I thank the Minister of State for her comments and for being here tonight to address this important matter. I recognise the work that Deputy Rice and the committee have done in bringing forward this report. It is irregular to be discussing a PLS report on legislation that does not yet exist. I recognise having tonight's debate allows us to hone in on a number of issues of key concern. It is far more difficult to do that when one does not see a list of heads of Bill, which is what pre-legislative scrutiny is about. It is to give the TDs and Senators on the committee, outside interest groups and, indeed, the Minister and the civil servants involved with its drafting the opportunity to go into some detail on the heads of Bill and discuss what is there, what is missing and how it can be improved. When we do not have those heads, that absence is certainly noted. We are, therefore, speaking in theory on quite a lot of the points we are making tonight. It is important to briefly recall how we have got to the particular situation now. I want to recognise the work the previous Minister for Health, Stephen Donnelly, did in advancing the first Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) Act. The Minister, Deputy McEntee, worked closely when she was in the Department of justice. I had some involvement in terms of the Department of children and equality. A call was made in mid-2024 to get that Act passed because, although it was recognised there were some gaps or new issues had come up that did need to be addressed, nevertheless that Act could provide legal protection for large numbers of families and parents. I note two things. It was the right call to make at the time, but it is disappointing that significant sections of that Act still have not been commenced. There are parts of that existing Act that could be commenced that do not require this new Bill. I am glad the Minister referenced section 232. That is something I have been asking the Minister for Health about for a considerable period of time. I know it is not just sitting within the Department of Health. There are issues to do with the rules of the District Court and Circuit Court and issues to do with the Department as well. However, addressing that could provide relief for a body of people who need its provisions. I ask that in the new year, the Minister of State maybe urges her officials and her colleague, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan in the Department of justice, to move rapidly ahead with that because it can be done, and it will help people. In terms of the report, there were just one or two points I want to focus on in a little bit of detail. That question of judicial discretion to always apply what is in the best interests of the child in a particular case before the judge should be reconsidered by the Department of Health. I absolutely understand that the rules on surrogacy need to be strict. There is a very important reason. These are fundamental decisions about the parentage of children. It is important that the rules are strict and the legislation, or what we are told the legislation will look like, does set out detailed rules for that. However, there are circumstances where a mistake or an error that is outside the control of the intended parents may take place and for the recognition of parents' rights to be refused in absolutely every situation due to a fault that was outside of the parents' control and which then has the impact that the child they have conceived or the child they now have will not have his or her relationship with those parents recognised in law. That is a huge punishment, not for the wrongdoer in those cases but for the parents or, indeed, for that child. A right to allow the judge, even in situations where maybe not every provision of the Act has been made, but where a judge can recognise that it is in the best interests of the child in this particular case to allow parentage and grant a parentage order should be provided for in this legislation. It can be circumscribed, but we as a country back in 2013 passed the referendum to put the best interests of the child in our Constitution. That same principle should be recognised in this legislation, not as an opportunity to allow people to wilfully ignore the important rules and importance safeguards around surrogacy but to allow for those occasional situations where something went wrong, or one provision maybe could not be reached but it was not the parents' fault. We should mot penalise that child. I ask the Department to look at that closely. I refer to the issue of excluding people with blood conditions from being able to use surrogacy. One might on the face of it think there is a health issue for the child, but where those conditions can be addressed through various treatments it risks enhancing the discriminations and worries and stigmas that are out there against certain conditions. If an intending parent has HIV, for example, as the legislation is currently drafted, from my reading, both parents are punished in terms of not being able to use this legislation, particularly where there are medical approaches that can address that and ensure that a child conceived there will not have that medical condition or, indeed, other medical conditions. Again, I ask the Department whether that is necessary at this stage. Is it an appropriate provision to have in legislation in 2025-2026? I had the opportunity as a Minister in the previous Government and now as a backbencher to meet with many of the organisations and parents - current parents and intending parents - who will benefit from this legislation and whose children will benefit from this legislation in terms of the relationship between parent and child. The de facto relationship will become a legal relationship as well. They are those children's parents, undoubtedly, but that law does not recognise it. It is really important that the Minister of State's Department and the Department of justice continue to engage with them. I attended a number of meetings in the previous Oireachtas with the then Minister, Deputy Donnelly, and the Minister, Deputy McEntee. I recall that former Senator Seery Kearney was very involved as well. It is important that open dialogue continues. It is a dialogue, and I understand that the answer cannot always be "Yes", but at least that engagement is really important. There is maybe a concern that the engagement has not been as frequent. As this legislation advances, it would be useful to help tease out and maybe help officials in the Minister of State’s Department understand the real-world implications of some of the decisions that are being made on paper without a full understanding. I thank the Minister of State for her contribution. I recognise the very significant piece of work Deputy Rice and his committee have done. I really urge that this legislation needs to move quickly. We do not really even have proper heads of Bill. We are a year into the term of Government. I ask the Minister of State to urge the Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, who I know is interested in this area, and the officials to move rapidly on this because there are a lot of parents and a lot of children whose right to have their legal relationship with their parents recognised is entirely dependent on this work being done.

Sentiment score: 0.21