Vol. 787 No. 3
65. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she has attended a meeting with officials and or others at which the initial Supreme Court judgment from 8 November was discussed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52238/12]
This question was transferred from the Department of the Taoiseach. I met Government colleagues and senior officials on 8 November to discuss the ruling delivered by the Supreme Court in the McCrystal case on that day. Subsequently, discussion of the Supreme Court ruling featured in various meetings with Department officials and colleagues in the intervening period.
Further to the meeting of 8 November, I issued a statement encouraging people voting in the referendum on 10 November to focus on the substance of the amendment and the historic importance of the proposal to amend the Constitution. I also drew attention to the reference made by the Supreme Court in its ruling that the substance of the referendum proposal "is a matter for the people alone".
I must interrupt the Minister.
I will conclude by saying that, as I have stated already and made clear, the Government will now take on board the full judgment of the Supreme Court of 11 December.
In the Seanad debate on 8 November, the Minister stated, "A detailed protocol underpinned the drafting of content for the booklet and website and the Office of the Attorney General was consulted for legal advice throughout the process", and yet I note Mr. Justice Fennelly, in his judgment, stated:
It is notable that this account, at no point, alleges that the website or the booklet was actually reviewed and approved by the Office of the Attorney General. The advice of that office, as very briefly summarised in the form of two brief sentences, seems correct and in accordance with the McKenna judgment. The first sentence refers to the right of the Government to give information, to clarify situations or to give explanations. The second emphasises that the Government is not entitled to expend public monies for the purpose of promoting a particular outcome.
Who signed off on the booklet? Whose idea was it to issue the booklet? Why was it decided to spend €1.1 million and take it away from the independent commission? Also, what are the associated costs as a result of that decision? Ultimately, who will take responsibility and who will be held accountable? The Government came to office 20 months ago talking about accountability, transparency and responsibility. Who will be held accountable for this?
As I stated, the Government will now take on board the full judgment of the Supreme Court of 11 December. The failures to which Deputy Troy refers on the part of the Government identified by the Supreme Court are fully acknowledged and deeply regretted. The Government is carefully studying the judgments of the court and we are committed to acting in full accordance with elaborated guidance which the judgment provides as regards the application of the McKenna principles in all future referendums.
I refer the Deputy to my Seanad speech on that date, from which he quoted. That Seanad speech is accurate. In light of the High Court hearing in January, as a respondent in those proceedings I am constrained as regards further comment at this stage while proceedings are ongoing and it is prudent for me to restrict my comments. As I have already said to Deputy Troy, I would very much like to engage with him on the points he raises but I am advised that, in view of the High Court proceedings in January to which I am a party, it is not appropriate for me to do so, and I ask that he respect that.
As regards the Supreme Court judgment, does the Minister accept that the handling of the website issue was a complete cock-up by the Government? I agree with the Minister on the substance of the issue and voted "Yes" myself. However, I was annoyed during the last few days of that campaign because I thought the Government could have blown the whole issue. Does the Minister agree that the Government should apologise to the people for mishandling this issue? The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, was on television that week and refused to apologise.
Is it not the reality that many members of the Government, and people in the major political parties, do not really accept the McKenna judgment? Privately, they barely tolerate the decision. In future, the Government should be very careful to present the referendum, let it run in a fair and balanced way, and let the people decide.
I call on Deputy Troy to contribute briefly because we are out of time.
I raised this matter as a Topical Issue on numerous occasions prior to the referendum result being challenged. I accept what the Minister is saying but will she give a clear commitment to appear before the House and make herself available pending the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing in January? We should have a full and frank debate to allow all Deputies to bring forward ideas and suggestions to ensure this never happens again.
Deputy Finian McGrath was not here when I spoke earlier, but I would like to make the following point to him now. As Mrs. Justice Denham said, "In all the circumstances of this case, as have appeared before the court, I am satisfied that the respondents acted in a bona fide manner." Mr. Justice Fennelly said: "I have no doubt that this was all done bona fide and with a consciousness that the decision in McKenna had to be respected." That is quite contrary to what Deputy Finian McGrath was saying. I just wanted to quote to him what the judges of the Supreme Court said in relation to the approach that I and my Department took to this matter. Justice O'Donnell stated: "It should be said that the plaintiff made it clear that he [the plaintiff] was prepared to accept the Department had acted in good faith in preparing the campaign and did not challenge it on that ground."
As regards the Deputy's broader point on future referenda, I accept that we need to examine what has happened in previous referenda. As the Government statement said, we are carefully studying the Supreme Court judgment which now clarifies, for the first time since 1995, how the Government can make information available to the electorate during a referendum.
As regards Deputy Troy's point, I have no doubt that we will be having discussions in the House on that matter. Many Deputies will want to express a point of view in light of recent events. In looking back at how other referenda were conducted, there will be a discussion in the House on future referenda.
66. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she is satisfied regarding the adequacy of her Departmental budget to meet its full range of requirements in the coming year with particular reference to new and/or anticipated responsibilities arising in the aftermath of the passage of the Referendum on the Rights of Children and any existing or consequential legislation; if she will set out her main objectives; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [56661/12]
As a result of budget 2013, I am pleased to advise the Deputy that the gross funding allocation for my Department next year will amount to €443 million, which represents an increase of €16 million or 4% over the 2012 Estimate provision of €427 million. This includes €417 million in current expenditure and €26 million in capital expenditure. I am satisfied the significant resource allocation demonstrates the priority and commitment which the Government, and my Department, attach to the delivery of programmes and services for children and young people.
I know the Deputy will appreciate the economic context in which my Department is operating. Like every other Department, we have had to make savings. While I regret that situation, I must operate within those constraints and try to decide on priorities within the available budget.
There are implications in terms of both policy and legislation attaching to the proposal to amend the Constitution, with a significant body of work likely to be involved in amending existing legislation, introducing new legislation and review of policies and procedures to ensure they comply with the new improved standards for children. It is not just my Department that will be required to do this, as any Department offering services to children and young people also will be affected. For example, the Department of Justice and Equality, which holds responsibility for custody and guardianship legislation, will also face a significant body of work.
Some of the principles in the constitutional amendment already are reflected in statute law, such as the principle of "best interests". This "best interest" principle is already well-established in Irish statute law, for example in the Child Care Act 1991 and the Adoption Act 2010. This principle is now reflected in the Constitution as the paramount consideration for judges in making decisions in certain critical court proceedings relating to the care of children. As part of the constitutional proposal, I published the Adoption Bill 2012 which it is envisaged will be introduced to the House, subject to a successful outcome to the referendum. This will place new obligations on the Adoption Authority of Ireland among others and I am satisfied the budget allocation for 2013 will be adequate to meet expenditure that arises in this context.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
In terms of the Deputy’s core question on the question of resources, everyone in this House will be aware we all are operating in an environment of very constrained resources. This is the reality of the context in which I seek to deliver on all my commitments with regard to children and young people. As part of its efforts to address Ireland’s deficit, my Department, like all others, has been obliged to find savings. However our overall approach has been to prioritise investment in child and family services and to reform funding streams and delivery mechanisms to make the best possible use of resources. The Deputy will be aware of the wide-ranging reform of children's services that is under way and will see the establishment next year of the child and family support agency dedicated to the improvement of these services through the combination of the activities and resources of the Family Support Agency, the National Education Welfare Board and the child and family services of the HSE. The agency will have available to it a much stronger and more comprehensive range of resources and expertise than heretofore.
The focus of the agency will be on early intervention and family support services aimed at delivering proportionate responses to child welfare concerns and to protect children in the home, as envisaged by the constitutional amendment. This approach will be supported by the inclusion of the existing Family Support Agency and its nationwide network of 106 family resource centres. In addition, I am pleased to state the new area-based approach to child poverty initiative, for which €2.5 million has been provided for in the 2013 Estimates, will build on and continue the work of the prevention and early intervention programme, PEIP, which supported projects in Tallaght, Ballymun and Darndale. These projects involve a range of pilot programmes to improve outcomes in areas such as literacy, speech and language, parenting, health and pro-social behaviour.
I assure the Deputy that follow-through on the proposal to amend the Constitution is a top priority for me and I will make the necessary resources available within my Department to do so effectively.
I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply. Does she foresee a situation in which further responsibilities may be thrust upon her Department arising from the passage of the recent amendment to the Constitution in respect of children or relating to issues that concern parents of children, such as the vulnerability of many children who appear to be the subject of cyber attacks, bullying, threats or whatever the case may be? Does the Minister believe there is a need for an embellishment of the role of her new Department, as it emerges, to deal with such issues, which she has inherited? In stating that, I do not attribute blame to anyone as it simply is a fact of our times. Is the Department of Children and Youth Affairs fully aware of the need for children and young people to be reassured and that in the context of youth services, this would be part of the role she envisages for her Department?
The Deputy raised broad questions on young people in Ireland and it is true that Irish childhood has in many ways changed beyond belief in respect of the progress of children, for example, in the changed attitude to violence and the opportunities many children have. Nevertheless, it is clear there are some highly vulnerable children in our society who need the kind of support to which the Deputy refers. The Government needs to be highly alert in this regard and this is not simply an issue for my Department but is cross-departmental. It is very important that the Departments of Education and Skills and Health, as well as my Department, should work together as is the case, for example, in respect of bullying and working with the anti-bullying forum and in ensuring, as the Minister, Deputy Quinn is doing, that increased funding is being provided for initiatives in that area. He also intends to launch, in conjunction with the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, stronger guidelines in respect of mental health issues in schools. There have been some very tragic cases recently and it is important to bring in the supports at an early enough stage to those children who are vulnerable.
This is the reason the new Child and Family Support Agency will focus on prevention, on identifying those children and families and on making sure that, as I indicated to Deputy Healy earlier today, the family resource centres and the supports they offer are working with the agency to ensure we get those services to young people when they need them. I will also ensure that the funding streams for the youth services will be reformed. I take the Deputy's point and I believe the youth services around Ireland are doing a wonderful job in engaging with some of our most marginalised young people. In addition, I pay tribute to the Garda diversion programme, which has been hugely successful but does not attract much attention or recognition. A huge amount of support is being given to young people, unfortunately, not always successfully as Members will have seen in the child death report and more recent reports. However, these initiatives will make a difference to the children to whom the Deputy referred.
As three other Deputies wish to ask questions, I ask for brief questions from Deputies Finian McGrath, Ó Caoláin and Troy.
I have three brief questions. Did I hear the Minister state earlier that her Department's budget was €443 million?
What percentage of the €443 million is spent on wages and administration compared to front-line services? Deputy Durkan and many others have raised the issue of cyber-bullying. Another issue is the number of serious assaults on children taking place in Irish society that are not even reported to the Garda. I welcome the Minister's comments about the Garda diversion programme, which is excellent, but every day I get complaints about 12-year-olds and 13-year-olds being seriously assaulted with knives by gangs. Such incidents concern small issues like mobile telephones, etc. It is a miracle that many children are not seriously and horrifically injured. This societal problem is emerging.
I can appreciate that the Minister would be concerned but I wonder if she is in a position to give the House any assurance on the funding that will follow in the advent of the Child and Family Support Agency. We know from the supplementary budget secured by the Department of Health that there was an element of the €360 million allocation that impinged on identified needs to get to the end of the year with regard to areas that I hope will transfer to the Minister's Department in good time. There is also the €781 million in cuts to be implemented across the health budget and the HSE. Has the Minister any expectation or, more importantly, assurance that none of those cuts will further impact on areas that will ultimately be under her Department's responsibility and control in the early part of 2013?
The Children's Rights Alliance has indicated that, on balance, children were among the key losers in this budget. I could go on further with comments but will not because I must be brief. Children and family services already carry a deficit of over €50 million. I have asked the question before and will repeat it today. Must this deficit be carried into the new Child and Family Support Agency? What kind of impact will that have on a new agency that is trying to start from a clean sheet and fresh approach? The Minister has received support from this side of the House in that regard.
I accept that. Deputy Finian McGrath mentioned violence, taking in both children who are carrying out and who are subject to violence. I agree that the issue is serious. I must repeat that the best way to deal with the matter is to quickly identify vulnerable children and provide the best possible early intervention services. The research is interesting regarding high-quality early years, and it relates to the issues mentioned by the Deputy, including violence and addictions which lead to assaults. These are considerably reduced when attention from child care services is given to people at an early stage. Equally, the Garda diversion services have a role to play with those young people, and it is important that there is engagement.
Many youth work services around the country now specifically work with the more marginalised young people. It is interesting that there are fewer children and young people coming into detention. Those who are 16 years of age no longer go to St. Patrick's Institution and they will be in a purpose-built detention centre with appropriate services for those who, unfortunately, reach that point. Prevention is the key with the issues raised by the Deputy.
Deputies Ó Caoláin and Troy spoke about budgetary matters and much work has been done. Some of the figures quoted by the Children's Rights Alliance regarding the agency are incorrect and I will discuss that with the alliance. The 2013 provision for children reflects the work that has been done during the year in establishing as accurate a budget as is possible. There has been miscoding of expenditure, which is one of the reasons for a slight change of €5 million.
For example, some adjustments had to be made in respect of expenditure for child and adolescent mental health, which was mistakenly included under the Child and Family Support Agency budget. Some of the changes, therefore, reflect differences in categorisation.
Will the Minister provide information on the matter?
Yes, I will be pleased to provide the Deputy with the relevant information. As he will be aware, when I first assumed responsibility for this budget last year it was €72 million overdrawn, which is an extraordinary figure. Significant progress has been made in this regard. For example, the Government allocated an additional €40 million last year and major efforts to achieve savings this year resulted in a reduction in expenditure of €20 million. I expect the low overspend towards the end of this year will be carried forward to the agency. However, given that the overspend was €72 million at one stage, substantial progress has been made.
Extra demands are being placed on the service. For example, decisions must be taken in respect of children who require special care and these will give rise to considerable expense. I am in favour of recruiting more foster families who would be in a position to provide high quality care to such children at a different cost. The option of residential care is extraordinarily expensive and the outcomes are not very good in some cases.
Have the lessons learned from the tragic incidents of recent years, to which the Minister alluded, given rise to an arrangement or agreement within the Department? Do any of the Departments with responsibility for this matter have an early warning system or other mechanism in place to alert other Departments to the possibility that children are at risk, whether at school or in the youth services? Such an approach would result in greater co-ordination and a rapid response.
One of the most useful initiatives we took last year was to republish the Children First guidelines with a manual to ensure people understand the issues when children are at risk and know when to refer children appropriately to child and family support services and child protection services. Significant work has been done by the various agencies involved in this area. Teachers, for example, have done much work to ensure child welfare concerns are referred to the appropriate services. Sporting organisations have also been active and I recently attended a morning organised by the GAA for people from all over the country.
The usual procedure for Departments is that individual cases would be referred to the Health Service Executive and child and family services. This is how children in such circumstances are identified in the first instance. In terms of policy issues, which I understand are what the Deputy has in mind, a great deal of cross-departmental work is being done. Bullying is one area where Departments are taking joint initiatives to ensure a cross-departmental approach is taken. Such an approach will succeed in helping children.
67. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs her plans regarding the school completion programme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [56703/12]
The school completion programme aims to retain young people in the formal education system to completion of senior cycle and to improve children’s participation and attendance in school. In 2013, €26.456 million in funding has been allocated to this programme. The programme comprises 124 projects throughout the country. It is managed and directed by the National Educational Welfare Board, NEWB, and funding is administered by my Department. It is intended to undertake a review of the programme in 2013. The review will address the potential to promote outcomes within available resources through greater consistency and efficiency in the administration and delivery of the programme. The review will be undertaken in conjunction with the NEWB and in consultation with the Department of Education and Skills.
The findings of the review will also inform the NEWB’s ongoing work to implement an integrated national approach to educational support services to enhance children’s attendance, participation and retention in schools. This approach incorporates the co-ordination of the board’s responsibilities in the three areas of the school completion programme, home school community liaison service and education welfare service.
Next year will also see the establishment of the Child and Family Support Agency and incorporation of the education welfare services operated by the NEWB within a broader and more comprehensive range of supports to children and families.
In 2008, the then Fine Gael spokesperson for children expressed sharp criticism of the proposed decrease in funding. He stated:
In the current economic climate the Government, in implementing cutbacks, needs to differentiate between services that are essential and those that are not. It should not simply engage in a crash and burn approach which implements overall reductions across a broad range of sectors indiscriminately.
He was referring to a 3% cutback. In 2012, there has been a cutback of 6.5%. In 2013, there will be a further cutback of 6.5%. I am concerned about the future of this important programme, given the level of financial commitment it has received heretofore.
The Minister mentioned a review. What will it cost, will it consult the relevant stakeholders and when can we expect its publication?
A full review of the scheme will take place in 2013.
Did the Minister say "2015"?
Its terms of reference will take account of the need for local innovation in developing programmes and address the variations in approaches and cost bases. The truth about the programme is that there is considerable variation in its schemes and in how it is administered. I acknowledge the work that is being done, much of which I have seen at first hand. I also acknowledge the programme's importance, how supportive it can be for principals and teachers and the difference it can make in children's lives. However, it is important that a national approach be taken.
There are significant variations in the projects and their cost bases. The programme needs to be analysed and reviewed. The review was signalled when the comprehensive review of expenditure was published. A working group has been established to steer the process. There has been an input from my Department, the National Education Welfare Board, NEWB, and the Department of Education and Skills. The review's terms of reference are being finalised. It is intended to commission an independent external evaluation of the programme to progress the matter. I will keep in mind the Deputy's points concerning the involvement of the stakeholders. It is important that we hear at first hand from those who are delivering these services.
I recognise the importance of school attendance. I have seen some interesting projects, for example, one in Ballymun and another in the inner city, through which significant differences were made in school attendance rates. The schools focused on the issue and the agencies in the locality worked together. One project in the inner city saved 57 years of school attendance through its work in approximately six schools.
The question of school completion is critical. I regret the cutbacks that must be made. I hope that, when economic growth resumes, we can begin to invest more resources into such issues.
We all recognise that early school leavers are more likely to experience social exclusion and unemployment or underemployment. For these reasons, I am concerned about this important programme's future. I welcome the Minister's commitment to consulting those who have first-hand experience of it.
It may have been a slip of the tongue, but the Minister mentioned 2015.
I presume 2013 is when the review will commence. What will that review cost? The Minister referred to using an independent firm to conduct it.
Given the €26 million, the 124 projects and the 13% cut in the past two years, has it been the Minister's experience since entering office a year and a half ago that most of the projects are successful and are we getting value for money from the school completion programme?
The current information on school completion is interesting. For those who entered second level between 2001 and 2006 in the schools in question, the average leaving certificate retention rate increased substantially from 68.2% to 80.1%. Last year, the proportion of early school leavers in Ireland was 10.6%, down from 13% in 2004, and was well below the EU average of 14%. Whatever about the range of initiatives being undertaken, it is good to see the relevant statistics are improving so substantially.
I agree, however, with the Deputies' points. We are undertaking the review because the projects need to be examined and value for money needs to be considered. We also need to determine which projects are working successfully and how they can be mainstreamed. There is significant variation.
I do not expect the review to cost much, but I will revert to Deputy Troy on that question. In our analysis of the projects and their outcomes, we intend to link with those involved to benefit from their experience.
