Before we commence I remind the House that two minutes are allowed for the Minister's initial reply and four minutes are allowed overall, with one for each supplementary question and reply. It is the same time allocation as for ordinary questions.
Priority Questions
Preschool Services
Robert Troy
Question:1. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she intends to introduce a second free pre-school year; the evaluation she has conducted of the effectiveness of the free pre-school year;; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22026/13]
The free preschool year in early childhood care and education, ECCE, programme, which was introduced in January 2010, provides a free preschool year to all eligible children before they commence primary school. It is a universal programme with an attendance level of 94% of qualifying children, which equates to approximately 67,000 children.
The free preschool provision was introduced following a Government decision in 2009 to redirect some of the savings arising from the abolition of the early child care supplement. In line with the programme for Government, I succeeded in maintaining the universality of the free preschool year, including securing additional funding of €9.8 million in 2012 to address increased demand due to an increase in births since 2009.
With respect to future developments, I have on numerous occasions indicated my objective to seek to introduce a second free preschool year, which would represent an equivalent saving of approximately €3,000 in child care costs for parents as well as contribute to improved educational and developmental outcomes for children. However, I am conscious of the continuing imperative to deliver improvements in quality in the preschool year that we have.
Recently, the preschool inspectorate for the sector, together with the inspectorate of the Department of Education and Skills, carried out joint pilot inspections of a number of preschool services. While the findings have not yet been published, I understand the pilot inspections found good standards of personal care, relationships and physical and material environments for children’s development. They also identified considerable scope for development in regard to planned programmes of activities and their implementation, as outlined in the Aistear and Siolta frameworks, which promote all aspects of children’s development. I would therefore like to see development and further investment in a number of associated measures to support quality assurance, staff training, workforce development and inspections. My Department is currently examining proposals in these areas in collaboration with the Department of Education and Skills.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
My Department has initially estimated that the additional cost of providing a second free preschool year would be broadly in line with the costs of the current one-year provision. It is anticipated that the second-year participation rate would not be as high as the current rate. It is estimated that the full cost of introducing a second universal free preschool year, including all associated measures referred to, could be between €175 million and €200 million.
As a building block towards a possible second free preschool year, my Department is continuing to work and invest in improving quality standards and workforce capacity. Future developments relating to early years care and education will be considered during the preparation of the new national early years strategy, which is currently being developed by my Department and will be published later this year.
I thank the Minister for her reply. She is right in saying this scheme has been highly successful in terms of participation, but participation alone cannot be used to measure the success of the scheme. I welcome the Minister of State's announcement that a pilot programme has been carried out examining the standards that are being applied. She might elaborate on the depth of analysis carried out into educational development outcomes for the children. We need to examine raising our quality standards. We can only do that by professionalising the child care sector and ensuring that service providers are facilitated in undertaking continuous professional development to ensure they are adequately qualified, because this scheme is being delivered at such an important stage in a child's life.
Does the Minister believe there is the capacity currently to offer a second preschool year, or would it require an expansion of the capital programme? What level of consultation has she engaged in with service providers and parents on providing a second free preschool year?
We need to examine the various building blocks that would be required if we were to establish a second year. As the Deputy said, the quality issue is one that we have to address and there are a variety of ways to do that. We have to examine outcomes. From the research available in this country, the outcomes of early intervention are very good. We know the research is available internationally, but increasingly we have Irish research on early intervention. The centre for effective studies is co-ordinating that research, which is coming in from, for example, the three pilot project areas in Dublin which were funded by Atlantic Philanthropy and the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. We are getting details of the interventions that are most effective in working with preschool children.
The best way to assess how children are doing in preschool is longitudinally, by noting how they do when they enter primary school. The Deputy will know that there is universal praise for the impact the preschool year has had in terms of children being better prepared and better able to learn when starting in primary school. The longitudinal studies we are doing under the Growing Up in Ireland study - I have recently agreed funding for the five and half year old cohort - will tell us how the children who have had the experience of preschool do when they reach the age of five and a half. That is very important as well. There is ongoing research, and we will continue it, to find out precisely how the children who have had access to the preschool year are doing.
In terms of capacity, there are issues that need to be addressed, including workforce capacity and quality standards. The sector has universally said that it would like a second preschool year but clearly there are a range of issues to be addressed as we move towards the provision of a second year.
I advise Deputy Troy that one minute is the new time limit that applies.
I agree that early intervention is very good and there is a plethora of surveys and research to back that up. I asked in particular about the pilot analysis that is being done now. When will we have the results of that? How broad is that analysis from a geographical perspective and how deep is it?
In regard to the cost associated with a second preschool year, does the Minister concur with her Cabinet colleague, Deputy Quinn, who earlier this week said that we need to start a debate about redirecting the direct payment of child benefit into this area for the provision of a second preschool year? We had this conversation previously at an Oireachtas committee, where the Minister quite rightly raised concerns about removing this direct payment, and I agree with her on that, because many families rely heavily on it. Is the Government going to look at redirecting payments in respect of older children in lower and middle-income families to support this new venture? The Minister might enlighten us in that regard.
There is a range of financial issues that need to be addressed. I remind the Deputy, for example, that the Mangan report, which examines the interaction between the tax and welfare system and addresses some of these issues, is currently being examined by the education committee. I await the outcome of those discussions at the committee. Clearly, any decision in regard to child benefit is a budgetary issue and comes primarily under the remit of the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton.
In terms of the funding of a second preschool year, a range of steps would need to be undertaken as we move towards the development of a second year.
There are several issues about workforce capacity which we need to address, questions of quality and standards which the Deputy has raised. My Department is examining each of these issues relating to the one year we already have but also to providing a second year. One has to have regard to the €1 billion a month that we continue to borrow and to the fiscal situation and overall economy. I welcome the comments of the Minister for Education and Skills. It is important to have this discussion about the services we should be providing in the early years, and the early years strategy which I hope to publish in July should give us a framework for addressing those issues.
Child and Family Agency
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:2. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she has proceeded to seek expressions of interest from interested persons or nominations of specific persons who would be prepared to serve as members of the board of the yet to be established Child and Family Agency; the number of board positions she intends for the new Agency; if a person (details supplied) has taken up her position as Chair of the board of the existing Family Support Agency;; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22071/13]
The Government has approved, on my recommendation, the appointment of Ms Norah Gibbons as first chairperson of the board of the agency. In preparation for the formal establishment of the new agency Ms Gibbons will be initially appointed as chairperson of the existing Family Support Agency, one of the constituent bodies to be merged into the child and family agency. In line with the practice established by this Government, Ms Gibbons will be available to appear before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children in advance of taking up her position. I wrote to the Chairman of the Committee on 30 April last requesting that he facilitate Ms Gibbon's appearance before the committee in connection with her appointment. I await confirmation of a date for this meeting.
On 2 May, a public advertisement seeking expressions of interest from those interested in being appointed to the board of the Family Support Agency was published on the website of the Public Appointments Service. A notice to this effect has also been posted on my Department's website and on the websites of the National Educational Welfare Board and the Family Support Agency, FSA. The closing date for applications is Thursday, 23 May 2013. The advertisement highlights both the role of the board members within the Family Support Agency's existing statutory functions and the board's planned role in facilitating advance preparations for the organisational establishment of the child and family agency.
Therefore, the selection of board members will have particular regard to the enhanced role being given to this board in overseeing, on an administrative basis, the governance and organisational preparations for the new agency. The number of board members appointed will be in line with section 10(1) of the Family Support Agency Act 2001, which provides for a board of 12 members in total.
Those appointed to the FSA board will have a term of office up to the date of the establishment of the new child and family agency. In the interests of good governance I anticipate that in general a good level of continuity will be maintained between the newly appointed Family Support Agency board and the board of the child and family agency, although it is intended that the latter board shall be smaller in number.
For the Minister's information, at this morning's meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children, I urged that we take the opportunity to engage with Norah Gibbons on the earliest date possible and we hope to do that over the next couple of weeks although we are heavily involved in addressing upcoming legislation with hearings on the heads of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill at the end of next week and the following week.
The board of the Family Support Agency will oversee transition to the new agency. The Minister indicates that 12 members are provided for but that a smaller number is anticipated for the child and family agency. I hope that it will not be much smaller. It would be appropriate to accommodate the experience gained by those who will serve for whatever period the board of the Family Support Agency remains in situ. I note the deadline for expressions of interest and hope that those who have been involved heretofore will be considered. I am particularly concerned about the family resource centres and their network and representation at national level, and again commend their particular interests to the Minister.
There are three parts to the child and family agency, the HSE child services, the Family Support Agency and the National Educational Welfare Board which has already come under the aegis of the Minister's Department. I am particularly concerned about the school completion programme. Cuts of 6.5% have been announced in the current and upcoming years, 2013 to 2016 I think. I note that Pobal was to undertake an analysis of the existing operational staffing arrangements with a view to providing advisory support to local managements in such matters and that it was intended that this work would commence shortly after Easter. Some time has passed since Easter and I wonder has that process got under way. Staff are employed in various roles in the school completion programme which is to help young people to remain in school and complete second level. Can the Minister indicate whether the process to be undertaken by Pobal has got under way and can she give any hope or confirmation to the employees in the school completion programme that they will still be employed in September?
The Deputy's question, to which I am responding, was primarily about the board and its membership. I understand that the assessment of the school completion programme is under way. I will check the proposed date of completion of that work and will pass on the information to the Deputy. It was undertaken because of the wide variety in approaches to school completion around the country and to try to get a national overview of the work being done. I will have to give the Deputy the details later.
The Deputy will see from the notice posted about those who will be appointed to the board that we emphasise the skills that would be required and the range of expertise needed to run an agency of that size, with 4,000 staff. He will note that one of the criteria on the website is knowledge of and expertise in community development, social inclusion and community participation. We want to have as wide a range of skills as possible available to the board and the appointments will be based on merit and suitability to run an agency of that size and to make meaningful contributions. We are not trying to make the board representative of everyone involved in the sector but we do want to make sure that it will include experts in the various areas within the remit of the agency, such as community involvement, family support and child protection who will contribute to the management of the agency and the development of policies.
I commend to the Minister the inclusion of the salient expertise, relevant knowledge and experience in the family resource centre network. I have personal experience of its worth in my constituency and that is reflected the length and breadth of the country. It is very important that it continues to have that involvement and access.
I appreciate that the Minister would not have the information to hand about the school completion programme but the funding will conclude on 31 August which poses a problem and uncertainty as to what will apply when the school year resumes in September. This replicates the situation that pertained 12 months ago when people employed directly within these programmes had no certainty or idea of whether they would have employment to return to in September. We need to address that problem and understand the importance of what they are doing. It is a worthwhile and successful programme and it is regrettable that with the establishment of the Minister's Department one of the three components of the new child and family agency has suffered significant cuts. I would appreciate hearing from the Minister as soon as possible.
I will come back to the Deputy with the details of the school completion programme. Obviously, the intention is to continue this work. There is no need for those working in the programme to doubt its continuation.
Or of their employment.
Youth Services
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:3. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will consider reversing the recent cuts to the City of Dublin Youth Services Board; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22121/13]
In 2013, my Department will provide some €53.498 million to support the provision of youth services and programmes to young people across the country, including those from disadvantaged communities. This funding will support youth work programmes and services serving some 400,000 young people, delivered by over 1,400 youth work personnel who in turn support a large volunteer base of some 40,000. In addition, €1.5 million is being provided in 2013 for youth cafés and youth projects. Details are available on my Department’s website, www.dcya.gov.ie. This follows on from funding of €500,000 which was provided in 2012 for the development of a number of youth cafés which had applied for previous youth café funding schemes.
The comprehensive review of expenditure published in December 2011 sets out clearly the savings required from my Department in each of 2012, 2013 and 2014. The review contains a detailed seven page chapter outlining savings required from youth work funding. It requires a 10% saving in 2013, with a lesser saving in 2014. The review further provided there were no reductions in 2012 or 2013 in funding for the local youth club grant scheme which provides funding to volunteer-led youth clubs and groups. Having regard to these savings requirements, my Department has tried to be as equitable as possible in the determining process for the allocations and to have particular regard to the protection of front-line youth services, particularly those for the most vulnerable young people.
This year, €11.486 million was allocated in respect of youth services and projects in the Dublin city area. Funding provided to support youth projects in the Dublin city area is administered on behalf of my Department by the City of Dublin Youth Services Board. The board submitted proposals to my Department to reconfigure the allocations based on its local knowledge and expertise of the youth projects in its area and, following its consideration, my Department modified the allocations to ensure, with a small number of exceptions, no project in the Dublin city area would be reduced by more than the 10% recommended in the comprehensive review of expenditure. As a result, for most of the youth services in Dublin, the reduction in funding in 2013 is of the order of 5% or less while for the larger organisations the reduction is 10%.
I have met, and will continue to meet, with many youth organisations and groups to see how we can work together to minimise the impact of the savings required under the comprehensive review of expenditure, as well as seeing how we can work together to ensure the most effective and efficient use of the resources available to continue to support the provision of quality youth services to young people. To support this process, my Department has commenced a comprehensive value for money review of youth funding which is expected to be completed later this year.
I thank the Minister for her reply but it is disappointing. I find many of the cuts that are being imposed as part of the Minister’s austerity regime cruelly unjust and senseless. There are few cuts, however, that could be more unjust and senseless than the cutting of funding to youth community services for some of the most vulnerable young people. The reason I have raised this issue is because those young people affected from Ballymun, Ballyfermot, Dublin’s north-west inner city, Finglas, Coolock and Darndale were protesting outside the Dáil last week. They put it simply that if these cuts go ahead, in many cases they will be forced out on to the streets with nothing to do. It will lead to more confrontation with the police, more temptation to get involved in drugs, drinking and, ultimately, it will cost them, in terms of their lives, and the State to pick up the pieces afterwards. These cuts are utterly counterproductive.
It is particularly regressive when one considers Ireland has more young people at risk than any other EU member state. Up to 37% of our young people are at risk as against the European average of 27%. These cuts will disproportionately hit young people who are in no way responsible for the crimes that led to the economic and financial crisis. I am appealing to the Minister on their behalf to reverse these cuts and find the moneys elsewhere. These cuts make no sense and are cruelly unjust. There can be no justification or time to soften up the real impact of these cuts.
I recognise the value of youth work and am very pleased we have been able to maintain 95% of the funding that youth services receive. It is important Deputy Boyd Barred does not exaggerate what is happening. The majority of front-line youth work services have been protected and will continue to be available to young people. The Deputy referred to various areas in Dublin. For example, the Cherry Orchard youth service, which received €297,488 in funding, has been asked to make a 2% saving. St. Michael’s youth project in Inchicore, which received €290,000, has also been asked to make a 2% saving.
In a scenario where we are borrowing €1 billion per month, my Department is not exempt from having to make some savings. When the Dublin youth services board examined expenditure in this area, it insisted that front-line services would not be affected. I would prefer if the economic situation were different and I certainly look forward to the time we can invest even more in youth services. I view them as early intervention for the most vulnerable young people in our society. I also recognise the importance of the Garda youth diversion project which does excellent work with some of the young people the Deputy spoke about.
The Minister referred to projects which took small cuts, a point acknowledged by some of those on the protest, but others have taken 10% cuts. Some were initially looking at a 14% cut to funding. All the organisations involved said that any cuts against a background where we have a disproportionate number of young people at risk will have an enormous impact. No cuts are acceptable in a situation where more young people in this country are at risk than in any other European country and where more young people are being hit as a result of the impact of the recession. These young people must be protected. Whatever else the Government may think it has to do to pay off the debts of bankers, these cuts are cruelly unjust and will have a disproportionate effect, as well as costing the State more in the long term. The Youth Council of Ireland report suggested that for every €1 invested in youth services, the State will save €2.20. In other words, the Minister’s cuts will double the cost for the State. They do not even make sense from a book-balancing point of view. Whatever else the Government may think it should do, these cuts are regressive and should be reversed.
Every Minister has to make cuts in their Department and every Minister will have argued, exactly as the Deputy has, on the value of what they are doing in their Department. I will certainly argue that we should have increased resources going into early intervention. As I have explained before about protecting the funding for early intervention, I had to seek an extra €10 million to maintain the universal free preschool scheme. For every euro invested in that area, there is a saving of between €7 and €8 for the State. The majority of funding in my Department is going into early intervention.
I take the Deputy's point about the value of youth work. The study done by the National Youth Council of Ireland, NYCI, was very useful. The majority of the work being done by the youth services has been protected in very difficult times. I realise the efforts the youth workers are making to maintain the service and to continue to work with young people. I accept these are difficult times for them, and I will do everything to protect the funding. Next year, I will be looking to continue to support youth work as much as possible in the tough economic situation we face where we are borrowing €1 billion a month. That is the reality.
After-School Support Services
Robert Troy
Question:4. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will provide a progress report on the new after-school child care scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22027/13]
As part of budget 2013, I was pleased to announce, together with my colleague, the Minister for Social Protection, a new after-school child care initiative which will be targeted at low-income parents availing of employment opportunities. As we know, lack of access to affordable, quality child care is a significant barrier to many low-income and disadvantaged families seeking to avail of work opportunities. This initiative will provide an important support measure to enable parents to avail of job opportunities. This is in line with the Government's overall strategy to support parents of low-income families to take up employment and demonstrates how the Departments are working together to deliver the Government's agenda on promoting employment and supporting children's development.
This initiative is expected to receive full-year funding of €14 million. It is a new budget line that was agreed last year. It will have €14 million to provide 6,000 after-school places for children attending primary school to support parents to take up employment. This funding has been made possible through savings from the Vote of the Department of Social Protection.
Eligibility for the new after-school child care programme is determined by the Department of Social Protection. Officials from the Department of Social Protection and my Department have been working together to set up the programme. The first pilot phase has commenced. There are 500 child care places available in Tralee, Mullingar, Dundalk, Cork city, Finglas, King's Inn and Limerick city. They are all participating now. The second phase of the pilot will be rolled out in July when further areas will be added, with the full roll-out of the programme in September 2013 to coincide with the new school year. The pilot programme will assist both Departments in determining the procedural, quality and practical issues that will require attention prior to the finalisation of the programme.
The programme will provide €35 per week per child enrolled in a participating service for after-school services. This payment will rise to €100 per week during holiday periods when parents will be availing of full-day care. A further €20 per week will be paid by the parent to the provider in both instances.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The new after-school child care programme will further augment my Department's programme of child care supports for low-income families. These include the community child care subvention and the child care education and training support programmes, both of which provide subsidised child care for low-income parents, including qualifying parents who are on approved VEC and FÁS education and training courses. In 2013, my Department expects to spend in the region of €70 million on these programmes, supporting more than 30,000 child care places. This is in addition to the early childhood care and education, ECCE, scheme which provides a universal preschool year. The cost of this scheme is in the region of €175 million per annum.
I thank the Minister for her reply and for including my home town, Mullingar, in the first pilot. It was welcome news.
Are the 500 places announced on 29 April filled or is it the case that they were announced and it will be a number of weeks before they are filled? When the original scheme was announced, there was talk of a pilot but not of a second pilot. The Minister spoke about a second pilot. Will the second pilot involve a further 500 places or will it be more? Will there be a third pilot and will we see the scheme fully implemented by September of this year?
What level of consultation did the Minister's Department have with the various county child care committees that will have to implement this scheme? A number of county child care committees have told me that the level of consultation was minimal. Also, is it the Minister's intention to regulate fully the after-school sector under the Child Care (Pre-School Services) Regulations 2006?
It is useful to have these pilots before we begin the full scheme in September. It is intended to have the full scheme - the 6,000 places - operating from September. A decision was taken subsequent to the first announcement to do a second pilot in July because it was felt it would be helpful to roll it out in a number of other areas and learn from that.
My Department has had a huge amount of contact in recent months with each county child care committee in terms of developing a national approach to child care and co-ordinating the work of the child care committees. I have no doubt that during the course of those consultations, the new decision, and it is a relatively new decision going back to the budget, to establish an after-care school project would have been discussed. Those discussions will continue in the coming months. They are pivotal in terms of analysing and supplying to us the number of child care places that are available in each area. My Department has been heavily involved in that. The Deputy will appreciate there is a huge amount of work involved in getting this scheme up and running this year.
The issues the Deputy raises about quality and standards will also be discussed on an ongoing basis to determine what precisely will be in place in September and the best approach. I will revert to the Deputy regarding the question on the regulations.
Is the Deputy happy with that reply?
I take the Minister's word that her Department has had a huge level of contact with the child care committees but she qualified her reply in terms of the role they are providing in the general child care sector and the way they see it evolving over years. Regarding this particular pilot scheme, is the Minister satisfied that her Department had a high level of contact with the county child care committees? Will the Minister's Department engage fully with the county child care committees that are implementing these 500 places in the first pilot to ensure any teething problems with the second pilot are ironed out and there is full implementation of the scheme? Are there any time limits regarding the holiday weeks? How many holiday weeks will be allowed in a particular year?
I assure the Deputy about the detailed contact that has been taking place. I am aware that the Department staff who have been involved in working with the child care committees have visited all the child care committees and had national meetings with them on the range of issues that arise in their portfolios in local areas. Up to now, county child care committees have been doing their work at a local level in the county, but they were not being co-ordinated nationally.
In terms of the development of a more co-ordinated approach to child care nationally and locally, an important aspect of that is getting the child care committees to work to national priorities. I assure the Deputy that the ongoing development of this after-school child care provision will be a key part of the ongoing discussions with the local committees.
The Deputy asked about the subsidised after-school care provision. People will be entitled to a total of 52 weeks of subsidised after-school child care even if they have more than one child in child care each week. Provided the person's circumstances do not change, the subsidised after-school child care place will last the 52 weeks from the date they first avail of the service. If someone avails of child care for any part of a week, that is counted as a week.
Adoption Records Protection
Mick Wallace
Question:5. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she is satisfied that adoption records are adequately protected; her plans to improve their protection; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21822/13]
In consultation with the Adoption Authority and the Health Service Executive, HSE, my Department is examining legislative and administrative options in relation to accessing records which may exist. I intend strengthening the legislative provisions regarding maintenance and access to adoption records in the forthcoming adoption (information and tracing) Bill. An important aspect of the proposed legislation relates to responsibility for adoption records. The intention of the Bill is to provide that either the Adoption Authority, the HSE or an accredited body may hold adoption records, with the authority having overall charge of those records. It is intended that the Bill will provide for the Adoption Authority to be responsible for providing access to adoption records in accordance with the provisions of the Bill. The Bill will provide for the Adoption Authority to establish and maintain a national index of adoption records, the purpose of which is to help an applicant for adoption information to identify the location of his or her adoption records.
The HSE has commenced the takeover of files. In late 2011, the HSE adoption services took responsibility for the adoption files of the Sacred Heart Adoption Society in respect of homes in Bessborough, County Cork, St. Peter's, Castlepollard, County Westmeath, and Sean Ross Abbey, Roscrea, County Tipperary.
These files have since been transferred to the HSE in their entirety and are stored in specialised facilities in Glanmire, County Cork.
It is also intended that the Bill will provide for placing the national contact preference register on a statutory basis. The purpose of the register is to allow a person affected by adoption to enter his or her name on the register, with a view to receiving information about another person from whom he or she has been separated as a result of adoption and also to indicate a preference as to whether contact is being sought with that person.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
When the former Adoption Board launched the national adoption contact preference register in 2005, provision was made for persons, who were party to the illegal registration of a child, to declare an interest in the register for possible contact with another relevant party sometime in the future. Fundamental to the success of the national contact preference register is that any persons with information in this regard contact the information and tracing unit of the Adoption Authority. The Adoption Act 1952 provided a legal basis for adoption in Ireland and for the establishment of the Adoption Board, thereby bringing order to what had been the ad hoc arrangements which had previously existed in lieu of formal adoption procedures.
A national tracing service will be established under the provisions of the Bill, the operation of which will be subject to guidelines to be set out in regulations. It is intended that the tracing service is to be made available to an adopted person, a birth parent and a relative of either an adopted person or a birth parent, and that the Adoption Authority is to have overall responsibility for providing the tracing service. Work on the development of the adoption (information and tracing) Bill is also proceeding. This includes careful examination of the constitutional and legal issues involved in the disclosure of information relating to a person and the issues of privacy which arise where the consent of all the parties involved has not been obtained.
It is good to hear the Bill will include retrospective tracing rights. However, more than likely, there will be some information in the private domain that will need to be chased up. Most of us agree that the child's right to an identity must be of greater importance than the mother's right to privacy. The legislation must be introduced without further delay and I am unsure why it has been delayed. The Minister said last year it would be in place by Christmas. We need to bring Ireland in line with international best practice, which has a presumption of openness.
Giving 50,000 plus adopted people access to their birth certificates and early care records is essential in their quest for identity. I note that Susan Lohan of the Adoption Rights Alliance is insisting that the new legislation should take into account all files containing information on adopted people's origins, including, but not limited to, mother and baby home files, private agency files, HSE files, Department of Foreign Affairs files, GP and nursing home files. This is vital data and the State needs to seek information in an active way so it can centralise the data.
I was given a copy of a birth record of a woman who was illegally adopted in the 1950s. The mother's name on the birth record was not the name of the birth mother, but the adopted mother. This is like stealing someone's identity. The grandson of the midwife attending the birth found six birth registry books in an attic, containing the records of hundreds of births. He was decent and handed these records over. Clearly, there are probably data out there that should be collected. Will the Minister organise a proactive search for this sort of data, which supports people's quests for identity? There is information in the private domain the Adoption Authority needs to obtain.
Anybody who has access to or who knows about private information or adoption records held in private hands should make that known to the authorities. I am glad that in the case cited by the Deputy, that was done. I accept the Deputy's point regarding the need for the legislation to have a proactive demand that files held elsewhere other than with the statutory authorities, and perhaps mother and baby homes, be handed over. We could put a proactive obligation on people aware of such files to provide that information. I agree with the Deputy it would be important to gather the records from as many sources as possible. I will see what we can do in the legislation with regard to that and to ensuring there is a proactive approach to gathering adoption records.
The intention in the Bill is to give the Adoption Authority the responsibility of holding all of the records. I believe that will happen under the terms of the Bill. The Deputy made the point regarding the child's right to access information. I agree, but I should point out there are complex legal and constitutional issues in Ireland that are different from those in other countries which have taken this route. We have constitutional provisions that are very strong in regard to privacy and this is one of the issues I am trying to tease out to see whether we can reach a balance. This is one of the reasons there is some delay. I would like to have as strong legislation as possible in terms of the child's right to access information, to medical records and to know more about his or her identity, but that will have to be balanced. We are currently examining where that balance will be in the Bill and I am trying to ensure we strengthen as much as possible the child's rights to access that information. It is a complex issue constitutionally and the Attorney General is examining it.
I understand a judgment of 1998 upsets the balance between the rights of the child and the privacy of the mother. However, I understood the children's referendum would deal with that. Will the Minister clarify whether the children's referendum addressed that issue? Will the Minister tell us when the Bill is expected to be in place?
If one wanted to address that issue comprehensively, it would have to be done through a referendum on privacy issues. The children's referendum was about putting the best interest of the child at the heart of decisions, about hearing the views of the child and about ensuring a broader group of children could be adopted. It was to ensure that children who were in long-term fostering were eligible for adoption. However, this is a different constitutional issue. Once the issues relating to the referendum were finalised, the principles agreed would ensure that those constitutional criteria would apply across a range of cases.
There is clearly a separate constitutional issue in regard to privacy and the balance we have been discussing. I do not have a date for the completion of the Bill as I am awaiting legal clarification on the Bill currently. However, I assure the Deputy a great deal of work has been done on the issue the Deputy raised about the maintaining of records and ensuring they are preserved carefully and on ensuring the Adoption Authority will have the overall responsibility to ensure the safety of and access to records.