Clare Daly
Question:6. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the role of the mother and baby homes commission of investigation in relation to its powers to order exhumations and excavations of graves. [14403/15]
Other Questions
Mother and Baby Homes Inquiries
My question relates to the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes. Earlier this year the Minister stated the commission would have the power to order exhumations where appropriate, but its terms of reference contain nothing specific in this regard. Will it be ordering exhumations and, if not, why not? Do the families concerned not deserve the opportunity to know with certainty whether their relatives are buried in these graves?
The Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 provides an effective, prompt and transparent mechanism to investigate complex and sensitive matters, while also respecting fair procedures and natural justice. The Act gives the commission robust powers to conduct investigations within its terms of reference in the manner it considers appropriate, while adhering to the rules and procedures contained within the legislation.
While the terms of reference attached to the Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and certain related Matters) Order 2015 provide for a comprehensive investigative framework, the commission is independent in the performance of its investigations and deciding how best to approach its work. The reports on mass graves in Tuam rightly gave rise to significant public concern. The commission's terms of reference provide for an examination of mortality among mothers and children residing in mother and baby homes and certain other institutions in the period from 1922 to 1998. The terms of reference also require the commission to investigate post mortem practices and procedures in respect of the mothers and children who died while resident in these institutions, including the reporting of deaths and burial arrangements. Although the legislation does not confer specific powers to order exhumations, it is ultimately a matter for the commission to consider whether it requires exhumations or excavations of graves. It would be required to comply with the regulations and procedures in place for the conduct of exhumations.
It would be wrong to dictate to the commission how it should carry out its work. If it considers it necessary to take a certain course of action, it has the power to do so. I have met various groups, some of which want remains to be respected by leaving them undisturbed, while others want exhumations to take place. I have to leave it to the wisdom of the commission.
There is a certain logic to the Minister's reply.
I raise this question on behalf of a resident whose two brothers were in Tuam, who is trying to get as much information as possible about what happened to them as she does not know for sure whether they are buried there. She is one of those who wants the graves exhumed and wants DNA testing. She wants to bury her brothers if they are there. I appreciate that people have different views on this issue and that the commission is being given the power to make its own decisions. However, it must make those decisions based on the terms of reference laid down.
In the context of the investigation and the information being sought by the commission and in terms of potential criminal investigations afterwards, section 19 of the Commissions of Investigation Act would seem to suggest that any information gathered as part of the commission's investigations could not be used in criminal proceedings. However, the Minister is on record as saying the commission could pass on evidence it had. There seems to be a contradiction between the two. Will the Minister clarify that? Obviously, there is independence within the bounds of the commission, but that independence is rooted in the inquiry itself.
I absolutely respect the feelings of the individual the Deputy referred to regarding her two brothers. The terms of reference laid down for the commission of investigation allow it to order exhumations if that is what it decides is appropriate in certain instances. This is right and proper, but I do not wish to prejudge what the commission may find. I understand, notwithstanding section 19, that the commission's information will be available for people to act upon if criminal proceedings arise from it. If there is further information on that, I will furnish it to the Deputy.
Everyone welcomes the independence of the commission. I was impressed by the manner in which the Minister set it up and am glad it places an emphasis on the historical context of what went on at that time. However, within that we must be very careful that this is not used as an excuse. No matter what the historical context, I cannot believe neglecting and abusing children and leaving their emaciated bodies in shoe boxes or unmarked graves was ever deemed acceptable by anybody. Therefore, the relatives and the victims have a right to have their history and their remains treated respectfully. I am glad the Minister is stating clearly that the commission can decide on that.
However, I am still a little unclear in regard to criminal investigations, because the section that set up the investigation seems to suggest information gathered cannot be used in a criminal proceeding. It would be a little ridiculous if this means there is to be duplication afterwards, because most of the victims want to see criminal prosecutions at the end of this investigation as part of the bigger picture.
The commission has enormous powers as is only proper and right. I welcome the Deputy's support for the social history element of the investigation because context is important. It is equally important that people have an opportunity to tell their story. Many of the stories I have heard have been particularly harrowing. It is important also they have the right to tell their story in public or in private and in confidence. This right will be respected by the commission.
The commission will proceed in tandem on both lines of work, the history being very important in this regard. This is a social history that will be like no other. This will be the first time a history has been collected with the power of a commission to compel witnesses and documents supporting it. Therefore, the investigation will not be depending upon the good offices or goodwill of people, but will have the power of the law and the commission behind it.
Child Protection
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:7. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his views on the recent report by the Health Information and Quality Authority into services provided by Tusla - Child and Family Agency - in County Cork, which saw 234 high risk children still waiting to be allocated a social worker; his plans to address this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14401/15]
In the aftermath of the Ryan report and the appalling history of this State in terms of the history of child abuse and the failure to protect children, Tusla was set up with a great stated commitment to child protection. The HIQA report on just one administrative area details a chronic failure to adequately protect children in need of support and particularly 234 high priority cases who have not even been allocated a social worker and another 500 medium priority cases who have not been allocated a social worker. I ask the Minister to provide the figures but if this is replicated at national level that represents a chronic failure on the part of Tusla to provide the child protection services that the children need.
We touched on this matter when dealing with Deputy McLellan's question. I mean no disrespect to Deputy Boyd Barrett but Deputy McLellan asked whether I believed that child care services were worse under Tusla than they had been under the HSE.
I heard the answer.
I state categorically that they are far improved and continue to improve.
The inspection of the Cork child protection services was carried out by HIQA in October 2014. Overall, the report noted the good quality of the service provided to children and families when they had an allocated social worker. Two areas of significant risk were found and were addressed immediately. An action plan to address the remaining findings has been put in place.
Where a child does not have an allocated social worker assigned to his or her case there is a system of oversight by social workers to ensure that any change in the child's circumstances is addressed. It is important to note that high priority should not simply be equated with risk. For instance, children in care for less than six months who do not have an allocated social worker but who are in stable placements are included in this category. Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, has informed HIQA that all children identified during the inspection as having complex and acute needs were assigned a social worker at that time.
I am happy to say that there has been downward trend in the numbers waiting to be allocated a social worker. At a national level Tusla reports show an almost 50% reduction in high priority cases awaiting allocation for less than three months in 2014. This has been achieved at the current level of resources and staffing. To improve this further, the agency is carrying out a review of cases waiting for the allocation of a social worker to determine the level of resources required. I am aware that Tusla is pressing to fill its social work vacancies which will improve the effectiveness of the services being provided. Tusla has informed me that at the end of February 2015, there were 159.75 whole time equivalent social workers and 15 agency social workers, giving a total of 174.75 social workers in the Cork area. This represents approximately 50% of all social workers in the south region. It is one of my key priorities to ensure their workforce development plan addresses both current and future service needs for our most vulnerable children.
The somewhat rosy picture painted by the Minister of an improving situation does not reflect the language in the report, which stated that the service was not sufficiently resourced to deliver a child centred, safe and effective service that met the needs of children and families. It further stated that there were long waiting lists at point of receipt of referral and following the completion of the initial assessment. It found that staffing numbers were not sufficient to cope with the level of demand for the service and that some offices were in poor condition and not a suitable place for children and families to meet their social worker.
This is a damning statement. I refer to the two categories where the report identified significant risk. The Minister said earlier that children who were high priority or at significant risk would be dealt with immediately. However, the report identified significant risk with regard to the specific circumstances and needs of children subjected to organisational and-or institutional abuse and how children who are deemed to be especially vulnerable are identified and responded to. In that category the report finds a significant risk identified. That is in one administrative area and it is damning. Can the Minister tell the House what are the similar figures and breakdown for the country as a whole? If it is as bad as Cork it is not a rosy picture.
I supplied those figures in reply to the earlier question. High priority does not constitute immediate risk.
I made that clear in response to the previous question also. Any child who is in immediate danger or at immediate risk is seen as an emergency and is seen immediately. That is the reality. As I read out in the response, the category of "high priority" also includes children who are in care in a stable placement but who have not yet been allocated a social worker. That is not an ideal situation and I do not by any means wish to imply that it is, but I wish to provide clarity to those who might be worried that there are children in this country who are in immediate danger, who have not been seen by a social worker because that is simply not the case. Anytime a child becomes a cause of immediate concern the problem is dealt with immediately as an emergency.
I simply point out to the Minister that in the category of the HIQA report where significant risk is identified, it is precisely in the area of children who are particularly vulnerable and who have been subjected to organisational and-or institutional abuse. That is what the report says. That is pretty worrying. If those figures are replicated in the other 16 administrative areas of the country, that indicates an adequate service is not being provided to thousands of children at significant risk.
I wonder how all this relates to the crisis in child mental health services for which the Children's Alliance gave the Government an E grade - a fail grade - in its recent report, due to lack of beds, resources and staff, which seem to be evident in both of those areas. When I tabled questions on child mental health services to the Department they were transferred to the Department of Health. I have tried to raise the matter as a Topical Issue debate. I submitted the matter approximately 25 times in recent months. I believe the relevant Departments do not want to talk about the issue. There may well be a connection between the allocation of a social worker and child mental health services. If children initially identified as needing support do not have a social worker allocated, how many of them end up with mental health problems and then face the inadequate crisis ridden situation in the child mental health services? One cannot get answers about the area.
I reiterate what I said in response to the earlier question from Deputy McLellan, that all children who are known to be at immediate and urgent risk are seen immediately and have a social worker assigned to them by Tusla, the Child and Family Agency. Comments about the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, report for the Cork area may have given the impression that these most vulnerable children known to Tusla were not being cared for, but that is not the case. The children were described by some as having been abandoned, beaten or sexually abused. That is not the case. The point cannot be repeated often enough. That is not to say there is no need for huge improvements in the area, and more investment, but as I said previously to Deputy Healy, we wish to ensure that the money we spend now and in the future will result in the best outcome for children. That is the reason an interdepartmental group has been set up to examine child care and why Tusla is doing further work on those who do not have an allocated social worker to ensure that the required resources can be identified and that we can apply for them.
Child Protection Services Provision
Mick Wallace
Question:8. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the number of children deemed at risk who have not been allocated a social worker, particularly in view of the recent Health Information and Quality Authority report on child welfare services in County Cork, which highlighted long waiting times for the allocation of social workers for vulnerable children, resulting in these children remaining at risk for prolonged periods of time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14398/15]
I heard the Minister's responses to Deputies Troy, McLellan and Boyd Barrett. He said there has been a downward trend in the number of high priority cases awaiting a social worker. If that is true, it is certainly to be welcomed. I wish to ask the Minister about medium and low-priority cases. According to the recent HIQA report there were more than 760 non-priority cases in Cork alone. One would almost be afraid to ask about the national figure. What measures are being taken to deal with what are viewed as non-priority cases?
My Department works closely with Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, to ensure that all children identified as needing a social worker service receive one.
Tusla figures indicate there were 27,710 open cases at the end of January 2015.
These provisional figures show that 7,787 of these were waiting to be allocated a social worker. Around 30% of these were deemed to be high priority. Children in the high priority category include those needing further assessment of their situation, children who have recently come into care or some whose placement is at risk of breaking down. All cases awaiting allocation are monitored and reviewed regularly by the duty social work teams. Tusla is also undertaking a national review of open cases to determine how best to address service demands.
While this offers some assurance, work is continuing to ensure that all children who need an allocated social worker have one. Tusla has reported that the number of children waiting for a social worker decreased over 2014. Nationally, high priority cases waiting less than three months to be allocated a social worker almost halved over the course of the year, and in Cork the reduction in all high priority cases awaiting allocation was 66%. This reduction suggests that quality assurance and national standards are helping to deliver service improvements.
Tusla is also working to improve staffing complements and has introduced schemes for maternity cover and support for new entrants. We have previously discussed the turnover of social workers during Question Time in the House. Thankfully in this country the turnover of social workers is much lower than in many other Western countries. That is a credit to our social workers. The nature of the work is extremely demanding and challenging and Tusla's work to improve the schemes to support new entrants is very important.
Reducing the number of children waiting to be allocated a social worker is one of the core objectives for Tusla in meeting the current and future needs of our most vulnerable children.
I do not presume for a second that this is an easy area to deal with. In his reply the Minister referred to the high priority cases. While they are of major concern, I asked about those of a medium or lower priority. How many of them are there?
There is little doubt that there are significant challenges in this area and there is not quite enough allocation. Deputy Boyd Barrett linked this area with mental health. In a place like Wexford, where there is no residential institution for people with mental health challenges, the lack of help in this area is glaring. People in Wexford are told to go either to Newcastle or Waterford although the centres there have not improved, a fact the Minister would be familiar with from having been in the Department of Health.
Does the Minister agree that if social workers do not deal with problems at an early stage that will move the burden to the mental health services? They need to deal not only with the high priority cases but also the low and medium priority ones. This must be a challenge for the Government. It needs to deal with the problem at source. I know there is not a bottomless pot of money to deal with these cases but the Government is sowing financial and social problems for the future by not dealing with them at an early stage.
I could not agree more with the Deputy. The issues need to be dealt with before referral to social workers. That is the point of the Child and Family Agency and of all the non-governmental organisations, NGOs, the Department interacts with. On Monday we launched an excellent programme Tusla is introducing around far earlier intervention. We are moving away from crisis intervention and late intervention to early intervention and prevention. Many of the issues that arise can be prevented from ever escalating if parents get support from the Child and Family Agency and the other agencies that abound to help them prevent a situation escalating to the sort of problem that does require referral to social workers.
The Deputy asked me a specific question about the lower priority cases. I have the figures for Cork: in the 12 months prior to the inspection the service received 4,926 referrals.
Figures supplied to HIQA indicated that there were 4,071 open cases in the area. Of these 1,167 were unallocated and 2,904 were allocated a social worker.
The Minister would probably agree that the need is still a lot greater than what the facility can provide due to a lack of resources. The Minister mentioned that the turnover in Ireland was impressive by comparison with European standards. I am not familiar with what they are at European level. I noted, however, that in January the HSE data showed that between 2010 and 2013, 326 social workers left their positions, which is a rate of one per week. Of these, 208 resigned. HSE data show that social workers are almost twice as likely to resign their position compared to managerial or administration staff in the HSE. Perhaps we should pay social workers more than we pay those in administration, given that they do not seem to be leaving administration jobs. We probably have too many of them in Ireland, yet we do not have enough front-line staff who are paid well enough. Would the Minister agree with that?
There has been quite a reduction in the number of administrators right across the HSE in what was the predecessor of the Child and Family Agency. It is a considerable reduction because that issue was exercising many people on that side of the House before this Government took office.
The Deputy asked about numbers. Of the cases awaiting social workers, 234 were assessed as high priority, 790 medium priority and 143 low priority status. The area had 93 children on the child protection notification system at the time of the inspection, all of whom had an allocated social worker.
To revert to the Deputy's earlier point, we certainly want to get into the area of prevention and early intervention. We also want to ensure that social workers are doing the work that they alone can do, and that their time is not being taken up by using outmoded IT or having no IT, and filing reports that clerical staff could be doing. When we talk about administrators, let us always bear in mind that we get much better bang for our buck if we have clerical staff supporting the professionals, especially social workers.
Child and Family Agency Services
Seán Kyne
Question:9. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the number of children's services committees; the local authority areas which have such a committee; if it is envisaged that all counties would have a committee; and if he will report on the way the committees interact with the local community development committees. [14468/15]
My question concerns the number of children's services committees, the local authority areas which have such committees, and what engagement they have with the local community development committees.
I thank the Deputy for his question. Children and young people’s services committees or CYPSCs - God knows, there are a huge amount of acronyms in my Department - are being put in place to develop and implement a local planning model for inter-agency working to improve outcomes for children and young people. The age remit of the committees has been extended to include 18 to 24 year olds. The earlier children's services committees, or CSCs, applied from 0-18 years only. The CYPSCs will cover 0-24 years and are aimed at aligning with Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures to ensure a more connected and co-ordinated response to the needs and aspirations of children and young people.
At present, there are 22 CYPSCs established in Ireland across 22 counties and 25 local authority areas. Three CYPSCs are yet to be established in Clare, Laois-Offaly and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. The CYPSC boundaries generally match those of the local authority, but in some areas a CYPSC covers two local authority areas or counties. By the end of 2015, when all children and young people’s services committees are in place, there will be full coverage across the State.
Local authority engagement with the committees has always been strong with local authority managers and directors chairing or co-chairing committees in the past. This engagement with local authority structures will continue to be strengthened as the programme achieves full roll-out.
Staff within my Department are currently engaging with counterparts in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on the form and structure of interaction between the children and young people’s services committee and the local community development committee in any given area. There are clear opportunities for closely working together as both committees work towards collaborative and coherent cross-sectoral and inter-agency responses to locally identified needs.
I thank the Minister for the reply. I appreciate that the original children's services committees were to bring together a diverse group of agencies in the local counties to engage in service planning for children. Regarding the local community development committees, is the Minister confident that they have a strong interaction with the children's services committees or with the new children's and young people's services committees? What links are there between the child care committees and Tusla? Do they have any links with the local community development committees? Is there full engagement within all these groups or is there a lack of engagement?
It would vary around the country but of the ones I have met there is very strong coherence, connectivity and interaction between the various committees. They have the same interests at heart.
I was at the opening of an all-weather pitch in Balbriggan today where I could see all that coherence coming together, with Fingal County Council management, the councillors themselves, the local GAA club, the local soccer club, the president of the GAA and the vice-chair of the FAI and many other community people present to support this initiative, which is basically about sport but is helping children be active, physically exercised and well. There are also the night leagues, which the Garda run in conjunction with the youth service in my Department. They are aimed at keeping youngsters out of trouble. The league is run from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. on a Friday night because that is the night when they are most likely to become involved in criminal activity and where they have been in operation they have been very successful. The results show that there has been a 20% reduction in minor crimes. That is another example of co-operating right across the various committees and the community.
Foster Care
Sandra McLellan
Question:10. Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the provision this Government made for survivors of child abuse, who lived under State-paid foster care during the period 1953 to 1967, which abuse was reported by social workers and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children to the Government of the day; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14465/15]
I wish to ask the Minister what provision this Government has made for survivors of child abuse who lived under State-paid foster care during the period 1953 to 1967, which was reported by social workers and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, NSPCC, to the Government of the day.
The report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse - the Ryan report - was published on 20 May, 2009 and was one of a range of measures which were put in place following the formal apology by the State to the victims of abuse. The Residential Institutions Redress Board was also established in order to make payments to persons who, as children, were abused while residents in industrial schools, reformatories and other institutions subject to State regulation or inspection.
While the inclusion of children abused in foster care was raised during the passage of the legislation setting up the redress board, foster care settings were not included within the scope of the scheme. Following the publication of the Ryan report in 2009, there were a range of requests for the redress scheme to be extended, including requests to include foster care settings. Having considered these requests, the previous Government announced its decision not to revise those arrangements in April 2010.
The Deputy will be aware that the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters has been established by the Government and will thoroughly examine the experiences of the many mothers and children who were resident in a mother and baby home over the period 1922 to 1998. Linked to this examination, the commission will consider the practices and procedures relating to the placement of children outside of mother and baby homes.
The Government has no plans currently to carry out any further systemic historical reviews at this time. If an allegation of historical abuse is made, the Child and Family Agency, under its statutory responsibility under section 3 of the Child Care Act, 1991, is required to investigate such allegations. This would include establishing whether the alleged perpetrator presents a current risk to children. If the allegation is made by a child, the agency would also be required to take the steps it considers necessary to protect the child in question. An Garda Síochána also has a role regarding historical abuse in the context of investigating any criminal aspects involved. It is of course always open to any individual to have recourse to the courts in respect of any allegation of a crime, including historical abuse.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The Deputy will be aware that survivors of child abuse can access the services of the national counselling service which is a professional, confidential counselling and psychotherapy service available free of charge in all regions of the country.
The Government cannot ignore the fact that there is a large number of victims of child abuse who suffered terribly while in State-paid and -sponsored foster care in the past. There are many cases we know of where children faced horrific abuse while in foster care with little or no monitoring of their welfare. In one specific case, an individual suffered 14 years of abuse between 1953 and 1967. Physical, mental and sexual abuse while in foster care is evidenced by reports from social workers and the NSPCC. These reports were made to the Government of the day and were ignored. My office has been approached with specific cases that are devastating.
These victims have approached both this and the previous Government for support. The previous Fianna Fáil-led Government did nothing to address the issue. The current Government now appears to be equally reluctant to look into it or give any type of support to these victims. These children in foster care were failed by the State for years with no protection from abuse. What will the Minister do to afford these victims of abuse redress or justice? As convenor of the mother and baby homes commission, can the Minister give a commitment to investigate these cases of abuse under State care? If so, when will he look into it? These victims have been failed for decades and have been fighting for their voices to be heard. It is the least they deserve.
There have been a number of positive developments regarding foster care that have taken place in recent times. The primary legislation governing child care policy is the Child Care Act, 1991, and the Child and Family Agency Act, 2013. The report of the working group on foster care published in 2001 addresses meeting the needs of children in foster care, meeting the needs of children with additional needs in foster care, helping foster carers meet the children's needs, placement of children with relative foster carers, providing safe care for children in foster care and future organisation and management of the foster care service.
I am aware that there have been many terrible stories of people in foster care in the past.
Terrible.
The focus to date has been on ensuring there is no repeat of that and that the children in foster care today are safe from any such abuse.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.