James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 1 proposes to substitute the words "what other" for "whether another" in the proposed new section 88A(2) of the Children Act, as contained in section 6 in this Bill. The purpose of section 88A is to introduce a new power to transfer children between remand centres, where the remand centre to which the child is being transferred caters for that class of child or where the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs considers that the transfer is necessary in the interests of the good governance of remand centres.

Section 88A(2), as drafted, requires the Minister to consult the director or board of management of both remand centres involved in the proposed transfer "so as to ascertain whether the transfer would be in the child's best interests, or if the transfer would not be in the child's best interests, whether another course of action should be adopted in respect of the child". The use of the words "whether another" was intended to lead to consideration of other options for the child, in a situation where the proposed transfer would not be in the child's best interests. I am advised that if a transfer is not approved by the Minister, other courses of action would be considered depending on the individual circumstances.

In the course of considering draft opposition amendments on the Bill at Committee stage in Dáil Éireann, I raised the issue of the substitution of "what other" for "whether another" in the proposed new section 88A(2) with the Office of the Attorney General. I was advised that the inclusion of the phrase "what other", which has the effect of narrowing the Minister's position to deciding what other course of action should be adopted if the transfer would not be in the best interests of the child, rather than "whether another" would be appropriate in this case. This is the basis on which I bring forward amendment No. 1.