Vol. 830 No. 2
6. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs her observations on the establishment of the Child and Family Agency, now over one month in being; if the transition has been smooth; if there are particular concerns or issues requiring special address; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6643/14]
Following the launch of the new Child and Family Agency, have any issues arisen that may give rise to concern? Would the Minister like to report on the success of the launch a month after the new entity's establishment?
I thank Deputies Ó Caoláin, Troy and others for their support on the establishment of the new Child and Family Agency. I thank Deputy Ó Caoláin for affording us an opportunity today to reflect on the establishment of the agency on 1 January, as planned. I pay tribute to those involved in the very detailed work done leading up to the establishment. This is sometimes forgotten when there is a new initiative. The trade unions were particularly helpful and Ms Joan Carmichael chaired the HR process for nearly two years. I thank the staff of the HSE, including Mr. Tony O'Brien, and my ministerial colleagues, Deputies Reilly and Shatter. Considerable work was done by the Secretary General of my Department and many others. Mr. Gordon Jeyes and his entire management team were very involved in the background work that led to the establishment of the agency. This is now the time to give those concerned an opportunity to ensure the agency is well-established and that it gets an opportunity to bring its staff entirely with it in making the transition. Transitions can, of course, be challenging, especially when there are 4,000 staff and a budget of more than €600 million to manage. Many milestones have been reached.
The focus now has to be the three year performance framework for the agency, which will form the basis of its first corporate plan. I have already received the business plan from the agency, as I expected. I will be responding to it in the coming weeks in accordance with the provisions in the legislation. I have approximately a month in which to respond. I congratulate Mr. Gordon Jeyes and the team on putting the first business plan in place.
I take it from the Minister's response that there are no immediate matters of serious concern and that the transition has been made smoothly.
Are all the board positions filled? What is the position on sub-committees? How many will there be? Will the Minister ensure accommodation of representation for the Family Resource Centre National Forum in regard to sub-committee participation? I would have argued very strongly for its access to a board position but I noted the Minister's response to that point repeatedly. Perhaps she could address the matter of the sub-committees.
With regard to the launch of the new entity, one of the most critical recommendations in the 2012 report of the independent child death review group, chaired by Dr. Geoffrey Shannon and Ms Norah Gibbons and tasked with investigating the deaths of children in care, was that the child and adolescent mental health services be integrated with the child welfare service and protection work in the community. The meeting of this responsibility and the addressing of children's needs are continuing under the auspices of the Department of Health. Would the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs like to indicate whether it is intended to have the child and adolescent mental health services provided in an integral way under the aegis of the Child and Family Agency? If so, at what time might that be the case?
I can confirm that all members of the board are in place and that a number of board meetings have taken place. I am not in a position to advise the Deputy on sub-committees yet. I am simply not aware whether the board has yet taken a decision on the exact number of sub-committees. As soon as I have that information, I will let the House know. I imagine the board is still examining the work it must do in deciding on the best way forward.
It has already done a considerable amount of work as a board and I am sure that is a decision it will be considering.
I am not in a position to indicate whether the organisation to which the Deputy referred will have direct representation. Its interests will certainly be represented, however, and family support remains a key objective for the agency. The organisation in question plays a positive role in regard to family resource centres and I have no doubt that role will remain. I am sure the form of consultation with it will also continue as heretofore. The board includes people who represent the interests of family resource centres and support networks.
In regard to the Deputy's second question, this area requires further discussion. We have made the decision that certain groups of staff and organisations will be under the agency. We need to discuss the future of mental health services with a view to reaching agreements between child and adolescent mental health services and the agency in order to put in place the best possible arrangements. Mental health services are critical to the work of the agency. Discussions have commenced in this regard and I will be examining the issue further in the course of this year.
I am afraid the time has expired for this question. There is a limit of six minutes.
I did not know that.
I am only applying the rules.
I did not notice that I had exceeded the limit.
That is the purpose of the clock.
The clock may be wrong.
I assure the Deputy that the clock is not wrong. I will let him in on another question.
This was the one I wanted to ask.
I am sorry; I cannot do anything about it. I have to be fair to every Deputy.
7. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the position regarding the adoption (information and tracing) Bill; if she will provide a comprehensive account of the provisions of the forthcoming legislation; if she will confirm her welcome and support for the Philomena Project; the way she and her Department intends engaging with same in the lead up to the Bill's publication; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6645/14]
I ask the Minister to indicate when she expects the adoption (information and tracing) Bill to be published, her position in regard to the Philomena Project and whether ongoing consultation with that body will form part of the preparation of the Bill in advance of its publication.
I am conscious of the efforts being made by Philomena Lee to highlight the issues relating to information on and tracing of adoptions and illegal registrations. This is an extremely sensitive matter, especially for birth mothers who may still feel the emotional conflicts associated with adoptions many years ago. I have not yet had the opportunity to meet Philomena Lee. I would welcome a meeting with her, and this has been conveyed to her in a recent meeting with the Irish ambassador in Washington. I have also written to Ms Lee inviting her to meet me at a suitable time.
I am advised that the Adoption Authority has already seen a significant increase in the number of people who are calling it in regard to information and tracing. The Authority has stated that many of these callers have cited Ms Lee as the catalyst for their call. I am grateful to Philomena for the bravery and sensitivity she has shown. She is a remarkable woman who has struggled with great courage and grace on her own behalf and on behalf of all too many single young mothers who faced a cold and brutal response when what they needed was support and understanding. I hope she takes comfort from the success she has had in having her story heard and in encouraging birth mothers to come forward.
I urge birth mothers to enrol in the National Adoption Contact Register, which was established in 2005 to assist adopted people and their natural families to make contact with each other, exchange information or state their contact preferences. I believe the register is under-used and I appeal to those concerned, whether as the adoptee or the mother who gave up her baby for adoption, to make their names and contact details known to the Adoption Authority so that they are included on the register. This is potentially an important port of call for those affected.
I join the Minister in calling on birth mothers to register. It is also essential that the legislation is published so that adopted persons and parents who are searching for each other have the opportunity to access records. A large number of people have expressed frustration at their inability to progress their inquiries. The adoption (information and tracing) Bill will play an important role in this regard and I am anxious to know, if she can be specific, when she expects it to be published. If she is in a position to do so, I ask her to set out the outstanding issues that remain to be addressed in respect of the Bill. I welcome that she has indicated her willingness to meet Philomena Lee and I hope that an opportunity to meet arises in the near future.
I will work proactively with Ms Lee and the Philomena Project, and will give it every assistance I can in terms of making data and records available. I have made such information available to this House in response to a number of parliamentary questions in recent months.
We are still teasing out the complex constitutional issues that arise in regard to adoption tracing. I have previously stated that I want the legislation to go as far as possible within the constitutional limits. I am not in a position to indicate precisely when it will be ready because of the complexity of the work being done by my Department and the Attorney General. Once the heads of the Bill have been agreed by the Government, however, I will ask the Joint Committee on Health and Children to examine them. That will give a public opportunity to all interested groups, including the Adoption Rights Alliance and the Philomena Project, to make observations on the legislation. On the legal side, the examination by the committee will also provide an opportunity to tease out the aforementioned constitutional complexities.
I welcome that the heads of the Bill will be referred to the Joint Committee on Health and Children. That is a worthwhile exercise. I do not doubt that my committee colleagues would welcome the opportunity to examine the Bill.
How does the Minister intend to address the 1998 Supreme Court judgment which stated that adopted people have no absolute right to know the identity of their natural parents? It is my view that they certainly do have such a right. Any of us in that situation would want to know the identity of our natural birth parents. Is this a major difficulty in the preparation of the legislation?
Clearly the case to which the Deputy referred is central to the discussion, as are the European decisions on the right to identity. They vary. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is clear on the right to identity but the I. O'T. case and the European court judgments give a more nuanced response. I wish to state for the House the Supreme Court's direction on the criteria that the lower court should taken into account when deciding whether a person had a right to access information.
The court said a range of issues needed to be taken into account, including the circumstances surrounding the natural mother's loss of custody of the child; the current status and circumstances of the natural mother and the potential effect on her of disclosure of her identity; the natural mother's own wishes and attitudes regarding the disclosure and the reasons behind these wishes and the aforementioned attitude; the current age of the natural mother and the child, respectively; the attitude of the child, including the reasons he or she seeks disclosure of his or her natural mother's identity; the present circumstances of the child; and the opinion of the adoptive parents or other interested persons.
A huge weight was given to privacy in that judgment. That is central to the current discussions on the legislation.
8. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will expedite a resolution to the conflict between data protection legislation and preschool regulation compliance to enable students to undertake mandatory placements in child care services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6651/14]
15. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will amend the Child and Family Agency requirements under the Garda vetting standard of the child care preschool services regulations that relate to students to allow a letter confirming clearance from training organisations to be deemed compliant with regulations; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that the regulations as they stand are jeopardising training placements; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6656/14]
30. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will amend the Child and Family Agency requirements under the Garda vetting standard of the child care preschool services regulations relating to students to allow a letter confirming clearance from training organisations to meet compliance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6655/14]
The Minister will be aware of a conflict that has arisen recently between data protection legislation and new preschool regulations, which is putting mandatory training placements in jeopardy because Garda vetting clearance certificates cannot be transferred between service providers and training providers through which people carry out the mandatory training. Will she confirm whether she intends to take measures to bring about a speedy and satisfactory resolution to this issue?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 15 and 30 together.
I am aware that a problem exists in respect of the sharing of student vetting information by training colleges with a third party. It is my understanding that timing issues between a student finding a placement with a service provider and the time they need to be on placement may not allow for the service provider to obtain Garda vetting on behalf of the student. Where training colleges process Garda vetting for their students and subsequently secure placement of these students in child care settings, they are not permitted under current data protection regulations to release the vetting documents or copies to the child care service. The position of the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner is that the disclosure of such information to other parties, even with the consent of the vetting subject, is not appropriate and could potentially undermine the integrity of the vetting process. Service providers cannot accept students on placement unless the full Garda vetting documentation is available to them because of the requirements of the preschool regulations. This is to ensure clear responsibility for the vetting of those working with children in this area.
I am anxious that the issue raised by the Deputy be fully examined to find a workable solution can be devised. I agree with him that a workable solution has to be found. My Department has been in touch with the Data Protection Commissioner and I am arranging an urgent meeting to discuss this and a range of issues relating to the delivery of child care services. It is important that we reach a resolution on this because, clearly, it is impacting on placements and the training of child care workers
I am glad the Minister is aware of the problem and that she is in the process of bringing about a resolution. However, she has not outlined how that will be brought about. I tabled a similar question to the Minister for Justice and Equality regarding his role under data protection legislation to which he replied:
I understand that in the course of audits of childcare providers, the HSE has sought a certified copy of the Garda Vetting Disclosure to be provided to the relevant childcare provider. It is the view of the Data Protection Commissioner that this is not necessary. In September 2013 the Data Protection Commissioners wrote to the colleges in question and to the HSE, suggesting that a written confirmation that a college has vetted a person is sufficient confirmation that the Garda Vetting process has been complied with
Does the Minister concur with that view? Bearing in mind these people are undertaking mandatory training, would she be satisfied if an institute of further education went to the trouble of ensuring it fully complied with Garda vetting procedures, that a letter from the institute to the service provider would be sufficient to ensure the placement could proceed and people could finish their training? If so, will she put in place the necessary provisions to ensure this can happen?
It is crucial that the integrity of the vetting procedure be maintained. If there is any question of the Data Protection Commissioner feeling this will not be the case and there is not a separate vetting procedure, I will have to resolve that with him. If he is satisfied with that, it is a question of us further examining the preschool regulations to see if the resolution suggested by the Deputy is acceptable. We are currently examining that. On the face of it, if vetting has taken place recently, one would hope that would suffice but this issue has arisen in regard to vetting a number of times in other areas where even if somebody had been vetted by an organisation previously and they moved to work in another setting, the Garda had taken the approach that to preserve the integrity of the process, separate vetting was necessary. I realise the impact this is having on training and I will work to ensure as quick a resolution as possible.
I refer to how this is impacting in County Donegal. Currently, it is estimated that 400 students are affected across the county with Letterkenny Institute Technology's most recent placement period commencing at the end of January. Donegal Education and Training Board courses require the Garda vetting procedure to secure work placements and they are run in Donegal town, Stranorlar, Lettermacaward, Gortahork, Milford, Letterkenny and Moville. A total of 180 students are on the current programme placement. Approximately 200 students are on LYIT's early education social and care programmes and it is estimated that there are 60 additional early childhood programmes offered by private teaching organisations in the county.
This issue is also expected to impact on community employment workers on placements with children. Currently, DLCD has 51 placements and Inishowen Partnership has 21. Many of those who should have commenced their placements by now have had to go on placements that are not directly related to child care because of the ongoing Garda vetting issue. It is crucial that this be resolved quickly. Will the Minister elaborate on what has been done in this regard up to now? When does she expect a practical resolution to this to be finalised?
I thank the Deputy. Clearly, this is an urgent issue. If the Garda vetting clearance given to colleges is not deemed sufficient for the placements, the vetting unit has additional staff. Many Members have raised the issue of delays in securing Garda vetting clearance. The delays have been reduced considerably but I take the Deputy's point. My staff are in contact with the Data Protection Commissioner and they are trying to find a resolution to this because it is an urgent issue.
This is an example of bureaucracy gone mad. The Minister has said these people should seek a second clearance certificate from the vetting organisations in County Tipperary. I agree waiting times have reduced but people are still waiting weeks for these certificates. What is wrong with a training organisation, which has recently obtained a Garda clearance in respect of students, passing on a letter to the service provider with which they will do their training for a number of weeks that says they have been vetted by the Garda unit? There should be no problem, good, bad or indifferent with that.
The Minister said she has been working on this and she is aware of the problems this is causing many service providers and training institutes but she seemed surprised by the reply I quoted from the Minister for Justice and Equality. Will there be a speedy and satisfactory resolution to this issue? My colleague has clearly outlined the ramifications for people in County Donegal. That is being repeated the length and breadth of the country.
It is not acceptable to suggest people have to go through Garda vetting a second time because there are still significant delays of a number of weeks.
Will the Minister outline her view on current delays at the Garda vetting office? I am aware that these stood at 15 to 16 weeks a couple of months ago. Deputy Troy put forward a very sensible solution. Many students find themselves on a sticky wicket at present and cannot proceed with placements relating to their courses as a result of the delays in question. Unless a real and immediate solution is arrived at, they will continue to be unable to take up their placements as planned. Deputy Troy has put forward a very good solution and I ask the Minister to explore it. Will she indicate what is the length of current delays at the Garda vetting office? Such delays are unacceptable and they are causing difficulties not just for these people, but also for many other organisations.
I understand that a significant number of staff have been appointed to the Garda vetting bureau. As the Deputies are aware, delays in vetting were previously of the order of 14 or 15 weeks. The most recent information I received indicates that these have been reduced to five or six weeks, which is a substantial change.
It is all very well for Deputy Troy to refer to the sharing of information. However, this has been central to the integrity of the Garda vetting process. Many organisations argued in the past that there should simply be a "passport" in respect of vetting and that this could be carried between different organisations. There has been concern that this would undermine the integrity of the vetting legislation and give rise to questions in respect of safety. The safety of children and ensuring that people are vetted are central to that legislation. Particularly organisations must ensure that their staff are properly vetted.
I take the point about placements for college students. I will ensure that a resolution is arrived at as speedily as possible. I must seek to discover whether the same rules on vetting apply as have applied in the past on the sharing of information between organisations. It has been clearly stated that this cannot happen. I will be obliged to discover, therefore, whether the vetting in respect of a college student who is due to take up a placement will suffice for that placement. I understand the point being made and I want a resolution to be found as quickly as possible.
Will the Minister communicate further with us on the matter?
I will.
9. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the extent to which she remains satisfied regarding safety, well-being and welfare of children in State institutions or otherwise under State care; the extent to which monitoring and reporting services remains available; the degree to which reports are followed up; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6574/14]
197. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the extent to which she is satisfied regarding the safety and well-being of children in the care of the State, in State institutions or otherwise; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7181/14]
These questions relate to the need for the proper structures to be in place to ensure that children will receive adequate protection. Such structures are necessary, particularly in light of past events. Will the Minister indicate the provisions that are in place to ensure that children who report incidents can have their cases heard at an early date?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 197 together.
Under the Child Care Act 1991 and the Child and Family Agency Act 2013, the newly established Child and Family Agency has a statutory duty to promote the welfare of children who are not receiving adequate care and protection. The placement of children in care is governed by regulations. These provide for the welfare of children and for care practices, care records, accommodation and safety precautions to be overseen. The regulations also provide that a social worker oversees the implementation of a care plan, visits the child to whom it relates and sees him or her in private and reads the records relating to the child in the centre. That is the practice which obtains. Depending on their needs, children may often be placed in foster care. We are very lucky that the vast majority - over 90% - of children in care are either with relatives or general foster carers. A minority of children in care are the subject of residential care, high support care, special care or other placement types.
It is important to note that all children's services are inspected against regulation and national standards. The Health Information Quality Authority, HIQA, has played a particularly important role in this regard. The Deputy will be aware of the range of reports we received from HIQA during the past year on residential settings. The Child and Family Agency is obliged to respond to each of those reports, indicate the action it is taking and address the issues which have been identified. Last year, I asked HIQA to take responsibility not just for residential settings, but to examine the position with regard to child protection teams. We have already received a number of reports from it on the services being provided by those teams.
This is a work in progress and there are variations in standards. We want to move towards national consistency in terms of adherence to absolute best practice. There are some very bad legacy issues in respect of these services and change will not happen overnight. However, in the context of the reports it compiled in recent months, HIQA has returned to matters it examined previously and discovered that huge improvements have been made. An example in this regard is the special care unit at Ballydowd, of which there had been criticism. The most recent report on the unit was extremely positive. The same is true of Waterford. HIQA returned to it, examined the services on offer and provided a much more positive report.
I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply. To what extent has the definition of the word "care" been examined? For example, does a duty of care constitute someone being in the care of the State? I refer here to people in schools, other State institutions and public or private recreational facilities. To what extent does the concept of duty of care apply in this regard and are those in such schools, institutions or facilities deemed to be in care?
Yes. The definition is very broad and once a child is in care of the State, it is effectively acting in loco parentis. Essentially, what is involved here is promoting the safety, well-being and welfare of children. That is very clearly spelled out in the legislation and it guides the work being done in respect of children in care. It is important that the Deputy has highlighted this matter. We have a very special responsibility to the 6,000 plus children in the care of the State. One of the initiatives I want to take relates to the adoption of a cross-departmental view of children who are in care. In that context, I will ask the Departments of Health and the Environment, Community and Local Government, which deals with housing, to be aware of the needs of these children not just while they are in care, but when they leave it and are in aftercare. In the coming weeks I will be bringing to Government legislation to provide for a statutory right to assessment for aftercare in respect of children who have been in care.
