoming. The Hague Convention clearly transposed into our law the basis for inter-country adoption. The codification of all of the previous legislation going back to the 1950s is welcome and I commend the Minister of State and his officials on the extraordinary work that has been done in putting this Bill together.

Concerns still remain, however, about countries that will not be covered by the Hague Convention. I am not for a moment saying we should not promote, improve and uphold international standards. That is the point of the convention. It requires a high level of scrutiny on adoptions across the board. The whole point of the convention is that it be applied as the basis for inter-country adoptions.

Inevitably there will be countries from which Irish people wish to adopt children that will not be in a position to fall within the remit of the Hague Convention. The easy answer to that is that if we are to apply an international standard, it must be that set out in the Hague Convention, and if a country does not meet that standard, so be it. No one, however, would want to dispose of human situations in that way. Every time a law is made, there will be hard cases and exceptions, especially in such a human area. Our concern, which is shared by many of the adoption associations, is that countries such as Russia, Vietnam and Ethiopia, could fall outside the requirements in the convention.

Bilateral agreements can be made with these countries. Currently the bilateral agreement with Vietnam is in the process of being renegotiated. We are aware that Vietnam has become a popular country for Irish applicants because it follows model practice promoted by the Adoption Board, the Health Service Executive and the Minister of State's office. The Minister of State has indicated his support for a new bilateral agreement to replace the agreement that expires in April. The Department has yet to send a draft agreement, however, through the Department of Foreign Affairs to the Vietnamese authorities. The time is now critical for this new agreement given the situation in which many people find themselves. We do not want a hiatus to cause a collapse in adoptions from Vietnam, depriving 20 or more families and children of the opportunity to live in loving and secure environments. Ultimately those children might never be adopted if there is a delay in the application by Irish authorities on this urgent issue.

Other countries have established bilateral agreements with Russia so there are precedents and a willingness on the part of the Russians to enter bilateral agreements. There are hundreds of thousands of children in orphanages in Russia and we should not close Irish homes to them. Standards must be applied but that is what the convention seeks to do and that is what the Minister of State wants to achieve.

Recent analysis of adoption law in Ethiopia deemed the regime there compatible with Irish law. Why then is there a hold up in the establishment of a bilateral agreement with that country?