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

I thank Senators for their contributions. I had the pleasure of knowing John Boland and I am still very good friends with his widow, Kay. I knew the late Cyril Daly very well also. He was very well known for a very humorous column he used to write in the Irish Medical Timesunder the byline of Dr. Slymo Sloothery. The name itself will give an indication of the sort of antics that were described.

On a very serious note, I sincerely thank Senator van Turnhout for bringing forward this amendment for discussion. The matter to which it relates is important and one in respect of which I share the objective sought by the Senator. I also take this opportunity to repeat that the Government is fully committed to working towards the elimination of corporal punishment and to further protecting children from violence. I wish to comment on something to which a number of Senators, including Senator Henry, alluded. It puts me in mind that what we do in law is to send a strong message that we hope will be followed by a cultural shift. In the context of the marriage equality referendum, we sent out a very strong message but we know there is still bias out there against same-sex couples. We believe that, through the referendum, we have sent a very strong message to the effect that such bias is not acceptable in Irish society anymore and that the position will change. Equally, I believe the same will be the case in respect of the matter under discussion.Although various provisions exist under Irish law and administrative measures that prohibit, or aim to prohibit, the use of corporal punishment in non-family settings, it has been acknowledged that these arrangements do not reach the standard required by international instruments to which Ireland is a party, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Council of Europe's Revised Social Charter.

In that very context, earlier this year Ireland was found to be in violation of the Revised Social Charter. This was the second such finding; the previous one having been made in 2004. As I view the particular matter as one of equality before the law, rather than any intrusion on the exercise of legitimate parental authority, I resolved to set about addressing this issue as quickly as possible. Accordingly, in its response to the finding of a violation Ireland gave particular commitments to the Council of Europe.

The first of these commitments related to bringing in regulations to expressly prohibit in law the use of corporal punishment in certain State child care settings where this was not already the case, essentially covering foster care and residential care situations. I am pleased to inform the House that preparations for making such regulations are almost complete and I would hope to be in a position to sign them into law shortly.

The second commitment related to the matter of the common law defence of "reasonable chastisement" which is the subject of the Senator's amendment. In that regard, Ireland undertook to the Council of Europe to initiate arrangements to examine the potential, under the Irish legal framework, to remove this defence. This is something my Department has been working on actively and purposefully since the commitment was given a number of months ago.

A proposed provision in law which involves children, their parents and the State has considerable chance of engaging issues of constitutional rights and therefore needs to be very carefully examined. A very thorough and sure-footed approach is required in preparing any measure to reduce the prospect of a successful challenge in the future, which will not be to anyone's benefit and certainly not that of children. I do not want this House to be responsible for my proposing a law that will be struck down by the courts.

The aim of the current work by my Department is to ensure that there is the strongest possible policy and legal grounding for action in this potentially legally sensitive area. These steps constitute a normal, prudent approach to ensuring that legislative measures, particularly where the State interacts with the family, consider implications and vulnerabilities as extensively as possible to provide the greatest level of confidence that the measure is sustainable. In other words, we want it to stick. Given the advanced stage of that work, I consider that it may be possible to bring it to completion very soon and indeed to coincide with a Report Stage consideration of the Senator's amendment. I therefore respectfully suggest for the Senator's consideration that she agree to postpone determination of her amendment until Report Stage. At that time I expect to be in a position to let her know whether or not such an amendment can be accepted.

I have been in discussions with the Attorney General and with my Department as late as yesterday morning and this morning and we are very hopeful. There is absolutely no ideological issue here. Everybody wants this to happen. I do not want to leave this behind us. I am very much struck by what Senator Leyden has said as we come into 2016, that we honour that proclamation in a very real way. I ask for forbearance. Time is against me in that I cannot with absolute authority or confidence accept the amendment today but I have no doubt that by Report Stage, one way or the other, there will be a clear answer on this. If I have my way we will have this defence of "reasonable chastisement" removed from the Statute Book. I hope the Senator will accept my bona fides on that.