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

I take the opportunity to welcome to the Gallery the children from Clare.

Senator van Turnhout knows my views on this amendment and I do not propose to accept it. As we discussed on Committee Stage in this House, the amendment would provide for a definition of "relevant court documents" for the purposes of section 29 of the Child Care Act 1991. The section in question provides for the powers to report on child care proceedings before the courts where it is likely that such reporting may assist in the better operation of the Act.

At present, under regulations made under this section, the child care law reporting project has been examining cases before the courts over the recent past. All such reporting must be anonymised. By way of clarification, the project in question is permitted to report on such proceedings under regulations. It does not have a statutory remit in this regard.

The proposed amendment would provide access to all documents lodged to the courts in child care proceedings. Such an amendment, were it to be inserted in the Act, would not only apply to the aforementioned project but any future body given access to report on court proceedings in a similar fashion. As Senators will appreciate, in many child care cases before the courts information of an extremely personal and sensitive nature is submitted. This may encompass everything from financial reports to psychological reports, reports on addiction issues and alleged cases of physical and-or sexual abuse which relate not only to the child but also to his or her parents and wider family. The balance in providing access to such information must be very carefully weighed. The potential for a positive impact, in terms of what an examination of such reports may yield for policy or operational gain, must be considered against the right to privacy of the individual. This must be examined from a constitutional perspective and also in terms of obligations under international treaties to which Ireland is a signatory. I remain to be convinced that the intrusion would be appropriate or proportional to intended potential gain.

As I stated previously, I will keep an open mind on the matter and the views of the Child and Family Agency have been sought by my officials. An in-depth legal and policy examination of the issues associated with any such amendment would also be required. Were it deemed to be possible and desirable, a consultation with key stakeholders, given the nature of the documents in question, would be necessary.Finally, I would also like to establish if other avenues might be explored to provide the information sought for reporting purposes. For those reasons, I will not accept the amendment.