Child referendum threatens immigration control

CHILDREN’S advocates such as the ISPCC (Letters, March 9) have been using recent horrific abuse cases like that in Roscommon to make false claims about the proposed children’s rights referendum.

There is no bar in our constitution to removing children from abusive and negligent homes. The fact that there are almost 6,000 children in care constitutes ample proof of this.

In the Roscommon case, the ex-parte injunction preventing the removal of the children was given because the health board did not know about it beforehand and could not put its case. It could have had the injunction lifted immediately but inexplicably dragged its feet. The constitution was not a problem.

Our main worry, if this unnecessary amendment goes through, is that aspects of it, as currently proposed, will undo the effects of the referendum on citizenship of 2004.

There is a grave danger we will be pulled back to the situation where the children of failed asylum seekers, and the asylum seekers themselves, cannot be deported because the best interests and welfare of the child in relation to its upbringing are of the “first and paramount ” consideration. That means they trump all other considerations.

Dr Ursula Kilkelly of UCC (Irish Examiner, February 17) admitted the amendment had the potential to impact on migration issues.

The same politically correct minority that opposed the 2004 referendum would only love to see the rights of the 80% or so of Irish people who voted yes to that amendment set at nought in this one.

It is an unnecessary amendment and dangerous for immigration control. Unless adequate safeguards are inserted, it should be dropped or defeated.

Áine Ní Chonaill

PRO Immigration Control Platform

PO Box 6469

Dublin 2