Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 Dec 2003

Vol. 577 No. 3

Priority Questions. - Children Act.

Jan O'Sullivan

Question:

42 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress made to date with regard to the implementation of those areas of the Children Act 2001, for which his Department has responsibility; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31113/03]

The Children Act 2001 introduces a wide range of innovative measures that will provide a statutory framework for the future development of the juvenile justice system in accordance with modern thinking and best international practice. Responsibility for implementing the Act lies with three Departments: the Department of Education and Science, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Health and Children. I am the Minister of State with special responsibility for children and with the support of the National Children's Office, I am leading the interdepartmental working group on the co-ordination of the phased implementation of the Act.

The Department of Education and Science has sole responsibility for the provision of residential services for children up to age 16 years who have been convicted or placed on remand by a court. There are five schools for young offenders providing such services under the aegis of the Department of Education and Science. The schools are governed by the terms of the Children Acts 1908 to 1989 which will be replaced by the Children Act 2001 when the provisions of the latter are commenced.

The Department of Education and Science has responsibility for Part 10 of the Act, which provides for the establishment of children detention schools to replace the existing reformatory and industrial schools. These provisions cannot be commenced until separate detention facilities are provided by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for boys and girls aged 16 and 17 years.

Part 11 of the Children Act 2001 provides for the Special Residential Services Board which was established on a statutory basis on 7 November 2003. Part 11 is jointly the responsibility of the Ministers for Health and Children and Education and Science. Its functions are to provide policy advice to the Ministers on the remand and detention of children and ensure the efficient, effective and co-ordinated delivery of services to children in respect of whom children detention orders or special care orders are made. To facilitate the appointment of the Special Residential Services Board, section 159(1) of the Children Act 2001 was partially commenced to allow for the membership of representatives of the children detention schools.

I am sure the Deputy is aware of the importance of a proper liaison between the courts and the places of detention for children. This subject has attracted much criticism over the years and some of that criticism is echoed in an interesting article in the Irish Examiner this morning. The board has recruited a number of officers who can liaise between the courts and the relevant detention centres. This recruitment has taken place and the officers will commence their duties when they are trained to perform them.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.A key consideration for the Department in commencing the Children Act 2001 is the identification of the appropriate number of residential places required under the new arrangements. An independent international expert in residential care was commissioned to review the residential requirements for children detention schools so as to ensure there are sufficient and appropriate places into the future. The Department recently received the views of the Special Residential Services Board to the report and they are currently being considered.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I wish to focus in particular on the early intervention aspects of the Children Act. The Minister informed the Joint Committee on Education and Science that the early intervention aspects of the Act are not planned to be introduced until the medium rather than in the short-term. My intention is to ensure a focus on early intervention which all experts agree is far more effective than the later actions which include taking children into custody. What is the Minister's Department doing about bringing forward the early intervention measures envisaged in the Children Act? I am thinking about the children with wasted lives whom we saw on "Prime Time" a few weeks ago. They have become alienated from their communities and are causing havoc. We know they will end up in detention centres unless there is intervention, such as the youth encounter project. What will happen in terms of early preventative intervention?

I have noted the Deputy's concern about early intervention but we must be clear about our terms. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is responsible under the legislation for early intervention. The responsibilities of the Department of Education and Science include the detention of persons under 16 years of age. As regards the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the most fundamental form of early intervention is the Garda diversion scheme which has been put on a statutory basis under the Children Act 2001. That part of the Act has been implemented.

The work of the juvenile liaison officers and programmes operating under the diversion schemes is the first key barrier to offending. This is the first time an offender comes into direct conflict with the law and the diversion scheme has proved to be a considerable success. The new form of conferencing envisaged by the Children Act has been implemented by the juvenile liaison officers. In addition, the provisions for restorative justice, whereby the victim confronts the offenders, have been implemented under the juvenile liaison scheme.

The Deputy referred to the recent "Prime Time" programme, but it is difficult to say whether early intervention measures would have assisted that group of individuals who had already come before the courts on a substantial number of occasions. A stage of intervention before detention is clearly required for those offenders when they are first apprehended and appear before the courts. Responsibility for that type of required intervention, which can hardly be characterised as early because a person who comes before the courts regularly is on a serious progression of criminality, must be managed by the probation and welfare service.

I accept the point that there are insufficient facilities in this area at present. That is why the Government agreed to sanction the recruitment of 30 probation and welfare officers for a dedicated service for the Children's Court. That recruitment is taking place. As a result, conferencing can commence with that group of children, which can lead to an engagement as to what interventions can be used as a last resort before detention, to attempt the difficult task of diverting these individuals away from the criminal path.

In speaking of early intervention, I take it the Deputy will also consider the wider measures under the aegis of the Department of Health and Children concerning parenting and intervention for children under the age of seven, but that point raises wider questions.

I seek some interdepartmental thinking on early intervention before such young people are detained. Intervention in schools is needed, for example, especially with the younger brothers of the people we saw in the "Prime Time" programme. That kind of intervention should happen with a focused response from the Department of Education and Science to the specific areas in which these young people live and the schools they attend.

The Youthreach programme in primary schools forms a pre-detention system for children who are not just showing learning difficulties but also profound tendencies towards misbehaviour and offending. Substantial provision has been made through these schools for that category and the Department is conscious of its responsibilities in that respect.

In addition to the home-school liaison service, we have also established the National Educational Welfare Board to which a substantial allocation has been made both in terms of resources and personnel.

Not as much as it needs.

Ultimately, both decisions are our responsibility.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

We must proceed to the next question.

We are responsible to this House in respect of those decisions.

Top
Share