Adjournment Debate. - Children in Care. – Dáil Éireann (28th Dáil) – Thursday, 22 Mar 2001

Adjournment Debate. - Children in Care.

Ms Fitzgerald

I welcome the opportunity to raise this issue in relation to disturbed children being detained by security firms with the Minister. I would like the Minister to outline the extent and scale of the use of private security firms in units where children are in care and to outline the extent and scale of where these children are being housed by health boards throughout the country with private security apparently providing the staffing.

It emerged in the High Court this week that the Department of Health and Children has known since 1999 that vulnerable children in the care of health boards were being placed in units run by a private security company. Mr. Justice Kelly in the High Court said he was astounded by this. This raises more serious questions about the facilities available to health boards and the staffing arrangements in them. Will the Minister outline to the House the scale and extent of the use of private security firms by health boards? How many centres are being run in this manner, if any, and how many children are being cared for by the staff of private security firms? If this is happening – I do not think it is clear yet whether it is happening and the scale of it – what qualifications do these staff members have? Has the Garda given them clearance certificates for working with children? How long have these centres been in use? If such centres are operating, the question of whether they are being inspected by either the health boards or the national social services inspectorate arises. If they are not being inspected and if they exist, I am sure the Minister will ask the national social services inspectorate to inspect these places.

The private security industry is unregulated in this country. I would like the Minister to clarify whether it is Government policy to use private security firms to meet the needs of children who have been in care. This is an area which seems to be shrouded in some mystery. It is not quite clear what is happening so I am simply raising a series of questions in order to give the Minister an opportunity to put the facts on the record. It emerged in the High Court this week that there is some use of security firms and perhaps the Minister will clarify what exactly is happening.

Ms Hanafin

Deputy Fitzgerald has raised a very important issue. As the Deputy is aware, the health boards have the statutory responsibility for children in their care. The Child Care Act, 1991, and regulations made under the Act set out the statutory requirements in relation to the placement and care of children in services operated by the health boards themselves and by other service providers acting on behalf of health boards.

Section 3 of the 1991 Act requires each health board to promote the welfare of children in its area who are not receiving adequate care and protection. That section also requires health boards to regard the welfare of the child as the first and paramount consideration and to have regard to the wishes of the child. Under section 4 of the Act, health boards have a duty to take a child into care on a voluntary basis if the child requires care and protection, and is unlikely to receive it unless taken into care, provided the parents or persons acting in loco parentis consent to this arrangement.

Separate arrangements apply where the parents or persons acting in loco parentis do not voluntarily agree to a child being taken into care under section 4. These can be summarised as follows. Part III of the Act provides for the making of emergency care orders; Part IV of the Act provides for the making of interim care orders, care orders and supervision orders and Part IV also places a duty on a health board to initiate proceedings where a child is considered to require care or protection. Section 24 of the Act restates, in respect of proceedings regarding the care and protection of children, that the welfare of the child shall be regarded as the first and paramount consideration and that regard shall be had to the wishes of the child.

Against this broad statutory framework, health boards act in the best interests of the child concerned and deal with each individual child on its merits. Where a health board takes a child into care in accordance with the provisions of the 1991 Act, it has two main options in regard to the placement of the child, either foster care or resi dential care. Both types of care are regulated by Part VI of the Act and associated regulations.

In regard to residential care, a health board can either place a child in a residential home which it operates itself or it can place the child in a children's residential centre, that is, a registered centre which is not operated by a health board. Residential homes are subject to inspection by the social services inspectorate under section 69 of the Act and children's residential centres are subject to inspection by the health board in whose functional area they are located in accordance with article 18 of the Child Care (Standards in Children's Residential Centres) Regulations, 1996. These regulations also incorporate a guide to good practice in children's residential centres.

As the Deputy is aware, the matter raised by her is currently the subject of a High Court case in relation to the area health boards in the Eastern Regional Health Authority area and I do not wish to impinge or to prejudice the outcome of the court proceedings. However, the issues raised around this are being actively followed up with the chief executives of all the health boards and the social services inspectorate and I will communicate further with the Deputy with the specific information she has requested.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 22 Mar 2001