Guardianship of Infants and Child Care (Amendment) Bill 2026: Report and Final Stages Dail Éireann — 2026-06-17 ============================================================ Matt Carthy (SF), Cavan-Monaghan I move amendment No. 4: In page 12, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following: “(1A) Where a guardian ad litem of the child, another guardian of the child, or a relative of the child (being a person who would be entitled to notice of proceedings under this Act) is of the opinion that an application under subsection (1) ought to be made in the best interests of the child, he or she may request the Child and Family Agency to make such an application. (1B) The Child and Family Agency shall consider any request under subsection (1A) and, where it decides not to make an application under subsection (1), shall, on request, provide reasons for that decision to the person who made the request.”. This is another amendment we discussed at length on Committee Stage and I was hopeful the Minister would bring forward his own amendment to deal with this issue. As discussed, this deals with historical cases. As it stands, the section gives Tusla discretion in dealing with convictions that occurred before the Act commenced. The Minister made quite a lot of reference on Committee Stage to the fact that this is peculiar - I am not sure it is entirely unique - in that it has a retrospective element. That is important and I commend the Minister and Department on including it. However, without strengthening the provision to include other parties, as this amendment seeks to do, there is a risk that there will be cases where applications will not be brought where they should be. This amendment recognises that guardians ad litem , other guardians and relatives should have a role in prompting action where it is in the child's best interests. This is particularly important considering Tusla has raised concerns about resourcing and identifying historical cases. It is, therefore, essential that those closest to the child can bring matters forward and ensure appropriate applications are made to the court. The Minister previously indicated that people can contact Tusla anyway and that a provision in legislation is not needed. That is not necessarily an argument for not doing something. There is a strong case to put on a legislative basis that people can engage with Tusla to ensure there is, in the first instance, consideration of any such request. Equally important, in terms of the amendment we have put forward, is the provision that, if a decision is made not to pursue it, at least the rationale for that decision would be notified because that would resolve a question mark or concern on the part of those affected. I encourage the Minister to accept the amendment. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/dail/2026-06-17/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-09-21T01:01:09+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-06-17