The Cabinet are set to consider the wording of a children’s rights amendment agreed between the office of the Minister of State for Children, Barry Andrews (pictured), and Attorney General Paul Gallagher.

According to a report in the Irish Times, Mr Andrews said yesterday the wording was agreed in the run-up to Christmas.

He added that he was confident a decision could be made early this month, which would allow the Dáil to vote on the necessary legislation to hold a referendum on the issue. He suggested that if a general election were delayed until March, such a referendum could be held in conjunction with the election.

“It is feasible in the context of a late March election. It would be extremely tight certainly, but possible. If you were talking about an election in the first week of April, we would definitely be able to do it. I am not privy to the discussions on the date of the election but I am proceeding on the basis that it is doable,” he said.

According to Mr Andrews, the text agreed between his office and the Attorney General is based on the proposed wording agreed by the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children last February. However, it also draws on the text for a constitutional amendment on children presented to the Oireachtas four years ago by then minister of state for children Brian Lenihan, he added.

Mr Lenihan proposed the insertion of a new Article 42(A) dedicated to children in February 2007. It acknowledged and affirmed the “natural and imprescriptible rights” of all children.

Last year’s proposal from the all-party committee went further by suggesting that Article 42 be amended in its entirety. Section 1 of the amended article provided that “in the resolution of all disputes concerning guardianship, adoption, custody, care or upbringing of a child, the welfare and best interests of the child shall be the first and paramount consideration”.

Critics, such as prominent barrister and constitutional expert Dr Gerard Hogan, have expressed concern as to how the courts will interpret the phrase “best interests of the child”.

Speaking on the This Week programme last February, Dr Hogan said that everyone was in favour of the best interests of the child, but, he asked, “who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done?”

He told RTE: “We’re all in favour of the best interests of the child, and there is something of a mother and apple pie dimension to this. But in practical terms you have to ask yourself, when you’re talking about the best interests of the child, who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done? And if you’re talking about the State vindicating the rights of the child, you have to remember that this is likely to be officialdom, or some judge making this decision.”

Dr Hogan added: “This Constitutional amendment will be for life, and will be interpreted by the courts in the coming decades.

“It’s all very well to think of this in terms of Constitutional platitudes but those words will have real meaning and real significance in lots of hard cases and you have to bear that in mind.”