Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I back the call by Senator Darragh O’Brien for a debate on the issue of the sale of the Government’s shareholding in Aer Lingus. I hope the Leader will look at it favourably and organise it at the earliest opportunity.

Ireland has been found in violation of the European Social Charter by the Council of Europe’s European Committee of Social Rights. It clearly stated the corporal punishment of children should be expressly and comprehensively prohibited in law. When we look at the defence of reasonable chastisement, many people think it refers to rebuking or reprimanding severely. However, the dictionary states it includes corporal punishment, beatings and inflicting punishment, such as by whipping. The fact that anyone would have this defence against children is inexplicable. Over 100 years ago, one could beat one’s wife, dog or one’s child. We have removed this for domestic abuse and animal welfare but this defence is acceptable in cases involving children. The Council of Europe has repeatedly asked for it to be removed.

Up to 28 member states of the Council of Europe have prohibited corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the family home. Almost one year ago, I forwarded an amendment to the Children First Bill to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. I hope it will be accepted before it comes to the Seanad. I know I have the backing of the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the Children’s Rights Alliance and many other children’s rights organisations. If we want to children to be seen as rights holders, we need to remove this defence of reasonable chastisement. For the past 12 years, the Council of Europe has repeatedly told us to remove this defence. Will the Leader arrange a debate on this matter? Will he also urge the Minister to bring forward the Children First Bill to the Seanad? I know it was stalled for 18 months but it has now passed Committee Stage in the Dáil.

We need to bring this into law. I know it has not been used in the courts but the very fact that it remains on our law books speaks volumes about our perception of children as rights holders.