Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 26 Jan 2012

Vol. 753 No. 1

Inter-Country Adoption: Statements

Minister for Children and Youth Affairs (Deputy Frances Fitzgerald)

I welcome the opportunity provided by today's debate to discuss and reflect upon the important issue of inter-country adoption. I am conscious that this is a topic of much interest to Deputies and to existing and prospective adoptive parents.

The issue of inter-country adoption has been the focus of particular attention in recent weeks arising from the circumstances and developments in Mexico, and it is appropriate that we allow time to discuss and understand the systems and standards governing this area. I will begin by setting out the legislative policy and structural framework currently in place and address the issues relating to various countries.

I note the number of developments in the area of adoption. For example, the Adoption Authority of Ireland has approved 13 accredited bodies to perform the various adoption functions. Equally, the Adoption Authority of Ireland has approved three accredited bodies to perform assessments, which should speed up considerably the process for couples, which as we all know has been far too long. It should be noted that we have adoption arrangements with Bulgaria, China, Thailand and the Philippines. Very recently representatives of the adoption authority agreed to travel to India to discuss an administrative arrangement between the two central authorities. I will address the issues relating to a number of countries during the course of my contribution.

The practice of domestic and intercountry adoption in Ireland is governed by the Adoption Act 2010, which commenced on 1 November 2010. Many Deputies in this House and the Seanad contributed to that legislation. That commencement coincided with Ireland's ratification of the Hague Convention on the protection of children and co-operation in respect of intercountry adoption. Signing that convention has changed this issue in Ireland and couples will primarily travel to countries which are signatories of the convention to effect intercountry adoptions. There are some exceptions where there are other bilateral agreements in place.

The Adoption Authority of Ireland was established on 1 November, and the Act includes provisions for adoptions into Ireland from those countries which are signatories to the Hague Convention, or with which Ireland has a bilateral agreement. There was also a transitional provision, which has been mentioned in the media in recent days. That enabled prospective adopters to proceed with an adoption from a non-Hague Convention or non-bilateral agreement country, if prior to 1 November 2010 they had been issued with a declaration of eligibility and suitability to adopt. The provision requires that the adoption authority is satisfied that the adoption meets all the standards of the Hague Convention.

We have the Adoption Act, which is a framework for standards, to ensure that all adoptions are in the best interests of the child. The core of the adoption process is that it be carried out to the highest possible standards and in the best interests of the child. It should not be forgotten that intercountry adoption is a service for those children who cannot be raised by their birth parents or cared for in their own country. The interests of the child must be always paramount throughout the adoption process, and everybody in the House would agree that this is best achieved by the full implementation of the highest national and international standards governing the adoption process.

In this context, Deputies who have raised adoption issues in the past will be familiar with the terms of the Hague Convention, which is a set of core standards designed to ensure good practice. More than 80 countries have signed it, which means they have signed up to the highest international standards for intercountry adoption.

The first point of the Hague Convention regards subsidiarity. We have heard much about subsidiarity as it relates to Europe. I was recently in Vietnam and that country is now committed to domestic adoption first. This means that before a child is placed for intercountry adoption, every effort must have been exhausted in the native country to see if people wish to adopt the child in that country. The rate of domestic adoptions is going up in Vietnam, meaning there will be fewer children who will be suitable or available for intercountry adoption.

The second principle regards support for birth families and the need for free and informed consent. There are examples where consent has either not been sought or given freely, and nobody would support that. The third key principle provides that no party should profit from the intercountry adoption process and no money should change hands beyond legitimate expenses incurred. It is important that prospective adoptive parents are fully aware of these key guiding principles before beginning the adoption process. All adoptive parents have told me they would want such provisions for their children and these standards implemented. They are in the interests of the adopted children as much as those of the parents.

I will mention some statistics for intercountry adoption. The adoption board registered 341 foreign adoptions in 2003, rising to a high of 397 in 2008. The number of registrations has declined somewhat since, with approximately 200 intercountry adoptions in 2010 and 2011. There has been a transition period arising from the Hague Convention, which has made it difficult for couples. There is a new way and a more stringent set of standards, with the process more complex in many ways than it was in the past. More than 700 children from Vietnam have found homes here, along with 1,500 children from Russia and others from Ethiopia and other countries. We have a very good experience of intercountry adoption, and many families have provided warm and stable homes to children through that process.

Intercountry adoption is not without risk, and it is for this reason that the principles set out in the Hague Convention were developed. We want to minimise those risks at every stage of the adoption process. If countries have not signed up to the Hague Convention, there must be a bilateral arrangement or a very strong administrative agreement. The first priority is the welfare of children.

The application of the Hague principles falls to the designated central authorities in the respective referring and receiving countries. In the case of Ireland, the function is discharged by the Adoption Authority of Ireland, which was established in late 2010. I stress that this authority is an independent, quasi-judicial body appointed by the Government. I pay tribute to the chair, Mr. Geoffrey Shannon, and the very dedicated staff in that organisation who have had to cope with a changed process, the concerns of adoptive parents, the intricacies of the legal positions between countries and coming to terms with different legal processes in the countries they deal with. It is very complex work and as everybody in the House knows, it is a very emotionally demanding time for adoptive parents as they try to get a handle on the different processes and legal issues. For many, that comes after a very long assessment process. The assessment period should now be down to one year, and there is no need for it to be any longer in the vast majority of cases.

I will mention a number of countries as I know Deputies have particular concerns. I have outlined to the House already the position with regard to Vietnam. The Hague Convention will enter into force there on 1 February 2012, and this is a significant milestone for the country. The Vietnamese authorities have put in a considerable effort to strengthen and regulate the adoption practice, and Deputies will remember that adoptions were suspended from that country several years ago. I felt it appropriate to begin to re-establish political and diplomatic links with the Vietnamese when I came into office, which I have done, and I recently visited the country. I am happy to say that was a positive visit, and I know the developments there are of particular interest to the 19 couples who were about to adopt when the process was halted, as well as the 200 who had named Vietnam as a country from which they would like to adopt children.

We will shortly be in a position to have the accredited agencies named that will work in Vietnam with couples, and we will be able to have an administrative arrangement with Vietnam that will lead to a resumption of adoptions between Ireland and Vietnam. I have invited the head of Vietnam's adoption authority and its Minister for justice to visit Ireland, and both have accepted the invitation. I look forward to having them here and discussing further the inter-country adoption process between Ireland and Vietnam. Adoptions from Mexico have been the subject of particular media focus in recent weeks. The chairman of the Adoption Authority of Ireland, Mr. Shannon, has set out very clearly the position of the authority with regard to the regulation of adoptions between Mexico and Ireland. The authority has been proactive and has gone to Mexico to work with the Mexican Central Authority. There is a very good relationship between the central authority in Mexico and the Adoption Authority of Ireland. Adoptions can continue between this country and Mexico. Any adoption from Mexico must be effected between the respective central authorities. There is no provision under these arrangements for processing private adoptions. I understand that the 11 cases in question arose from private arrangements. I reiterate the advice to prospective adoptive parents that applicants considering Mexico should first consult the Adoption Authority of Ireland website for the latest advisory notice. Approximately seven advisory notices on Mexico have already been published on the website.

I am very much aware that the recent events will also have given rise to concerns for those who have previously adopted from Mexico. I reassure those adoptive parents that the authority has no evidence that previous adoptions are unsafe or are affected by the recent events in Mexico. The recent unfortunate developments serve to reinforce the need to ensure that all intercountry adoptions are properly regulated and effected in accordance with the provisions of the Hague Convention.

I refer briefly to Ethiopia. It is not a signatory to the Hague Convention. I gave approval to the Adoption Authority to commence a process of examining the feasibility of a bilateral agreement with Ethiopia. The authority has confirmed that it has commenced this process and it will keep me informed of progress in this regard. I emphasise that we are at a very early stage in this process. Given that Ethiopia has not signed the Hague Convention we will have to visit the country, look at the legal systems and see the compatibility under the new arrangements under the Hague Convention. Because so many children here have been adopted from Ethiopia, many couples, if they intend to adopt a second child, understandably, would like to adopt from the same country. Many couples have been caught in the situation where the country from which they previously adopted has not signed the Hague Convention and therefore there is not the automatic exchange there could have been if they had signed. Because of the representations that have been made to me and the fact that so many children have come from Ethiopia to live here I have asked the Adoption Authority to assess the situation and to come to a decision on it as quickly as possible.

What I have been keen to do in the area of intercountry adoption is not to have a situation where there is drift. I want clarity about what countries couples can adopt from. I want them to know what the situation is, and where countries are not compliant with the Hague Convention I wish to be clear whether we have the resources and the possibility of working with those countries. As one can imagine, quite an amount of resources are required if one is to work with other countries that are not compliant with the Hague Convention. The work on adoption must be seen in the context of many other demands on my Department and in the area of child protection. There has been a visit to Russia as well. Complex constitutional issues arise but they are being examined to see whether a resolution is possible.

I am very conscious of the challenges and stresses faced by prospective Irish adoptive parents as they seek to adopt a child from outside Ireland. There are several contributory factors in this, including the very challenging and rigorous assessment process and the level of uncertainty which has been a feature of intercountry adoption. In particular, we have seen a decrease in the number of children available for intercountry adoption in recent years following the ratification of the Hague Convention by a number of countries. While I sympathise fully with those going through the adoption process I stress that the best interests of the children in this process must be at the core of all of our thinking and actions. I know that this is a shared objective.

I will be very much guided by the advice I receive from the Adoption Authority of Ireland which has such a key role to play in this area. We have an obligation, of which I am very conscious, to ensure that the interests of the children involved, their birth parents, and prospective adoptive parents are fully respected throughout the process.

Deputy Charlie McConalogue

I thank the House and the Minister for ensuring that time was allocated to debate the issue on the floor of the Dáil today because it is an important issue to many families across the country, and in particular to prospective adoptive parents. It is also something which is of great value to the many children who find themselves in adoptive families with the chance that offers them to have a new life, in many cases a much better chance in life than would have been the case had they not been adopted.

It is opportune that time has been allocated for today's debate given the confusion among many prospective parents who have engaged with the adoption process and have made the decision that they want to go down that road. It has been a difficult couple of years for many of them during the bedding-in period following the introduction of the Hague Convention. Many couples were in the process of adoption prior to the implementation of the Adoption Act 2010 when this country signed up to the Hague Convention.

I note the work done by the previous Minister, Mr. Barry Andrews, to introduce the Act and put in place a framework in which adoption here could be regarded as safe and secure for families adopting and provide a platform of assurance that the intercountry adoptions process is in the best interests of those children who come here.

Today's debate follows on from the Minister's visit to Vietnam with the chairman of the Adoption Authority and staff from both offices. I commend the Minister for taking the step to travel to Vietnam with the Adoption Authority to engage with the Vietnamese Government and Minister for justice to assess where they are at in terms of its decision to sign up to the Hague Convention from the start of February 2012, and to tease out the issues on a face-to-face basis which must be resolved for adoptions to be able to proceed and commence once again between Ireland and Vietnam.

In recent years a significant number of children were adopted from Vietnam. The Minister referred to a total of 700 Vietnamese children living here now, and having met many of them, happily so. When the previous intercountry agreement with Vietnam lapsed in mid-2009 many families were in the process of adopting children. Up to 200 families had engaged with the authorities in Vietnam at that stage to seek to adopt children. A total of 19 families were at an advanced stage of the adoption process. It was highly distressing and stressful for those in that situation. It is a long process from making a decision to adopt, getting approval and reaching the stage of finalising an adoption. Families and prospective parents must indicate during the application which country they seek to adopt from. In many ways they are then tied in to that choice. In the case in particular of those who had chosen Vietnam and engaged with the process there, when it stalled it left many in a distressed situation. No doubt, like me, many Deputies have spoken to prospective parents involved.

The chairman of the Adoption Authority of Ireland, Mr. Geoffrey Shannon, gave a radio interview on Radio 1 alongside the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, upon her return from Vietnam. As was appropriate, he stated that adoption was not a service for parents, but for children and that the rights of children must be paramount at all stages. It is good that so many prospective parents are keen to adopt children and make them a part of their lives, but there is an onus on us all - parents are supportive in this regard - to ensure the processes in place in the countries with which we are undertaking adoptions are as secure as possible.

Consider the recent situation in Mexico in which some prospective parents have unwittingly found themselves. Even though Mexico is a signatory to the Hague Convention, this type of situation has developed. It is crucial that adoptions be undertaken through foreign countries' approved agencies and with the full approval of the Adoption Authority. The children seeking to be adopted are at a vulnerable stage in their lives and are normally not in a position to make the necessary decisions. It is essential that our Administration and the administration of the countries with which we are engaging take on the responsibility of ensuring children's rights are at the core of adoption services and appropriate structures are put in place.

In the Minister's closing remarks, perhaps she could elaborate on the precise details that remain to be ironed out with the Vietnamese authorities. In terms of financial transactions, was ensuring the Hague conditions discussed? No cloud can hang over the issue, given the doubts raised by previous reports. That situation led to the intercountry agreement between Ireland and Vietnam not being signed in mid-2009 pending the Vietnam's adoption of the convention. What is the likely timeline? Vietnam will sign up on 1 February, but I do not under-estimate the amount of work that remains to be done. I noted the caution in Mr. Shannon's comments, in that while every effort would be made, much work remains to be done. We want to be clear so that Irish people seeking to adopt know what the outcome is likely to be.

A significant number of adoptions were processed in Florida, yet prospective parents are still quite unclear about adoptions from Florida and Russia. After indicating their willingness to adopt through both, they have found themselves in limbo. I understand the Adoption Authority and the Department's difficulties with providing specific timeframes, given the lack of certainty about how to sort out the remaining issues, but it is important that we communicate as much information as possible to prospective parents. It is a highly distressing situation after having invested so much commitment and time.

That so many countries have ratified the Hague Convention is important. Some 57 countries have signed up to it. According to the Minister's remarks on the number of future adoptions that are likely to emanate from Vietnam, their profile will be different and the Vietnamese authorities will be required to ensure children have an opportunity to be adopted within their own country. Although it will lead to fewer children getting the chance to live in our country, the Hague Convention will ensure the child's interests are paramount. That children will have an opportunity to be adopted within their own country is welcome.

I urge the Minister to continue her work with the Adoption Authority on finalising outstanding arrangements with other Hague Convention countries in order that adoptions from them can occur. She should also progress our bilateral agreements.

I will address domestic adoptions and emphasise the importance of changing our arrangements, particularly in the context of the children's referendum, a constitutional change that would afford all children the opportunity to be adopted regardless of their parents' marital status. For decades, there has been a significant decrease in the number of children being adopted domestically. In many ways, this is a good sign, as children are going to homes that welcome them. However, there will always be a number of children for whom adoption offers the best future. Unfortunately, the current structure of the Constitution means that many children must spend much of their lives in foster care and cannot be adopted by their foster families. That this anomaly has not been addressed to date is unfortunate. Legislation was to have addressed it, but High Court rulings narrowed the legislation's provisions down so significantly that it became ineffectual.

I urge the Minister to fast-track the referendum as quickly as is appropriate. I also urge her to consult the political parties and the Joint Committee on Health and Children. In a recent interview, she mentioned that the wording was nearly finalised. I am concerned that, although the wording has nearly been finalised and the Minister is discussing holding the referendum in just a few months, she has not consulted other parties or the committee.

The Minister should consider putting two questions in the referendum, one on adoption and the other on children's rights. This idea deserves a great deal of consideration. The referendum should be held on its own so that it can be given the appropriate attention. Consultation, working together and information will play key roles, particularly given the lessons of last year's referendums. I urge the Minister to engage promptly with the other parties and the committee on the referendum's wording. She should also set a date for the referendum.

I commend the Minister for her work, which is important for many prospective parents. I urge her to keep pressing the issue and thank her for raising the matter on today's agenda.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

The laws surrounding adoption, both domestic and intercountry, were for many years a tangled web. The Adoption Act 2009 rectified some of the issues at the heart of what was, legislatively speaking, a complex mess. Section 19 of that Act stated that in any matter, application or proceedings before the Adoption Authority or in any court, the welfare of the child must be regarded as the first and paramount consideration. This has the effect of placing the child at the centre of the adoption process, with the objective being to place him or her with a suitable family rather than providing a family with a child.

This sentiment was echoed in the agreed wording of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children. We proposed that the child's best interests be the foremost consideration in all matters concerning their custody, guardianship and welfare, which would necessarily include adoption. Sinn Féin would like to have seen this proposed provision go further to ensure the best interests of children were the primary concern in all matters concerning them.

Section 9 of the Act gave effect to the State's participation in the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoptions. Some commentators argue that the convention is in need of reform. At its heart is the stipulation that all adoptions, regardless of their type, are recognised by the operation of the law in all states that are party to the convention. There are distinctions between differing types of adoption - whether they are "full" or "simple" and so on - that give rise to very technical legal distinctions regarding the rights of adoptive parents and biological parents.

Section 145 of the Act sets out the rules regulating the payments and donations permitted as part of the adoption process. Accredited bodies may accept what are described as "reasonable" costs and expenses related to their functions and reasonable fees for their professional services, while gifts of money may only be accepted with the express approval of the Adoption Authority. This provision is at the heart of many intercountry adoption processes. The Special Commission on the Hague Convention has on numerous occasions remarked that there must be transparency in regard to costs and payments made. This is especially important when we are dealing with countries in which the average wage is far below that in Ireland. Given that there is much room for exploitation, it is absolutely essential that all parties adhere to the letter of the Hague convention, including Article 4 which states that a child may only be adopted if he or she is adoptable. In other words, the adoption must be in the child's best interests and the necessary consents must have been obtained from the biological parent or parents.

We are all aware of the concerns regarding the adoption process in Vietnam. The Government must pay close attention to future agreements with other countries to prevent a situation similar to that which arose when our agreement with Vietnam collapsed, affecting 200 Irish couples who were in the process of adopting children there. I am sure the Minister and other Members were, like me, lobbied by couples in our respective constituencies who were greatly affected by that situation. Many hopes were dashed and great hurt and pain ensued.

While those still seeking to adopt will face significant delays under the revised agreement, these delays, though inconvenient, must be accepted given that the processes involved are in the best interests of the children concerned. I acknowledge and respect those who wish to give children a loving home in Ireland. That is highly commendable. However, we must also be sensitive to the factors that lead parents in less well-off countries to place their children for adoption. Moreover, we must also acknowledge that it may well be the case that adoption would not be in the best interests of particular children or the best option for their future.

One is reminded of the situation here where parents who find themselves without the financial means to raise their children may voluntarily place them in the care system in the hope of giving them what they view as a "better life." In such cases the State will provide a foster parent with a significant payment towards the cost of raising the child or children. Surely it would be better for the State to acknowledge that this may not be in the best interests of the child and that it would be better to introduce a social welfare structure which supports families and does not force them into such a situation. Perhaps we should ask ourselves whether international aid has a role to play here. I suspect that many parents in developing countries who place their children for adoption would not do so had they the financial means to raise their families themselves. I do not share the view that a Western home is automatically and inherently better for the child in an intercountry adoption. I suspect that is far from universally the case.

This brings me to the shady motivation - there is no other way to describe them - behind some adoption organisations overseas. Time and again we have seen how, in the wake of natural disasters or in conflict zones - Haiti comes to mind in this regard - baby businesses masquerading as adoption organisations will swoop in and say, "Let us take these children to be adopted and give them a better home." Surely it would be better for the children to remain with their parents and for the international community to help in rebuilding their societies.

These are highly emotive, sensitive and sometimes controversial issues. Even the most basic understanding of globalisation and debt demonstrates that extreme poverty in some countries is what facilitates and allows the unbridled wealth of others to accumulate. We as legislators have a responsibility to be cognisant of all of these factors when examining this area.

This State ceased adopting from Vietnam in 2009 after choosing, as the United States had done the previous year, not to renew its bilateral agreement, following the discovery of cases of baby farming and baby trafficking. I hope the Government will keep a close eye on these matters to ensure, first and foremost, that the rights of children are upheld and that we are sensitive to the experiences of those who are or were unwittingly duped into participating in the commodification of non-Western children. For many years, poor children in Ireland were taken from their parents because others felt they "knew best" and that there was a better class of parent elsewhere. There was a stratum of overseers in Irish society which held that view. It is not a mind set that should be applied or transferred from our past experience to any other jurisdiction today.

Further to this, I am mindful of the advice provided by the Ombudsman for Children, Ms Emily Logan, on the Adoption Act 2009. I urge the Minister to take on board and implement her outstanding recommendations, especially that consideration be given to requiring that bilateral agreements with states not party to the Hague Convention be reviewed periodically. I am disappointed the State did not see fit to see to address the adoption rights of same-sex couples in the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2011. It is an outstanding issue that has been raised time and again. I can only describe this as a deliberate omission, which is a source of much sadness and disappointment for many gay and lesbian couples. People who wish to provide loving homes for children should not be barred from doing so because of their gender or sexuality. In 2012, I would have expected the Government to have seen fit to address this issue.

I again congratulate the Minister on her efforts in resolving the Vietnamese agreement. I urge her to continue to ensure that children are front and centre in all these issues and I wish her every success in her continued efforts in this regard. The interests of the child must be at the heart of all decisions made, not alone here but globally.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate on intercountry adoption. I welcome also that the Minister is in the House for this debate. This is an issue relevant to the many Irish families hurt and disappointed in Mexico in recent weeks. We all support the safety and protection of children. This debate should focus on the rights of the child to a safe and warm environment. This also applies in respect of foster homes, adoptive families, State care, child care and families under the care of the HSE. We need proper standards and regulation to ensure the maximum protection of the child and his or her needs. There can be no rowing back in this regard. I urge the Minister to work hard to deliver on making child safety the number one issue. We can deal with all other issues down the line.

I have always supported adoptive parents. I have experience in this area from a personal family situation and having worked with adoptive parents as a backbench Deputy. I have witnessed amazing caring situations. I am proud of our adoptive parents and families. They have made a massive contribution to this country. Let us not forget in this debate our foster families who do a great job for this country in terms of saving children from hardship, hurt and abuse. I commend them on the excellent contribution to this State and to society. I thank them for their efforts. They are giving thousands of children a warm and happy place of comfort and doing the State a great service.

Many families believe the process of adoption in Ireland is too long given that it can be completed in other countries in 15 months. This needs to be addressed. We all support the Hague Convention but there is a need to speed up this process.

The issue of genital mutilation in African countries needs to be discussed in this debate. This issue is relevant in the context of my earlier remarks on child safety and protection. The international community needs to stand up and be counted and ensure these children are protected. This is not a time for sitting on the fence. It is a time for protecting the rights of all children.

Another issue relevant to this debate but not yet touched on is children born through surrogacy, an important issue for 30 children in Irish families. There is no legislation in place in Ireland to govern surrogacy. As such, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Passport Office are directing all parents to the courts. As there is no legislation, the courts have no guidelines on this issue and cases are often bumped into the High Court, the costs for which are crippling. Many families do not have the that type of money. I ask the Minister to examine this issue. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has stated he has no responsibility in this matter, that it is a matter for the courts. This issue requires compassionate consideration. I would like to know the statutory legal basis upon which the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is refusing to issue a passport to a child born through surrogacy, with expressed reference to statutory legal provisions relied upon. Also, why is he insisting that parents of children born through surrogacy obtain a declaration of parentage when no such requirement is imposed in respect of applications for passports for children born outside Ireland to Irish citizens? One particular child, Robyn, who is 16 months old, has no parents, guardians, citizenship or passport. She and all other children born through surrogacy cannot be registered with a doctor or school. I have been asked by many people to raise this issue. I ask the Minister to examine this issue which is currently affecting 30 children in Ireland.

Adoptions from Ethiopia and Russia have been stopped owing to the Hague Convention on the Rights of the Child. There are no plans for a bilateral agreement in the future. What then is the position of those families who already have a child from these countries who want to extend their family with a sibling for their child? The waiting period for the adoption certificate is too long. While previously this process took six weeks, it now takes three to six months, owing, we are told, to staffing issues. Can orphans around the world wait for us to get our staff issues sorted? These children need us and many Irish families need them. The longer they remain in care, the more institutionalised they become and the less likely they will be adopted. This leaves them open to abuse such as genital mutilation, in particular in African countries, child trafficking, the sex trade and so on. I ask again, do we not uphold the rights of the child? Are we, in allowing them to remain where they are because we are bogged down with bureaucracy, abusing their rights? We should stop this abuse and allow Irish families to adopt. Many are disheartened by the process here. In Britain, the process takes only 12 to 15 months. It is important to raise such issues during this debate.

The Ombudsman for Children, Ms Emily Logan, provided advice to the Government on the Adoption Bill 2009, in line with her statutory function under section 7 of the Ombudsman for Children Act 2002 to advise Ministers of the Government on the probable effects of proposals for legislation on children. One of the issues raised in her advice on the Adoption Bill was the regulation of inter-country adoption and the ratification of the Hague Convention on intercountry adoptions. I am delighted we have an Ombudsman for Children who is supportive on these issues.

I referred to the recent crisis in Mexico. The board of the Adoption Authority of Ireland met recently to discuss the issue of the 11 Irish couples who became unwittingly embroiled in a suspected illegal adoption ring. The board, with five members, has ultimate approval in respect of all adoptions in Ireland, domestically and abroad. I commend Mr. Geoffrey Shannon, chairman of the adoption authority, on its work. Mr. Shannon has stated that the only adoptions recognised in Ireland are those approved by the state agencies in individual countries. The Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption came into force in Ireland in November 2010. Mexico is also a signatory. Mr. Shannon also stated: "We are uncompromising in ensuring that international standards are met ... because the Hague Convention since November 1st is the instrument that regulates inter-country adoption." I support this.

As regards the situation in Mexico, the past few weeks have been difficult for the Irish couples involved. They have been questioned by the Mexican police but none was detained and most have since returned to Ireland. One teenage mother who was interviewed told how her nine month old baby girl was taken by a woman who paid her $755 and said the child would be used for an anti-abortion photo shoot and returned within a fortnight. The child was left in the care of an Irish couple in a resort town called Ajijic. The couple were given the impression that they would be adopting the child. One can only imagine the hurt and disappointment of the families involved. That is the downside of adoption.

On the positive side, I commend the Minister for her work in this area in which she has shown leadership. While Members on this side of the House are criticised regularly for not acknowledging when people in government do the right thing, as an independent Deputy I say it straight out as it is. The Minister stated earlier that the Adoption Act also contains an exceptional transitional provision that enables prospective adoptive parents to "proceed with an adoption from a non-Hague Convention or non-bilateral agreement country, if prior to 1 November 2010 they had been issued with a declaration of eligibility and suitability to adopt". The provision requires that the adoption authority is satisfied that the adoption meet the standards of the Hague Convention. I welcome these comments and strongly support the Minister in this. As the Minister emphasised, the key thing is the best interests of the child. As several of my Opposition colleagues already have noted, international standards of best practice are required. This is the way forward and is the sensible thing to do.

The Minister also touched on the numbers. Fore example, in the years 2010 and 2011, the number of registrations of intercountry adoptions amounted to approximately 200 people. Since the enactment of the new adoption legislation in 2010, the adoption authority has registered a total of 368 foreign adoptions. I mention these families because I wish to thank them and commend them. The Minister also touched on the risks, which is a matter about which all Members must be vigilant and careful. As she stated, the first priority is the welfare of children involved and every step must be taken to ensure the highest standards are in operation. This is something Members on all sides of the House will support strongly.

I will touch on an issue that has not been raised previously. It is a minority issue, albeit an important one, namely, adoptive parents who adopt children with a disability. That is an amazing thing to do and I have witnessed families who have done so. Moreover, an amazing contribution is being made to Irish society and I consider this to be active patriotism of the highest order. Adoption a child with a disability by young parents and young couples provides that child with an amazing opportunity. In addition, this affords the State an amazing opportunity to recognise such people as individuals who are making a massive contribution.

The Minister also dealt with the Vietnam issue. I am glad that rather than making telephone calls or sending e-mails, the Minister adopted a hands-on approach and travelled to Vietnam. She met people in Hanoi and took the opportunity for personal engagement with the Vietnamese authorities. Such actions and co-operation are necessary in such a situation. While I do not have the details, I understand Mr. Geoffrey Shannon also visited Vietnam at around the same time or previously. My point is that when dealing with such issues, Ministers must adopt a hands-on approach and consequently, I welcome the Minister's involvement on the ground.

I have touched on the serious Mexican issue and I refer to the Ethiopian issue. Ethiopia is not a signatory to the Hague Convention and the Minister has stated that future adoptions from Ethiopia, beyond those provided for under the transitional arrangements, would first require a bilateral agreement between Ireland and Ethiopia. I urge the Minister to get on with that and to deal with it positively and constructively. Moreover, the Adoption Authority of Ireland has a major role to play on this issue. I welcome the Minister's affirmation that she always will be guided by the advice of the Adoption Authority of Ireland, particularly with regard to redefining and redesigning intercountry adoption in line with best international practice.

Members must ensure that such children are protected. They must ensure they are put into warm, safe and secure environments and safe homes. This is an important point in this debate. I welcome this debate and I urge the Minister to consider the issues I have raised therein. I wish her well in the future in respect of her responsibility to look after and look out for the protection and rights of children.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call Deputy Joe Carey who I understand is sharing time.

Deputy Joe Carey

I wish to share time with Deputy Fitzpatrick.

I welcome this debate, as well as the statement by the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, in which she has provided a detailed up-to-date position on her activities since her appointment as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. In recent years, I have worked closely with couples in County Clare who have been tied up in the long drawn-out process of adoption. Such people have real personal cases and my heart goes out to them as it sometimes seems as though this process will never end. In recent years, couples trying to adopt a child from Vietnam in particular have been left in limbo with little progress made. No interim arrangements were put in place before the Hague Convention became law and following the lapse of Ireland's bilateral agreement with Vietnam in May 2009. Moreover, the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs made the situation even worse by not communicating with prospective adoptive parents. Consequently, the news that adoptions between Vietnam and Ireland are set to resume in the coming months is most welcome. This situation has come about due to the commitment of the new Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, who from her first days as Minister, has set out a plan to sort out this issue.

A total of 200 Irish couples were in the process of adopting children from Vietnam when the bilateral adoption agreement lapsed into 2009. A further 19 couples were at an advanced stage of adopting a child from Vietnam at that time. One couple from that group lives in my native county of Clare and I welcome the degree of engagement the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, has had with them. She has met and spoken with the couple, has been sympathetic and has listened to what they have had to say. A number of productive interactions have taken place between Ireland and Vietnam since the formation of the new Government. On her return from a recent visit to Vietnam, the Minister indicated that significant progress over key issues now has been made. She also indicated that there now is agreement on all the main issues, such as safeguards relating to consent, dealing with central authorities and issues pertaining to money. In all of these discussions, the best interests of the child have been the overriding concern. I welcome this approach and I welcome the work completed to date. I understand that the Minister, having highlighted and stressed the case of the group of 19 advanced applicants, also received a commitment from the Vietnamese Minister for Justice that priority will be given to their applications. This assurance is most welcome. It is clear that our State's relationship with Vietnam has been greatly enhanced in recent months and the work led by the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, must be built on.

I have a number of questions the Minister might address in her response to this debate. The Minister should give her views as to when adoptions can commence formally between Ireland and Vietnam. The chairman of the Adoption Authority of Ireland gave assurances last June that no impediments would exist after October 2011. Consequently, those involved wish to know when these adoptions will formally commence. In addition, when is it envisaged that an agency will be accredited to Vietnam? I wish to establish the current position regarding the accreditation process for the Helping Hands organisation.

I compliment the Minister and her officials on their work in the field of adoption and look forward to hearing her response to the questions I have posed.

Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick

The Hague Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption, or Hague Adoption Convention, protects children and their families against the risks of illegal, irregular, premature or ill-prepared adoptions abroad. This convention, which also operates through a scheme of national central authorities, reinforced the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and seeks to ensure that intercountry adoptions are made in the best interests of the child and with respect for his or her fundamental rights and to prevent the abduction, sale of or traffic in children. These are phenomenal aspirations which should be cherished.

The Adoption Act 2010 was commenced on 1 November 2010. This coincided with Ireland's formal ratification of the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. The Adoption Authority was also established on 1 November 2010. The purpose of the 2010 Act is to improve standards in the context of domestic and intercountry adoptions. The regulatory framework governing adoption has been strengthened in an attempt to ensure that the best interests of children will be protected at every step throughout the adoption process. Since 1 November 2010, it has been possible to effect intercountry adoptions with other countries that have ratified the Hague Convention or with which Ireland has bilateral agreements. From 1 November 2010, anyone wishing to effect an adoption from a Hague Convention country must be satisfied that the adoption is in compliance with the rules set out in the convention. The key rules to be adhered to are: that the adoption must comply with all the terms and conditions of the Hague Convention; that the agent or agency handling the adoption is properly accredited by the central authority of the sending State; and that the agent or agency can produce a valid Article 23 certificate from a competent authority of the sending State in respect of the adoption. These rules have often been criticised as being excessive. In light of recent revelations it is fair to state that they serve a great purpose and have much merit.

Article 2 of the Hague Convention states that it shall apply to all adoptions between two contracting states. Applicants proposing to adopt a child from Hague Convention countries must be satisfied, therefore, that the adoption documents comply with the terms and conditions of the convention prior to the processing and finalisation of the adoption. Applicants should make inquiries in the country of origin with the accredited agents and with the national central authority of that state. In effect, this places the onus on the adoptors to satisfy themselves that the correct procedures are being adhered to.

It is extremely unfortunate that recent high profile issues relating to foreign adoptions have brought this matter on to the front pages of our newspapers. I use the word "unfortunate" because it reflects the lost opportunity for prospective adoptive parents to bestow joy and love upon children they might wish to adopt. I have first-hand experience of the kind of joy and love a child can bring to a family. I have met two families which have enjoyed fulfilling experiences when they adopted children, via the correct procedures, from Vietnam and Mexico. When done within the parameters set down in the prescribed regulations, the adoption process may at times appear long. It is a commendable, robust and upstanding process, placed at the centre of which has always been the best interests of children. The recent events that gained public attention and led to front-page newspaper headlines only serve to reinforce the value of the Hague Convention and illustrate that the correct procedures are in place and have served so many Irish families and, in particular, children so well.

As much as I applaud the robustness of the system in place, that system still does not mask the fact that there are babies for sale throughout the world. The fact that this reprehensible practice is followed should further strengthen the resolve of potential adoptors to use the correct channels and never deviate from the protocol that has been established. Conducted correctly, the adoption process is joyous, wonderful and fulfilling. It should be the focus of people seeking to adopt and they should never, no matter how tempted they might be, seek to deviate from the official path. Potential parents should only consider adopting from countries that have embraced the Hague Convention.

I remind the House and the people of the mission statement of the Adoption Authority of Ireland, which says "We will work to achieve excellence in adoption and adoption related services, with the best interests of children as our primary consideration". Every person who engages with the adoption process should bear those words in mind.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I acknowledge the work the Minister has done since her appointment, particularly in the context of bringing about a resolution in respect of the issue relating to Vietnam. I was disappointed by the criticism I heard earlier of the role of the former Minister of State, Mr. Barry Andrews, in respect of that matter. Having worked with him on it, I am aware that he did his level best to try to bring about the earliest possible resolution. Those of us who were Members of the Dáil at that time and who were meeting parents, and so on, are aware of the major difficulties which obtained. Mr. Barry Andrews had an enormous personal commitment in respect of trying to see this matter through.

Deputy Finian McGrath referred to the need for absolute clarity in respect of adoptions from Vietnam in order that those who were waiting to make such adoptions during the period to which I refer can proceed to adopt now and to give the children in question the love they deserve and complete their family units. I know the Minister will ensure that this happens.

This debate provides us with the opportunity to consider the work of the Adoption Authority of Ireland and, in particular, its chairman, Mr. Geoffrey Shannon. At a time when so many people are criticising civil and public servants, Mr. Shannon shines as a beacon. I have no doubt he could probably become very wealthy were he to pursue a career in law in the private sector. However, he has chosen to devote much of this time to the welfare and legal protection of children, be it through the work of the Adoption Authority of Ireland or in his role as special rapporteur. The Minister and I spent some time together on the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children and we are aware of the work Mr. Shannon and many others in the sector have done to try to construct a framework which is robust and which respects the emotions of the people involved. The difficulty with adoption and fostering is that emotions can, understandably, run high. That issue lies at the heart of the debate.

The problem in this matter is that the law is an emotionless entity. Law and standards do exactly what it says on the tin. They are in place for a reason and it is important that they are there. When law and standards clash with emotions, various people - including Members of these Houses - get stuck in the middle. Individuals such as Mr. Geoffrey Shannon are there to shine a light, lessen the impact of the clash to which I refer, ensure that the correct laws and protections are put in place and to bring the emotional issues to the debate. Mr. Shannon does that very well. The work of the Adoption Authority of Ireland since its establishment in 2010 is testament to this.

The Hague Convention is crucially important. I read an article in recent days which stated that this issue first arose for Ireland in the context of the adoption of Romanian children some 20 years ago. It has previously had a relatively minor impact in particular cases. There are Members present who probably know individuals who were adopted as babies from Romania and who are now adults. During the past 20 years, the number of countries from which children are being adopted by parents from Ireland and elsewhere has continued to grow. This is a worldwide phenomenon and that is why the Hague Convention is so important.

Nobody doubts the genuine need of parents who travel abroad to adopt children. Equally, no one doubts the love these people are capable of giving. As the events of recent days illustrate, however, there is reason to doubt some of those involved at the other end of the process. The Hague Convention is an attempt to put in place a form of worldwide standard in order that when people invest time and emotion in the process, they will know that - regardless of their intentions - they will not be the innocent victims if anything goes wrong. It must be remembered that in the middle of all this are the children. It has taken a long time to establish the Hague Convention and to get matters right in respect of it. Ireland must seek to try to keep pace with developments relating to this convention and to work to change it, where required. In instances where the convention puts rules in place just for the sake of it, let us alter those rules. Let us not have a system which is so immune to the emotions and love involved in the process that it will get in the way of that process and add to people's pain. Ireland is in a unique position to adopt a robust approach in this regard. The Minister has a great deal of experience - in the context of the time she has spent in both Houses and with regard to her previous career - and she can bring it to bear on the debate surrounding the Hague Convention so that we might make the changes that need to be made.

Deputy Finian McGrath focussed on fostering. Foster parents are the unsung heroes. They bring the children of others into their families and give them love and provide them with stability, often in circumstances in which they have never experienced either. Foster parents set children on a course that leads them to experience the type of happiness and success in later life which they might not otherwise have enjoyed. Following a period with a particular family, the children will either move on to another family or back to their own. However, they will always carry the influence to which I refer with them. The foster parents will then take on other children. In the absence of a robust fostering system, this country - indeed the world - would be a great deal worse off. There are probably hundreds of thousands of people who have had the benefit, love and wisdom of a foster parent that has shaped their future in a much better way than it otherwise might have been. While everybody accepts that adoption in certain circumstances is the best way, there is no doubt that foster parents give huge love and guidance, and we should not forget them in this debate.

At some stage this year - maybe next year - we will have a children's referendum. I would like it to be a stand-alone referendum. I would be concerned if we have a children's referendum that is being piled on top of other referenda. There was talk of a super-referendum day. I hope we learned the lesson from last October. A children's referendum will be very complex, no matter what the intentions are, which we all share. Every sort of spin will be put on it. From having sat through some of the committee meetings, I know that the most honourable of intentions and the most desirable of outcomes are spun and twisted in a way that no one could ever have imagined. In the course of a referendum campaign and given some of the groups that will be involved, that will happen. We need the space for one referendum and only one question. Let nothing else get in the way.

The time of year is also important. People need to give this time and we in this House need to give it time, but it has been dragging on. We have seen different versions of proposed questions. The time has come to draw a line under the debate and put the question to the people, before winter, in order that they can get involved in a rational discussion.

I hope that all the groups who have participated to date will get involved in the referendum. A great amount of effort and time has gone towards the referendum in this House over six or seven years. Many Members who were involved in it have moved on. All I want is a rational debate. Is it too much to ask that we have that? We are talking about children who deserve a rational debate and the utmost protection. People will oppose whatever we come up with, so let us remember who we are talking about and who is at the heart of what we are trying to do.

I commend the Adoption Authority of Ireland, which has been very strong with its new mandate. I wish the Minister well as she carries on with her role. I plead for a rational discussion on the issues that are to be debated. There should be no super-referendum and there should only be one question on children's rights. That is what we owe the children of this country.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I understand Deputy Dara Murphy is sharing time with Deputy Alan Farrell.

Deputy Dara Murphy

Like other Members, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. It is clearly a very emotional issue for everyone, but for the families involved, it is an all-consuming and life-determining matter. The Minister clearly has a huge interest in it. I accept Deputy Calleary's point, but it is welcome that the Government has given her a full Ministry in charge of looking after our children, who are without doubt the most important resource we have. I congratulate her on her recent visit to Vietnam and on the progress that has been made there. I also congratulate the Vietnamese.

I am member of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, and I know that the chairman of the committee, Deputy Breen, also attended with the Minister. I had the pleasure of discussing his trip with him. It is perhaps one of the hidden benefits of the committee work that is being done by some great public representatives on the ground, bringing their experience from this country to countries that have significantly fewer resources than we do, and then coming back and reporting to us on how things are going.

The Hague Convention comes into force in Vietnam shortly. That is partially what gives rise to the discussion of this issue today. All politicians encounter families that are involved in the adoption and fostering processes. We need to acknowledge what I would see as the two core principles of the Hague Convention. First, it should be in the best interests of the child to be adopted. Second, there needs to be parental consent. Our committee spent a number of months discussing the effectiveness of Irish aid, and we get to meet many of the NGOs that are working in developing countries around the world. There is no doubt that we have a magnificent network of organisations working on the ground. We may have lost a lot integrity in other areas, but the work of our NGOs abroad is one of the reasons Ireland is held in such high esteem. We need to try to use this network abroad to ensure that some of the aid we donate goes to determining that people are not forced into putting their children up for adoption for economic reasons.

I remember the big debate 20 years ago about adoptions from Romania. The issue moved to Vietnam two or three years ago, and recently we have seen disturbing reports coming from Mexico. We have a wealth of experience that perhaps is unwelcome but can be very helpful, because 20 years before Romania, we were on the other side of the adoptive process. Many Irish mothers and many Irish people ended up in other countries around the world through poor and bad practices of which we are now very critical in other countries. However, that reality gives us the bona fides in trying to help countries engage with the Hague Convention and putting the rights of children first, which everyone believes is the most important issue. That is not to say there cannot be many possibilities for children from the developing world to come to the developed world. There are still huge opportunities for Irish families to adopt from within the Hague agreement structure. We should use our experience and bona fides to go to other countries, not as a rich western country that is lecturing a country trying to adopt proper and fair procedures but as a country that has been there before and that can show empathy and act in the best interests of children.

I compliment the work that is being done by the Adoption Authority of Ireland. Its members show great compassion and I am sure they are very pleased that we now have a full Ministry that can develop this process for families that deserve the opportunity to adopt and live fulfilling lives with their children.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I acknowledge the respect and sensitivity reflected today by all Deputies who have spoken on this important and delicate issue. The outstanding progress made over recent months on intercountry adoptions is a result of the commitment and dedication of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs and her officials along with the ongoing work of the Adoption Authority of Ireland.

Two years ago 19 families, with 200 in application stages, had their hopes crushed when the adoption process broke down between Ireland and Vietnam. In the space of one month after taking office, the Minister had taken the matter in hand by requesting personal engagement between Vietnamese officials and the Adoption Authority of Ireland. This is a commendable action to have taken. To have come to a solution within this period of time is an enormous achievement and I trust it has given encouragement and hope to those affected by the setbacks of several years ago, as well as those tentatively considering adoption as a possible option. It is a very positive step for the Vietnamese to adopt the Hague Convention which will come into force in Vietnam on 1 February. I take the opportunity to commend them for this.

I understand a lot of work has yet to be done and that those in the process of being considered eligible to adopt have a long and complicated process to complete. The sad reality is that couples turn to adoption as their last hope to have a family of their own. Unfortunately, at this stage most will have been through years of trauma, in coming to terms with the life-changing realisation that they will not be able to have biological children of their own. Years of hoping and subsequent failing to start a family take their toll, emotionally and financially.

The expense and ordeal in exhausting every possible fertility treatment available can, with the uncertainty and disappointment that come with it, mean that someone can be very vulnerable by the time they enter the adoption process. To consider that at this stage a couple will be met with the complicated and lengthy process that is necessary but not always successful is reason enough to hope and strive for improvement. It puts a large responsibility on the country's adoption services to ensure the process is made as straightforward and pain free as possible. Therefore, the procedures in place must be of the highest standards for their sake and that of the child. This is of the upmost importance.

The safety and care of the child are at the heart of the matter and certainty is to be found by way of the Hague Convention. This will ensure the vital high standards of the process are sustained, ensuring safety and peace of mind for the child and family involved. However, we must remain vigilant, including, as was illustrated recently, countries that have signed the Hague Convention, as well as families attempting to adopt.

The Government and the Irish Adoption Authority must ensure the process takes no longer than 12 to 18 months once parents have been certified as suitable candidates. This is particularly relevant in the light of the victims innocently caught up in the illegal adoption cases in Mexico which have caused such pain to those involved. This scenario is every adoptive parent's worst nightmare, traumatic for all involved and must be avoided. Notwithstanding this, I sincerely welcome anything that can be done within the limits of the Adoption Act to make the process quicker for genuine adoption cases.

I pay tribute to the amazing work done by the huge number of foster families who care for in excess of 95% of the 6,000 children in the care of the State. I take the opportunity to acknowledge them.

I welcome the decision to review the flexibilities offered by the Adoption Act 2010, whereby countries that have not ratified the Hague Convention can still enter into a bilateral agreement with Ireland. I support the Minister's proactive, yet cautionary, approach in this regard.

I acknowledge the commitment of and the work the Minister has put in in the past few months, with particular reference to her personal engagements on behalf of people in Ireland and to ensure the rights and protection of children in Vietnam. I know the Adoption Authority of Ireland was by her side at every step. I am optimistic that this will give hope to those undergoing this process and that they themselves recognise the importance of having a safe and secure method of adoption which is in the best interests of the child and of the future of the family.

Deputy Clare Daly

This is a very important discussion on an issue which has, in many ways, been dogged by scandal because of practices followed in various countries. It is also an issue encompassing many conflicting rights. The discussion in an Irish context has been very much focused on the welfare and rights of prospective adoptive parents. I recognise those who find themselves in this situation often face a rigorous ordeal and endure stress in very emotive circumstances, jumping through bureaucratic hoops and expending vast quantities of money to fulfil their a desire to have a child they can call their own and for whom they can provide a suitable upbringing. This is a worthy objective and I understand absolutely matters from their viewpoint. In this sense, the frustration and lobbying are clear.

That said, there are other rights which must be given equal weight; in fact, I argue they are greater. They are the rights of the natural parents, in particular the mother, and those of the children at the centre of the debate. We must step back and look at the issue in this context. Looking at the countries from which children have been adopted in the past, almost all of them have been shut amid scandal.

The majority of the media have been negligent in reporting on these situations, looking at them solely from the point of view of the desperation of Irish parents who want to adopt, rather than at the other issues revealed. It is interesting that the media focused so much on the 19 or 20 couples who desperately wanted to adopt from Vietnam and the difficulties they faced but scandalously ignored the up to 55,000 adults adopted in Ireland, many of them illegally. They desperately need to access records, obtain information on their natural parents and move on with their lives in a comprehensive manner.

In a certain sense, there are double standards in this regard because in the past Ireland was a huge exporter of children, much to our shame. The hidden scandal behind these stories has not yet been touched on. We possess certain knowledge, but there needs to be a greater unearthing of information. Now, there is a similar situation in other countries where it has been revealed that, in many instances, people in poor and difficult socio-economic circumstances have been preyed upon.

In Ireland when we did not provide support for women to keep their children, there were record levels of adoptions. It was only when State subsistence payments for lone parents came into being that the numbers of adopted children fell. Ideally most women and parents want to rear the children to whom they give birth in a loving home, but many were denied this opportunity and had to turn to adoption. This is the choice being faced by many people in other countries, of which we must be extremely mindful, as well as of the rights of the children at the centre. We must be to the forefront in advancing scenarios where children can remain with their natural parents, of if they are to be adopted, in their own country. This is an important context in which to place the issue.

Vietnam is the country being discussed with regard to the rights of adoptive parents. However, we must ask why Barry Andrews decided not to renew the bilateral agreement with it in 2009. Despite acknowledging the difficulties for the parents involved, he was right to do this. Vietnam is continuously ranked as one of the most popular countries of origin for intercountry adoptions. At least 10,000 children have been adopted from there in the past decade. Prior to the bilateral agreement lapsing, Irish people had adopted more than 600 children from Vietnam between 2002 and 2008, three times the number adopted from Canada and significantly more than the number adopted from countries such as Sweden, Switzerland and Denmark. Russia was the only country from which Irish people had adopted more children during that period. This was against the backdrop of reports from UNICEF and the US State Department on cases which had been described as baby buying, baby farming, fraud, corruption and so-called humanitarian aid intervening to develop a market in babies. There were studies from the US State Department describing what was in place as a network of adoption agency representatives, orphanage directors, hospital administrators and police and government officials, all of whom had profited financially by coercing and defrauding the natural parents of children who had been paid for.

These were the serious scenarios behind the scenes and while it is the case that Vietnam has established a central adoption authority and is required to sign the Hague Convention on inter-country adoptions, which is welcome, given what we know from UNICEF about the adoption practices that continued in that country during the bilateral agreement phase, how certain can we be that adoption procedures there are now acceptable because what went on was far from acceptable? Will the Minister indicate if there will be monitoring of the position in Vietnam? This is crucial because previous reports cited concerns that there was virtually no active promotion of domestic adoptions to allow children to remain in their country of birth and outlined many other scenarios which are too upsetting to read.

In that context, we must address cases such as those that occurred in other countries. The Minister referred to Mexico. The total number of adoptions from Mexico by Irish people was 92, a substantial number of children. We are also aware that a Mexican lawyer by the name of Lopez is being sought by the police. It has been stated he has arranged 60 adoptions from Mexico for Irish couples, yet the Adoption Authority of Ireland is on record as stating all adoptions of Mexican children by Irish couples are safe. Both scenarios cannot be correct. How can the authority state they are safe if the Mexican authorities are seeking an individual whom it has been stated has arranged two thirds of the adoptions referred to? We must, therefore, do more in that regard. Mexico is not safe. We must, therefore, stand back from the process and the Minister should call the Adoption Authority of Ireland to account for the conflicting statements being made.

Ethiopia has also been in the spotlight. I would be reticent about dealing with that country. There are United States' reports on corruption, fraud and so on fuelling foreign adoptions. The numbers of children available for adoption from Ethiopia have greatly increased in the past ten years. In that context, we cannot be sure the practices being followed inside the country are safe because the reality is, as our own history demonstrates, that when supports are provided for parents, the numbers of children available for adoption fall. There are fewer children available for adoption from those countries covered by the Hague Convention. This causes problems for prospective adoptive parents but protects the rights of children which must be at the heart of the process.

The Minister has serious questions to ask of the Adoption Authority of Ireland about its role in some of these cases and its assessment of some of the criteria to be met. We must also be mindful of, not just acknowledge, our history and try to do much more for the 55,000 adults adopted here who have been let down by the systems in place.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call Deputy Kevin Humphreys who I understand is sharing time with Deputy Ciara Conway. The Deputies have five minutes each.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I thank the Minister for facilitating the debate. This is an important issue that affects many families. Adoption can be a frustrating process but one that can bring much joy when concluded.

The rights of the children must be at the centre of the process of inter-country adoption. Everybody in this House will always put the rights of the child first but my focus, bearing in mind what Deputy Daly has just outlined, is on Ethiopia. I have spoken to many families that have adopted children from Ethiopia. In 2010, there were 75 adoptions from Ethiopia with over 300 children adopted in the past 20 years. Having spoken to those parents I am aware they dealt with reputable orphanages. The ambassador in Ethiopia was very helpful in assisting those parents when they travelled to the country and ensuring the adoptions were done in a correct manner in difficult circumstances but Ethiopia, as a non-signatory of the Hague Convention on inter-country adoption, is now closed off to Irish parents and only those cases that were under way can proceed.

It is worth noting that the ratification of the Hague Convention can be an expensive process for developing countries. Even when in place the guarantees it provides are not clear. That was outlined earlier by Deputy Daly in terms of what happened in Mexico, which is a signatory to the Hague Convention, the question marks over the practices of the Mexican establishment and the way they were managed, which would have been distressing for the children and the Irish families that travelled to Mexico who were in a terrible position.

Significant legal protections and guidelines must be met before new adoptions can begin in Ethiopia. We have a strong Irish network in Ethiopia on which we can build. I urge the Minister to consider that and put a timeline on the process. I realise the discussions are in the early stages but I know the Minister for many years and I know she will guarantee best practices to the best of her ability. She will leave no stone unturned in that regard.

The families that have adopted children want to see their family grow. They want the next child they adopt to be from Ethiopia and to be aware of his or her culture and identity. Having spoken with the parents I know that is very important to them, and they have organised support groups in Ireland for the adopted children. It would be useful if the Minister could provide a timeline for the Ethiopian situation to give the families some certainty. Furthermore, if she could confirm the length of this process it would be very reassuring for families. With every step we take and because of our own history in this State we must ensure that the children are protected and that what is best for those children is acted upon.

I thank the Minister for the opportunity to debate this issue. Funding was made available last year to consider South Africa as a Hague country but it decided not to continue. If an expense is to be incurred it would be welcome if it was in the direction of Ethiopia. We should examine the prospect of allowing families to grow if that is at all possible.

Deputy Ciara Conway

I thank the Minister and the House for the opportunity to speak on this important issue, which is close to my heart, having two adopted sisters, one from Ireland and one from Romania who is 21 years of age and would have been one of the first intercountry adoptions.

I wish to speak on the issues mentioned by Deputies Daly and Humphreys, that is, how we can protect the rights of the child. The last thing any adoptive parent wants is to upset the birth mother. They have suffered enough anguish not being able to have a child of their own. The decision to adopt is not easily made. They know the hurt that can be caused and the disappointment that is felt by not being able to have their own birth family. They would not want a child given to them, which I have no doubt they would love and rear and give every opportunity, knowing that the birth mother in the country of origin has been led up the garden path. We have heard harrowing stories of young women in Mexico who were bribed with flashy prams. They were told they would be given the money to buy a new pram and all the new things that any new mother wants to provide for her child and that they would use the children for photo shoots. The Irish parents were lured into thinking they were having an adoption. When the mother did not consent to the adoption they were told they had to repay €12,000, €3,000 or whatever amount - an enormous amount of money for those living well below the poverty line in Mexico.

Deputy Daly made a good point when she said we have to look at the circumstances and the country of origin of the children. The last thing any prospective adoptive parent wants is that they are somehow keeping the birth mother from their child because we have a torrid history of exporting children to other countries for adoption.

There is a lack of services post adoption. Barnardos is the only service available to parents post adoption. Much of the emphasis is on the process, which is worthwhile in terms of preparation, the assessment of parents for suitability and the placement of the child. Following on from that one is very much on one's own.

An intercountry adoption can sometimes raise issues for the child and the parents that are unexpected, such as cultural issues or, perhaps, behavioural issues. That is perfectly understandable given the major change because some of the children can be three and four years of age before being adopted. There is a severe lack of services for parents and children in terms of making a successful and happy transition for the child and the parents.

In the next couple of weeks HIQA will publish its guidelines on social work practice. I take this opportunity to ask that those guidelines be merged with Children First and other guidelines published by the Department in recent weeks in order that social workers who have a huge caseload and who, in the case of adoption and fostering, are trying to get on with the important work of assessing people, will not be asked to adhere to three sets of guidelines. It is important that standards are in place to ensure the procedures are rigorous and thorough and that unnecessary bureaucracy is cut out.

There have been many calls during the debate to speed up the process. It is important to take our time to ensure the children are placed with appropriate families. Fifteen months is not an extraordinarily long period to wait; in fact it is reasonable. It is a huge decision, not only for the parents and children they may already have in the home but for the child. The decision that will be taken in a 15 month period will affect the child for the rest of his or her life. No social worker or professional working in that area would be happy to allow an assessment go through in less than that time. Notwithstanding that, there are other issues that hold up the process unnecessarily. The assessment of families and prospective adoptive and foster parents must be rigorous to ensure children get the best opportunity that can be afforded to them.

Deputy Simon Harris

Like other Deputies, I welcome the opportunity to be provided with this forum to speak on the important issue of intercountry adoptions. Clearly this is an issue which is of great interest to many families, considering Ireland has one of the highest rates of intercountry adoption across Europe. For the children and the families involved in the adoption process this is a significant undertaking with consequences for several years before, during and after the adoption process. My colleague, Deputy Farrell, mentioned the range of emotions, concerns and stresses from time to time that parents and families in these situations experience. I have learned much from the debate which has been very reasoned and informative.

Deputy Ó Caoláin's contribution was extremely informative to a new Deputy like me in terms of providing an overview of how far we have come. That we have a new Department of Children and Youth Affairs has provided the Oireachtas with time that, perhaps, a previous Oireachtas have not had to discuss issues regarding children and youth affairs. That is welcome.

Clearly, the Minister has achieved much in a short period in terms of providing clarity on a number of the issues she has inherited. Her trip to Vietnam showed the process and the progress that can be made through direct intervention. The decision to incorporate the Hague Convention directly into Irish law in 2010 was welcome in that the convention is geared towards ensuring the integrity of the adoption process and, crucially, as Deputy Ciara Conway called for, protecting the rights of adopted children.

However, some families who had already engaged in the adoption process prior to the coming into force of the agreement have been left in a legal limbo. The Minister is aware of this. They have done everything by the book, followed all the rules of the Irish State that existed at the time and went through the lengthy process. They, too, have had the interest of the child at heart but find they cannot have the adoptions registered in Ireland as a result. This issue was highlighted by the Ombudsman for Children in November 2009, prior to the enactment of the Adoption Act. Great credit must go to the Office of the Ombudsman for Children for that work.

I welcome the direct and personal engagement of the Minister in that area. Her recent visit to Vietnam has produced positive results and has allowed her to raise the cases of 19 families, who have been in such limbo since these adoptions were stopped two years ago, in her conversations with the Vietnamese justice minister. I am glad to hear that these families and the 200 families who have already been assessed will be prioritised when adoptions resume shortly. An indication of progress is that the Minister has asked her officials and the Adoption Authority to explore the possibility of establishing a bilateral agreement with Ethiopia. This will come as good news to many families and potential adoptive parents.

There are some broader issues I wish to highlight. One family with whom I came in contact outlined the obstacles they face in finalising an adoption from Florida. I understand there are approximately 20 other couples in roughly the same position. They said:

We have fallen into a gap with regard to having our adoptions registered in Ireland as a result of the implementation of the Hague Convention into Irish law. It appears that the Adoption Authority are refusing to consider registering any of these adoptions. They seem to be basing this view on the understanding that if the adoption was finalised after the Hague Convention was implemented into Irish law then the adoption should be subject to the rules and regulations of the Hague Convention. Of course, this approach, [in their own words] completely ignores the fact, as the adoption process in their case began over five years ago, it could not possibly have been carried out in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Hague Convention, which were not part of either Irish law or US law at the time.

This is a matter on which I have corresponded with the Minister and raised through parliamentary question. This is a family that has completed the adoption process in Florida. I raise this as an example of a challenge facing about two dozen families. They did everything correctly. They carried out the adoption process to the letter of the law and, as far as the Florida authorities are concerned, that adoption has gone through and that child has been formally adopted. That child lives here with that family in Ireland. However, they still cannot register their adoption with the Adoption Authority in Ireland.

The Minister will understand, appreciate and empathise with the great stress and concern associated with that. Anything that can be done to regularise these arrangements, primarily in the interests of the child, would be welcome.

A related issue brought to my attention involved a family which had adopted two children from Vietnam before the ratification of the Hague Convention. The agency through which they completed the adoption was not accredited after the Hague Convention was ratified. As a result, the post-placement reports for the adoption authority which the family were required to complete are no longer being sent to the agency in Vietnam. Consequently, this family, through no fault of its own, finds itself to be in breach of a binding legal agreement. While this specific case may now be resolved since the Hague Convention has entered into force in Vietnam on 1 February, this will allow the Adoption Authority of Ireland to begin the process accrediting Vietnamese agencies. However, the issues highlighted by the family relate not only to Vietnam but to other countries with which Ireland has had bilateral agreements prior to the Hague Convention.

I recognise the excellent work currently being undertaken by the Adoption Authority of Ireland in working with signatories of the Hague Convention and other countries to ensure processes are in place which protect the best interests of children in the adoption process. The recent events in Mexico serve as a stark, tangible and real reminder of the importance of this. It is important that anomalous situations created by the ratification of the Hague Convention are addressed comprehensively as a matter of urgency. It would be most unfortunate to have a situation whereby families are allowed to fall through the gaps created by the Hague Convention through no fault of their own. Anything that can be done by the Department and the authority to regularise those who played by the rules and who put the interests of children first would be appreciated. I welcome the Minister's decision to grant approval to the AAI to examine the feasibility of introducing a bilateral agreement in Ethiopia. I understand a similar review is taking place in respect of Kazakhstan which has ratified the Hague Convention and I would welcome any update on this issue.

I thank the Minister and I commend her on her commitment to keeping public representatives appraised of the progress made in establishing the necessary processes and to ensure that intercountry adoptions that safeguard the rights of the child can proceed. I am contacted frequently, as are many public representatives, by families seeking an update on the work of the adoption authority. I praise the adoption authority, in particular the chairman, Mr. Geoffrey Shannon, who operates in a voluntary capacity and does such excellent work. However, in the interests of providing a regular flow of information in terms of providing fact and assurance to families, it would be useful if the Minister in conjunction with the AAI considered establishing a similar information flow for public representatives to that provided by the HSE, the immigration service and NAMA. This would be a positive step in keeping us informed and appraised and it would place the responsibility on Members and legislators to keep abreast of these important issues regarding child protection and adoption. The families involved do not seek to influence the work of the adoption authority. Its independence and its application of the guidelines must be paramount and sacrosanct. However, it is important that there is a constant flow of information.

I refer to some issues which arose during the debate. Deputy McConalogue referred to the Minister's intention to hold a referendum on children's rights. I agree with him, as do many Deputies, that it is desirable to hold this referendum on its own. I am keen to see a referendum proceed with children as its exclusive focus. Any political wrangling or posturing that other referendums inevitably generate would be best parked on the day. I call on the Minister will examine the feasibility of this and to consider the matter carefully, since she is determined to get the best outcome. I disagree somewhat with Deputy McConalogue in another way and Deputy Conway also alluded to this in another area. We are keen to have these developments as soon as possible but we are also keen to get them right. This aim must supersede any political desire or temptation to hold a referendum in the morning. I understand from the Minister's public comments that she shares this view and understands this reality. We only have one opportunity to get the best possible constitutional framework for children's rights. We urge the Minister to get it done as quickly as possible. However long it takes, the Minister will have my support and the overwhelming support of most Members.

Deputy Finian McGrath referred to surrogacy. This is a real issue for many families. We need guidelines and clarification on surrogacy.

We must also examine how the Child Care Act interacts with the Refugee Act especially at the stage when the child becomes an adult in the eyes of the law on reaching 18 years of age. I have raised this issue previously with the Minister during Oral Questions in the House. We must ensure that regardless of whether children are adopted, any child who enters the State is cared for in a compassionate way. Work must be carried out involving the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Children and Youth Affairs on this issue.

The Minister managed to achieve what many doubted she would achieve - I always knew she would - on the issue of social work commitments in the Ryan report and the provision of extra social workers. She is to be commended on this. However, there appears to be a geographic imbalance. In my constituency of County Wicklow I have heard alarming reports that the level of provision of social workers for child and family issues is down. I call on the Minister to pay attention to my constituency, to address the anomaly and to ensure a correct geographic spread to cater for the needs of children. I thank her again and I commend her on her work. I look forward to continuing to contribute on these issues.

Deputy Patrick O’Donovan

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. I compliment the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste on their vision in assigning ministries and in establishing the new Departments. I have not had the chance to say as much directly on the floor of the House. In some ways it is a terrible indictment of the country and in other ways it is a great mark of a country that it took us until 2011 to establish a fully-fledged Department of Children and Youth Affairs. I congratulate and compliment the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, on the work she has done in a short period. I echo the sentiments of previous speakers especially in respect of the staff in the Minister's office. Anyone who has worked with the Department of Children and Youth Affairs would agree that the staff of the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, at the Civil Service grades and at advisory grades are exemplary. The Minister is lucky to have excellent people working for her and I would appreciate it if she relayed my compliments to them.

These issues probably affect every Member. There is no doubt that at some stage during a representative's time in the Oireachtas a family will probably present at a clinic or office and will recount the difficulties they have had with regard to intercountry adoptions. It may be an easy option to consider intercountry adoption as something associated to the developing world or, as it was known heretofore, the Third World. However, this is not always the case. We are in a position in Ireland whereby we are engaging in intercountry adoptions with First World or developed countries. Sometimes people experience considerable difficulties with these nations as well. It is important not to single out particular categories of country or to label some countries as troublesome and others as trouble-free in our dealings with them.

I concur with Deputy Harris. Issues may arise when one deals with federal countries in which there are different family law arrangements within the same national boundary. We have seen as much in respect of Florida recently. This adds a layer of complexity to what is already a very complex situation.

In recent times we have focused on the need to reduce costs and the cost base and to remove layers of civil servants and so on. One area that could be of considerable benefit to the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, and her Department is our diplomatic network throughout the world. It could carry out a great deal of the preliminary work in building up relationships and smoothing out any creases in terms of Ireland's relationship with countries from which we are trying to adopt.

I break no secret by stating that I held a productive meeting with the Minister in the not-too-distant past. I relayed to her a concern in respect of a particular issue with a European country, namely Belarus. It is fully compliant with the Hague Convention now and there is willingness to try to put back on the agenda the good working relationship that existed previously. There is an amenable atmosphere in the Department in this regard. I realise the Minister is up to her eyes at the moment with the Vietnam issue and that she is attempting to regularise the situation with Ethiopia but there is potential to consider countries a good deal closer to home and to regularise our relationship with them in terms of intercountry adoption.

I refer to an experience I have related to the Minister previously. It is harrowing for a family when they must wait and when they do not know the position and when there are false starts and no-starts. It is nobody's fault. I would not put blame on anybody, but we cannot lose sight of the child who is at the centre of each intercountry adoption from the United States, Mexico or China. We must maintain our focus on him or her. Ultimately, we need to put in place the best legal framework for each child who needs to be at the centre of the process.

Deputy Simon Harris spoke about the children's rights referendum. People have been asking the Minister when it will take place. I would prefer not to have it this year, next year or the year after if it means the proposal will be a bad one. Any constitutional amendment needs to be dealt with properly from the start. We need to spend time consulting the various interests involved. For the first time since 1937 when Bunreacht na hÉireann was enacted by the people, we will be inserting in the Constitution a series of rights for children living in Ireland today who were born of Irish parentage or who may be adopted by Irish parents and become Irish citizens in the future. We need to be cognisant of the current and future needs of the children of Ireland and children in other countries who may be the subject of intercountry adoptions.

I pay tribute to the Adoption Authority of Ireland. There is a tendency in this country to denigrate public institutions and civil servants. However, the impression I have gleaned from the parents who have spoken to me is that the staff of the Adoption Authority of Ireland are very understanding and humane. They put the interests of parents on the table when talking to public representatives. Deputy Simon Harris suggested officials within the authority could form a parliamentary affairs division to deal specifically with parliamentary queries. That might reduce the number of parliamentary questions being asked.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Jack Wall)

I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy, but the time available for this debate today has expired. He will have four minutes when the debate resumes.

Deputy Patrick O’Donovan

That is fine.

Debate adjourned.