Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Sections 77 to 80, inclusive, agreed to.

NEW SECTION.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald

I move amendment No. 49:

In page 56, before section 81, but in Chapter 2, to insert the following new section:

"81.—(1) The Minister shall make a report to both Houses of the Oireachtas six months prior to the expiration of any bilateral agreement as to:

(a) whether it is proposed to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country,

(b) the steps taken to date to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country,

(d) the date it is hoped that a new bilateral agreement will be in place.

(2) The Minister shall make a further report to both Houses of the Oireachtas one week prior to the expiration of any bilateral agreement on the progress in relation to its renewal outlining:

(a) whether it is proposed to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country,

(b) the steps taken to date to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country,

(d) the date it is hoped that a new bilateral agreement will be in place.

(3) On the conclusion of any new bilateral agreement, or the renewal of any bilateral agreement, the Minister shall make a report to the Houses of the Oireachtas and, as soon as practicable after the conclusion of any such making or renewal of a bilateral agreement, cause to be lodged a copy of the agreement and a report of the Department of Health and Children on that agreement in the library of the Houses of the Oireachtas.".

This amendment relates to bilateral adoption agreements. Obviously, the Minister of State is aware there is concern in regard to bilateral agreements, especially in respect of Vietnam. Perhaps he will bring us up to date on that agreement and whether it is ready to be signed off. What is the timeframe in regard to other bilateral agreements on which he said he will start to work once that one is agreed?

The intention behind this new section is that the Minister of State will make a report to the Houses of the Oireachtas prior to the expiration of any bilateral agreement outlining in detail whether a new bilateral agreement will be entered into, what steps have been taken with the relevant country and the date it is hoped the new bilateral agreement will be in place.

The Minister of State is aware that many parents who have adopted children from Vietnam are very keen to know the status of the bilateral agreement and would like to have had it agreed and concluded before this legislation was taken. There is concern that there is uncertainty for them, given that this legislation will be passed presumably before the bilateral agreement is in place. Perhaps the Minister of State will inform the House of the situation. This is a straightforward amendment and I am interested to hear the Minister of State's reaction.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews)

The position in regard to Vietnam is that the agreement expires on 1 May. The Government decided in December that we would pursue a new agreement which would be improved and based more rigorously on the principles contained in the Hague Convention. The drafting of that agreement was not a simple affair. We went through some of the details of that on the last occasion in the House. Nevertheless, we sent a draft of an agreement to the Vietnamese authorities and we intend to go to Vietnam in the next few days or weeks to sign an agreement. That is our intention, but as I said the last day, we cannot anticipate what the Vietnamese authorities will say about the draft agreement we sent them. That is the state of play.

I am keen to keep the parents informed. Members of the Oireachtas are getting a lot of representations from anxious parents and anxious prospective adoptive parents in regard to where we are going with this. I reassure people that we are very keen to sign an agreement and we will be guided at all times by the protection of children, both in Vietnam and here. They are the guiding and central principles in terms of how we approach this.

We have put a lot of time and resources into this to get this far. There have been some comments in the media that we have been dragging our heels and that we are somehow or other not interested in doing this, but nothing could be further from the truth.

I oppose the amendment. The experience I have had in the past few months in trying to negotiate bilateral agreements, agreements between two sovereign states, is that very often other sovereign states look at what is going on and many non-governmental organisations take a great deal of interest in it. It is not something that happens in isolation. There is little to be gained by placing before the Houses of the Oireachtas one's opening position or bottom line or negotiating information which might be better not put on the public record thereby preserving for oneself a strong negotiating position. I would be inclined not to do that.

The motivation behind the amendment is right. It is to try to ensure that these things are done in a timely fashion. However, that cannot be guaranteed by such a provision. The key is transparency. We will lay any new agreement before the Houses of the Oireachtas where it can be duly debated. However, it is important that my office and the Department of Foreign Affairs are given the right to negotiate this agreement in the normal way in which international agreements are concluded. The provisions in the Bill in regard to the laying of agreements before both Houses of the Oireachtas are adequate so I do not believe the amendment is necessary.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald

As the Minister of State said, many parents are very concerned that the agreement with Vietnam has not been signed. What is the position if it is not signed? The Minister of State said there is some doubt there but that he hopes it will be agreed. What will the legal position be if it is not agreed?

Senator Alex White

I support what Senator Fitzgerald said. Unless it is necessary, nobody wants to hold the Minister of State to precise dates and so on. However, this is a very urgent matter and one of huge concern to many people. The Minister of State indicated that he hopes there will be contact with the Vietnamese or that there will be a trip to Vietnam within days or weeks. Will he indicate which will be the case so that we can give some measure of clarity to people who get in touch with us and, I am sure, with him? There has been a serious delay, although I am not accusing anybody of foot-dragging in this regard. The bottom line is that there has been an inordinate delay in resolving this matter about which there is grave concern. The draft has been sent to the Vietnamese. Has the Minister of State considered any leverage that can be brought to bear? What is likely to be the next stage? He mentioned that there would be contact and perhaps a trip there. We are not asking the Minister of State to reveal any specifics of the draft. What does he envisage happening next? What steps, if any, does he intend to take to try to avoid further delay or any delay at the Vietnamese end? As it is a bilateral agreement, both sides need to want to make an agreement. It is not possible to have one that is just pushed by one side. What sort of leverage is available and what does the Minister of State believe he might be able to do to push the matter along at the other side, as it were?

I do not find persuasive what the Minister of State has said in opposing the amendment. He stated that he did not believe it was appropriate that the negotiating position of our Government would be revealed publicly. I have just re-read the amendment and it does not propose that that would occur. The amendment states that the report should indicate whether it is proposed to conclude an agreement and the steps taken to date to conclude an agreement. While it might touch on the contents of the agreement it does not really comprehend the contents of the agreement. The amendment also states that the report should indicate the steps proposed to be taken to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country, which is the same point again, and the date it is hoped that a new bilateral agreement will be in place. Section 81(2) refers to another report outlining whether it is proposed to conclude a new bilateral agreement with the relevant country, the steps taken to conclude an agreement and the date it is hoped that a new bilateral agreement will be in place. None of those points relates to the contents of an agreement but simply to the fact of an agreement or whether one is to occur.

Deputy Barry Andrews

I remind Senators that we are in a very sensitive period in negotiating this agreement with Vietnam. My experience is that such a measure as proposed in the amendment would not be helpful in negotiating an agreement with another party. I would like to say many things about how we are trying to conclude this agreement at the moment. However, it is a very sensitive time. We are approaching this particular deadline. I know people want to be completely reassured that we will be successful in negotiation with another country. I cannot give that reassurance. It would be wrong for me to give anybody false hope in that regard.

I assure people that we are very keen to have an agreement. Staff from both the Adoption Authority of Ireland and the Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs are being sent out to negotiate this face to face with the Vietnamese. It had been my intention that they would go out sooner -as soon as possible. That is a matter that is in flux. As Senators will understand, from time to time these matters are not always nailed down completely. That needs to be agreed upon as well. We are very keen to do that. I do not believe we have dragged our heels in any way on this issue. It is very sensitive and the core principle is the protection of children. We want to upgrade the old agreement and stitch into it new elements that are essential to the Hague Convention. I would like to tell Senators more about it but I am afraid it would be misconstrued.

Until we get through this period, it is as far as I can go to ask Senators to take my reassurance that we are putting in every effort in. We are very conscious of the sensitivities involved for prospective adoptive parents. We are making every effort to do that and we are informed by the principles of the Hague Convention. We want to get it done. There are other issues we need to settle. There are certain times in the negotiation of international agreements when it is better to allow the Government plenipotentiary powers, as it were, to do that job on the basis of trust that it will do the best job.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald

Notwithstanding the sensitivities and regardless of whether it was Vietnam or another country, if it was not possible to reach an agreement, what would be the legal position? What would the next step be? I do not refer particularly to Vietnam. Given that this legislation is to give effect to the Hague Convention and that we will also have bilateral agreements, if a bilateral agreement was not concluded, what would happen then?

Deputy Barry Andrews

If a bilateral agreement were not concluded there would be a good reason. It would mean that after a negotiation process, we would have not been able to be satisfied that all child protection measures were in place and therefore there could be no agreement and no adoption. That is the way it works.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald

I thank the Minister of State for clarifying that matter. That is what I thought and obviously that would be a very serious situation. I accept what the Minister of State says that every effort is being made to conclude the agreement with Vietnam, which will be reassuring to prospective adoptive parents who are obviously waiting to hear and want it concluded as quickly as possible. I hope the negotiations are going well. I also take the point that the best interests of children should be the guiding principle. When making these arrangements we do not want to compromise on our standards of what is best for children. Obviously that is core and I am sure is a core part of the Government's negotiations.

Nevertheless the amendment involves a principle. Obviously this is not just about the negotiations with Vietnam or Russia. The principle is that the Minister should be accountable to the Houses of the Oireachtas. Having the Minister report back and give information to the Houses about the bilateral agreements is in the interests of the process, the children and the parents. It is about information and transparency, and accountability to the Houses. I do not believe the amendment would compromise in any way the Government's negotiations on international bilateral agreements. We are asking that the Houses be kept informed. If we have the Hague Convention and also bilateral agreements, the Minister should indicate to both Houses the stage of the negotiations on bilateral agreements and whether he is expecting agreement. That would be reassuring to prospective adoptive parents who would then know it is in hand. It also keeps the pressure on the Department to review the bilateral agreements and negotiate new agreements where necessary.

This is a principled approach in the interests of the prospective adoptive parents and the children. It would not interfere with the Government's negotiations. It certainly would not interfere with its current negotiations on Vietnam. The date for that is 1 May and the Minister of State has given as much information as he is in a position to give, which I welcome. I understand the sensitivities. I wish the Minister of State every success in the negotiations in the coming weeks. Obviously it is in the interests of the families, who have been in touch with us, and their children as well as for future adoptions that this bilateral agreement would be concluded as soon as possible. The best conditions should be agreed by both sides and written into it.

Amendment put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 19; Níl, 30.

Tá

Bradford, Paul.
Burke, Paddy.
Buttimer, Jerry.
Cannon, Ciaran.
Coffey, Paudie.
Coghlan, Paul.
Cummins, Maurice.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Hannigan, Dominic.
Kelly, Alan.
McFadden, Nicky.
Mullen, Rónán.
Norris, David.
O’Toole, Joe.
Phelan, John Paul.
Regan, Eugene.
Ross, Shane.
Twomey, Liam.
White, Alex.

Níl

Boyle, Dan.
Brady, Martin.
Butler, Larry.
Callanan, Peter.
Callely, Ivor.
Carty, John.
Cassidy, Donie.
Corrigan, Maria.
Daly, Mark.
de Búrca, Déirdre.
Ellis, John.
Feeney, Geraldine.
Glynn, Camillus.
Hanafin, John.
Keaveney, Cecilia.
Leyden, Terry.
MacSharry, Marc.
McDonald, Lisa.
Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
O’Brien, Francis.
O’Donovan, Denis.
O’Malley, Fiona.
O’Sullivan, Ned.
Ormonde, Ann.
Phelan, Kieran.
Quinn, Feargal.
Walsh, Jim.
White, Mary M.
Wilson, Diarmuid.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Maurice Cummins and Nicky McFadden; Níl, Senators Camillus Glynn and Diarmuid Wilson.

Amendment declared lost.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 1 Apr 2009

Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Tá

Níl

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Apr 2009