Aideen Hayden (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I would like to thank all of the previous speakers for what have been excellent and thoughtful speeches. In particular, I congratulate the Minister on her speech. She has brought this debate to another level in looking more specifically at the whole issue of childhood and how it has evolved in the wider society to a point where we now believe and feel we need to protect children and give them a value.

While I do not want to repeat much of what has been said in the debate, I will make a couple of points. Historically, when we look at, for example, the portrayal of children and childhood, an awful lot of what was at stake was the issue of poverty. For example, when children were down in the mines and in the factories, there were many commissions, particularly in the UK, on whether or not the practice should be outlawed. On a number of occasions, outlawing the practice was not successful because the family needed the work of the child, and the argument was made that only the small hands of children, for example, could be put into the looms. There is a real issue about the value of childhood and poverty. The Minister referred to issues of the recognition of childhood in the Victorian era. For example, Queen Victoria herself was perceived as being a mother figure, yet we all know her treatment of her own children left a lot to be desired. The reality is it was an era where children were owned by their parents and were the possessions of their parents. Short of killing them in extreme circumstances, there was really nothing a parent could not do to a child.

I was struck by what the Minister said about the role of parents in this context and their responsibility for childhood. I was very struck when she mentioned the fact that, because of child mortality, for example, parents could not afford to care for their children. In a book I read many years ago, Aristocrats, one of the characters was a member of the family that owned Leinster House, the FitzGerald family. It was very clear it was a very difficult issue in that a parent could not really emotionally care for a child before they reached a certain age because there was no guarantee the child would survive.

We have all signed this motion so perhaps the issue of beauty pageants is beyond debate on one level. However, I want to raise the issue of the exercise by children of their free choice. Children are controlled by parents. I have always been very uncomfortable with the idea, for the sake of argument, of children swimming competitively or playing piano competitively at the age of five, six, seven or eight, where they are practising for four, five or six hours a day. That is what we are talking about here - about competition and being the best. To what extent do we try to ensure that children are genuinely exercising free choice when they are engaging in any form of competition, whether it be competition based on their looks, their ability to play a piano, their ability to swim or any other form of competition? We have to be very careful about that.

In regard to child pageants, again we come back to the issue of poverty. From the research I have done on child pageants, principally those in the United States, I believe the vast majority of people involved would not generally be what one would call middle class. I believe there is an issue about poverty, about resources and about education when it comes to issues such as child beauty pageants. I believe, as the motion states, that childhood is time-specific and unique, and we need to be very careful that we allow children that space, and that they exercise their free choice in any area of life, whether that be competition around their looks or any other form of competition.

I congratulate my colleague, Senator van Turnhout, for bringing this motion forward and for her personal stance last September. I also congratulate the hotels that turned down this beauty pageant. We live in tough times and this is a matter of resources, so fair do's to them. We have a moral duty to children and we have a responsibility to protect them. We are the grown-ups - it is a simple equation. I understand that many parents are justly proud that their children are beautiful and they believe they are the most beautiful in the world. However, we need to be clear what we are talking about. It is about competition. We are also very much in the frame where we are putting a premium on youth, and not just youth but younger and younger youth in an aging world. We live in a society where people are living longer - an aging society - yet this premium on youth is a dangerous thing and is not something that should be promoted in any shape or form.

A child beauty pageant is no better than a dog show, in my opinion. It is exactly the same principle. By its very nature, it should not be allowed. It is positively illegal, in my opinion, and should not be happening. I have no issue whatsoever with the idea of outlawing it full stop. We should not even be debating it. As mentioned, the French Senate has made it a criminal offence for anyone under the age of 16 to be entered into such competitions. The organisers of these competitions should also face criminalisation. We have to bear in mind that this is the exploitation of children for the titillation of adults, and there is no other way to put it. I would perhaps go further than the motion has done and say, to be perfectly frank, it is a matter that should be subject to legislation and it should be outlawed.