Seanad debates

Tuesday, 2 October 2012

Thirty-First Amendment of the Constitution (Children) Bill 2012: Second Stage

 

6:55 pm

Photo of Trevor Ó ClochartaighTrevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I doubt it. Not unless things change radically.

There is an issue about the coverage of the referendum. There are rumours that the 50:50 rule regarding coverage of this referendum might be challenged. That would be a very dangerous step to take, for a number of reasons. First, that could become the issue, as opposed to the actual referendum and passing it. Second, if there are people out there who have genuine concerns these need to be addressed by those of us who are campaigning for a "Yes" vote, instead of our branding them as cranks or people with very specific agendas. They need to be tackled head on. There are some groups who have contacted us, for example, fathers who are separated from their children who have legitimate issues, and other representative groups. The way to tackle this is to address those issues in a very forthright and open manner, taking on board the issues the people concerned have and explaining that in most cases, or so I imagine, such issues do not relate to the change in the Constitution. It is really important that we stand by the principle of 50:50 coverage in the run-up to the referendum.

Another issue very close to my heart is that of asylum seekers. The Irish Refugee Council has been seeking legal advice on the referendum. Ms Sue Conlon of the IRC stated she hoped the wording would afford rights to children living in direct provision but that at present it was uncertain if this were the case. Ms Conlon also said that phrases such as "as far as practicable" might mean that children in direct provision may not fall under all the elements of any new laws, were the referendum to be passed. She stated, "we would welcome any inclusion of these children", and added that regardless of their status in direct provision, these children are the responsibility of the State. I raised this issue recently with the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, because of the situation in the Lisbrook direct provision centre in Galway where 272 people are staying, 100 of whom are children. We are not clear what their rights are under this provision. Perhaps the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, might be able to enlighten us as to how she reads the referendum as affecting their rights. The people concerned have asked me to ask her that question which is a very important one.

The Minister mentioned that HIQA is to be given a role in regard to child protection standards; I hope that would include children in direct provision. At present there is a certain lack of transparency - one way to put it - about what is going on in some of the direct provision centres and about people checking what is going on in them. Mrs. Justice McGuinness was mentioned, rightly, on numerous occasions today. I wish to cite her in another instance. She wrote the foreword to the State-sanctioned report on child poverty and exclusion by the Irish Refugee Council, in which she stated:

[The report] paints a convincing picture of the damage done to children by years of living in institutional accommodation which is so far removed from the atmosphere of a normal family home. This is rendered even more damaging by the income poverty of their parents.
Noting that the UN convention has not been fully ratified, she continued:
Ms Arnold's cogent argument in the report that in the case of these children Ireland is also in breach of the family life rights set out in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In this context it should be borne in mind that a considerable number of the children living in direct provision accommodation are Irish citizens, born in Ireland.
These comments raise very serious issues regarding direct provision and these children. One third of the residents in State accommodation, some 1,789, are children. Regardless of their or their family's status, these children did not choose to come to Ireland and they have no control over their circumstances. The author of the report states:
Direct provision is an example of a Government policy which has not only bred discrimination, social exclusion, enforced poverty and neglect, but has placed children at real risk . . . However, the question remains - does the sustained and prolonged restriction of human rights and civil liberties inherent in the direct provision system amount to child abuse? This report calls on the Government to establish an independent inquiry to acknowledge and investigate the long list of complaints, grievances and child protection concerns reported by the residents, children, non-governmental organisations and support agencies herein. It also highlights the need for a Government commitment to protection of the best interests of the child in all circumstances.
I do not wish to continue on it for too long but it is an extremely important point.

I refer also to the issue of resources. The Government must be applauded for introducing this legislation, as must anybody who has had any hand or part in it over the years. However, the real proof will be in the pudding of how it will change the lives of children. I refer to a recent news report from Galway which stated that almost one in five households with children were at risk of poverty.

In addition, over 200,000 children nationally are living in poverty. A member of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in Galway has stated:


People are coming in hungry. One woman who came in recently had only 40c to feed her three kids for the week ... The cuts to the fuel allowance for those on social welfare and the rising costs of electricity, oil and gas have left growing numbers of Galway families struggling to heat their homes ... A good number of people coming in here cannot pay their ESB bills or put oil in their tanks and that would be a lot of our clients ... Our clients would have gone up by over 30%.
There is an obvious need to recognise children's rights in the Constitution. However, the requisite resources must be put in place in order to change the lives of the children to whom I refer and all other children of the State. I hope that the reference to "all children" means all children, regardless of from where they come.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.