Kathleen Funchion urges registered-post option on tracing bill

Thanks, Cian Córle. Deputy Bacic has articulated the position very well and eloquently. Just to say from the onset, for clarity, that nobody has any issue with a birth parent who wants to register no-contact preference. It is totally their right to do so, and I think everybody would respect that. Some of us believe that this mandatory information session, or the information session, or whatever people want to call it, is not actually necessary. But even if you were to accept that it is necessary, it is in that spirit that we looked at alternatives. So we are not even saying, get rid of it and have nothing. We are actually willing to say, okay, there clearly is an issue or a difficulty between the balancing of the privacy rights and people's right to their information and identity. And I just, I cannot understand how the issue of the registered posts is not acceptable. I just don't, I just don't, I can't get my head around that. I don't feel that, I just think it is the perfect alternative. And in fact, as I said earlier, I think it gives greater protection to the state because there is a record, clearly. If that is what is trying to be achieved, then there is a very clear record. I don't see why that can't be looked at. I just think it is far more respectful for people. And again, I don't think it matters if it is only one person that is affected by this. We are still potentially leaving one person out. And I really, really feel very strongly about it. I know others do as well. And in fairness, the start of this debate, we were up and down welcoming all of the improvements and all of the changes. And I don't think anybody is here to be critical just for the sake of being critical. There has been really good progress. But this remains a serious, serious sticking point. And for me, it is just, as I said, I don't think we will be able to support the legislation if this has not changed. So I really would hope that in particular Deputy Batchick's amendment is supported. Because we just can't have a situation where people are being called into these information sessions. We have gone way past that. We have improved in so many areas in relation to the whole mother and baby situation. I really feel we need to not get rid of it, but have the registered post option. Thanks. Mr. Robert, Clarence Corlea, this proposed, notwithstanding the order of the Dáil yesterday, that proceedings in the report and final stage of the Birth Information Tracing Bill 2022 shall, if not previously concluded, be adjourned at 8.30pm this evening. Is that agreed? Thank you very much. Minister, I believe you have spoken twice already on this group of amendments, is that correct? I thought I only spoke once. We will give you two minutes then. Thank you. We will give you that flexibility. Thank you very much, Clarence Corlea. We do trust women. That's why in every situation where this bill is used, the full information that a woman or any adopted person, any person subject to an illegal birth registration, the full information will be provided to them. All the information about their parents, about their mother will be released to them. And this is why this legislation is so significant. This is why this legislation represents such a change. We trust people, so we issue them the information in every situation under the process set out within this legislation. Deputy Batchak, you've asked the question, and I answered it, I believe, at committee stage. If someone decides not to use the process set out in this legislation, they may use the GDPR process. They have the right to do that. They have the right to say, and the GDPR will probably give them much of what's here, maybe all of what's here. But our legislation, this legislation, gives them the absolute right in every circumstance to the full information. Whereas GDPR brings us back to the place where we don't want to be, where the data controller in each individual situation weighs the rights of the parent with the rights of the adopted person and makes a call, makes a judgment call in every situation. That's what we want to move away from. That's what we do move away from with this legislation. Using this legislation, everyone in every circumstance will get full access to their information. And, you know, again, I just sometimes I don't think maybe there's a recognition of the stakes here. What we are doing is a very significant restriction of the privacy rights of the parents in these situations. It's right that we do it. We need to do it to vindicate the right to identity. But like it or not, we have a system in this country where when the Oireachtas restricts the fundamental rights of certain citizens, the courts have a right to adjudicate whether that restriction was done correctly, whether it was done proportionately. And we know from the history of this area, this is an area that is litigated, that people feel so strongly about their desire not to be revealed that they have taken litigation before. And we have gone with the alternative to the Attorney General and we have discussed that. And the legal advice that I have received is that the mechanism proposed here is the greatest restriction on the privacy rights that we can allow for without a risk of unconstitutionality. And as somebody who passionately wants to see this, wants to see legislation passed that will allow every adopted person, every person who is subject to an illegal birth registration, get their full information. I want, I have to accept that advice. I have to act on that advice. And then that is why I believe that the process set out in this bill, which will always result in the full access to all information is the process that should be adopted. Look, given the sensitivity and importance of this matter, I'm anxious to be as flexible as possible, but I must still adhere to standing orders. And Deputy Funcion is the only member at this point who is entitled to speak a third time. So if you want to make a contribution. Really briefly. In fairness, I think the points have been covered by everybody, by Deputy Batcheck, Deputy Kearns and Deputy Connolly. But just to say, I suppose, is to clarify again that nobody is saying that people should not have a right to register a no contact preference. I just think it's really important to that point is clarified. What we're saying is how that information is then has an impact on the adopted person getting their information. That's what we're arguing. That's just, I think that there's, it's kind of being said, you know, about people having the right. We fully accept that people have the right to register a no contact preference. That's not what the issue is here. I just wanted to make that point very, very clear that it's how then that information is communicated. Some people will argue, there's no need for any sort of an information session. But what we're saying is if there is a need, it should be done. It should be done by a registered letter. And I still don't see. I haven't been convinced as to why that is not the case. Thanks. Thank you, Deputy Deputy. You