Robert Troy
Question:1. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his Department's plans to ensure that the area based childhood programme remains fully resourced and funded for the upcoming number of years. [27466/15]
Priority Questions
Area Based Childhood Programme
As the Minister is aware, the current area based childhood, ABC, programme is jointly funded through his Department and Atlantic Philanthropies. The funding provided by Atlantic Philanthropies is due to expire later this year and I would welcome a statement from the Minister today in regard to how he plans to ensure this critical early intervention programme is maintained and strengthened in the years ahead.
I thank the Deputy for his question.
The area based childhood, ABC, programme is an innovative prevention and early intervention initiative. It consists of committed funding for an area based approach to improve outcomes for children and thereby reduce child poverty. The programme builds on and continues the work of the Prevention and Early Intervention Programme 2007-2013, which was co-funded by my Department and Atlantic Philanthropies.
The ABC programme involves joint investment from my Department and Atlantic Philanthropies of €29.7 million in evidence-informed interventions to improve the long-term outcomes for children and families living in disadvantaged areas. It aims to break the cycle of child poverty within areas where it is most deeply entrenched and where children are most disadvantaged through integrated and effective services and interventions in the areas of child development, child well-being, parenting and educational disadvantage.
The ABC programme is time bound and the co-funding arrangement between the Government and Atlantic Philanthropies is in place until 2017. A key purpose of the ABC programme is to identify the learning in, and across, the ABC sites and to transfer this learning into existing and established services. Adopting such a systems focus, rather than merely a site or geographic specific focus, is the intention so that we can ensure a greater reach and sustained impact in services across the country. What I want to ensure is that, rather than creating parallel provision, the learning from this programme informs the ongoing reform of established services and supports for children and young people. Mainstreaming the learning in this way will bring improvements, not only in specific areas, but across the wider system, thereby addressing all areas of disadvantage. A task group has been established to explore how best to mainstream the learning where programmes and activities have proven more effective than existing provision.
We visited Oberstown recently and when we look at how much it costs to keep a child in detention, over €300,000 per year, or at the €150,000 per year it costs to keep a child in residential care, it is clear that not only is investment in prevention and early intervention in the best interest of the child, but it is in the best interest of the taxpayer.
We are all acutely aware of, and agreed on, the importance of early intervention in terms of how it shapes a child's life and development. However, people are concerned about the Minister's and the Government's commitment towards maintaining critical investment in this area into the future. This is the reason the group Hands Up for Children has formed. Its aim is to ensure there is a universal response on early intervention. In some instances, there is a need for additional resources and targeted initiatives. The ABC programme has proved very effective and I would like a clear commitment that it will be continued in the future.
As the Deputy has pointed out, prevention is much better than cure, and I have always been a strong proponent of that. Evidence based interventions are critical and because of constraints on our budget, we want to ensure the money we spend delivers the results we seek. What we are looking for here are better outcomes for children and to address the issue of those who face disadvantage, particularly educationally.
The ABC programme - the second of its type following the programmes implementation platform, PIP - is currently being evaluated under the guidance of an expert advisory group. The evaluation adopts a shared measurement framework across all ABC programme sites. The evaluation will consider the implementation and cost of programmes and, crucially, how the outcomes for children and families in area based childhood areas have changed during the course of the programme. This evaluation will be crucial for indicating the impact of the ABC programme, along with the work of the task group. It will be a key factor in informing considerations regarding the mainstreaming of the learning from the programme.
The key point is that these programmes are used to identify improved ways of delivering a service and getting better outcomes and then mainstreaming the learning so that the improvement is not just in the specific areas where the programme has been tried out, but can be applied across the wider system, thereby addressing all areas.
I could not agree more that it is not simply about the ABC programme, but about a much broader approach to the issues facing so many children. The ABC programme provides a range of services, addressing child development, child well-being, parenting, educational disadvantage and more. Therefore, it is important it is rolled out on a wider scale. However, this will require greater resources.
The current funding is time limited, because Atlantic Philanthropies is about to pull out. The Minister has said an evaluation is in progress. When will that evaluation be completed and when complete will it form part of the interdepartmental group's current study on the accessibility and affordability of child care? Will it feed into that? What are the Minister's plans in terms of ensuring prevention and early intervention measures are rolled out nationally in the future? The Minister is correct that it is about getting value for money. As I said earlier, when we consider that it costs between €300,000 and €350,000 to keep one child in detention facilities, the money spent on prevention and early intervention is money better spent.
I agree with the Deputy regarding prevention, not just in terms of value for money in the context of the money saved, but in terms of offering something invaluable, namely, a better outcome for a child, a fuller life, a better educational achievement and a better standard of living for the child and his or her family.
The evaluation is critical because it will form part of how this programme is mainstreamed. It will also inform what new programmes should be put in place to continue the process of evaluating, learning and reforming. This is critical.
The Deputy has rightly touched on the need for strong, evidence-based policy so that this can be put to the Departments of Public Expenditure and Reform and Finance during the Estimates process, when more funding is sought for programmes that we can show will yield the dividend we seek.
Child Care Services Regulation
Sandra McLellan
Question:2. Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his plans to implement a system of registration, inspection and support for childminders in order that they do not have to work in complete isolation, as is the case currently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27551/15]
I wish to ask the Minister what are his plans to implement a system of registration, inspection and support for childminders in the State so that they do not have to work in complete isolation, as is the current situation.
I thank the Deputy for her question. Childminders play a very important role in the care and protection of children. At present, childminders who mind four or more unrelated preschool children must notify Tusla and are inspected by the agency. The statutory notification process is set out in the 2006 child care regulations. As of April 2015, just 154 childminders had been notified to the Child and Family Agency. I am preparing revised child care regulations which, when commenced, will replace this notification system with a new registration system. This will cover childminders with four or more unrelated preschool children.
Childminders who mind three children or fewer are not currently required to notify or register with Tusla. However, they are encouraged to register their service voluntarily with their local city or county child care committee, CCC. According to Pobal, the number of childminders who are not subject to the regulations but who voluntarily notified their service to the CCCs in 2014 was 749.
A range of supports are currently in place for childminders. For example, my Department provides annual funding of €340,000 to Childminding Ireland. It also funds childminding development grants, amounting to €250,000 in total, which are distributed annually by the county child care committees, CCCs. In addition, childminders taking care of three or fewer children under the age of 18 may be entitled to avail of the child care services relief from the Revenue Commissioners, provided their annual childminding income comes to no more than €15,000.
It is likely that the interdepartmental group on future investment in early years and after-school care and education, which I established in February this year, will consider further supports for childminders as part of its work. This interdepartmental group, which is tasked with setting out a range of options for current and future investment, will consider options to enhance affordability, increase the accessibility of provision and build the quality of provision of early years and school-age care and education. The group is expected to submit a series of recommendations shortly.
I thank the Minister for his reply. It is estimated that approximately 50,000 young children are being cared for by paid non-relative childminders. Of the estimated 19,000 childminders, less than 1% are registered with the HSE or Tusla. We need to be moving towards a system of registration, inspection and support so that childminders are supported in their work. Currently, the voluntary notification system asks that childminders who mind three children or fewer are not required to notify the HSE and be inspected but may notify their local city or country child care committee or childminder adviser of their service. This is a voluntary notification process as set out in the 2008 national guidelines for childminders. Voluntary notification states that childminders benefit by gaining access to a range of services and supports through their local city or county child care committee and childminder advisers, including information networking and training, as outlined by the Minister.
Does the Minister believe that voluntary registration by childminders is a realistic and reasonable requirement, in light of the cutbacks in support for childminders? Does he agree that this voluntary system creates a two-tier system of regulation?
As I said in my reply, it is accurate to say that childminders who are looking after three or fewer unrelated children do not have to register, but they are encouraged to do so voluntarily. We will need to take an incremental approach. Childminding is governed by the Child Care Act 1991 and the Child Care (Pre-School Services) (No. 2) Regulations 2006. The national guidelines for childminders were published to assist childminders by providing guidance for good practice in the area. Considerable sums have been made available to support childminders. There is a also a grant for childminding development. This grant provided funding of €1,000 to childminders to assist them with the purchase of materials to help them improve the quality of services available to children in their care. The national childminder initiative provides support for childminders and people interested in becoming childminders and it is implemented locally by the city and county child care committees. A first step for any person who wishes to become a childminder is to contact the local child care committee, CCC, to avail of its quality awareness programme.
Report and Final Stages of the Children First Bill will be taken in the House this week. The Bill addresses the issue of childminders, and this was debated on Second Stage and Committee Stage. I ask the Minister to clarify whether sanctions will be imposed on professionals who fail to comply with the Bill. Are monitoring mechanisms in place for reports to be received and how will these be dealt with? Will there be demands for audits of child safety statements? Childminders are still exempt from having to report, as only those providing an early years service under the meaning of the Child Care Act 1991 are included. Will the Minister comment on these points and indicate the anticipated commencement of the Children First Bill?
The Deputy has asked quite a lot of questions which I do not think I can deal with in the short time remaining to me. I reassure her that Report and Final Stages of the Children First Bill will be taken in the House tomorrow and this will provide an opportunity to discuss these matters, which were discussed at some length. I note the concerns expressed by the Deputy and her party colleagues about childminders and I have addressed those concerns previously. The auditing of facilities would represent a huge volume of work and would be a draw on resources for the agency. In our view, that money would be better spent on providing services to children. We have made provision in the Bill to have registration and the right for Tusla to inspect pre-registration. If there is a failure to allow a pre-registration inspection then the premises would not be registered. I thank the Deputy for allowing me this opportunity to state that when this provision is enacted, an advertising campaign will advise parents that there should be a child safety statement in place, and if this is not available then it is not a facility to which parents should send their child, and they should report it to Tusla.
Victim Support Services
Joan Collins
Question:3. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his views on the fact that all core funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland has been cut and transferred to Tusla; and his views on the loss of valuable information to the Government and support for services for rape victims with the closure of the Royal College of Nursing. [27633/15]
This question was asked as a Topical Issue recently and I read the Minister's reply. I wish to challenge some of the points made in the reply. I am not saying that funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland should be reinstated but rather that we must remember the role of Rape Crisis Network Ireland, which has been crucial in collating data which has driven policy over the last 40 years. As the Minister has said, it is evidence-based. This is top-of-the-range information, as is recognised internationally. For that information not to be put to further use is very serious. I do not think Tusla can play that role.
I understand that the Deputy's question relates to Rape Crisis Network Ireland, and I am responding on this basis. Tusla has undertaken a comprehensive review of sexual and domestic violence services in consultation with service providers. The purpose was to identify strategic priorities and to set out a roadmap for the future delivery of these services. It is seeking through this process to address any identified gaps in services, to avoid duplication and to support effective delivery of front-line services nationally. Tusla considers that there is scope for more co-ordinated and more equitable provision of these services across the country. One of the concerns identified by Tusla, and by Deputy Collins, relates to the completeness and availability of data to plan and deliver services.
For the first time domestic and sexual violence services are being developed as a specialist national service with a single line of accountability so as to enable better outcomes for both children and adults who are survivors of sexual violence. A roadmap for the future of service delivery has been approved by Tusla’s board.
Funding provided to RCNI by Tusla was to develop and maintain a database of information recorded by workers in rape crisis centres. Tusla had concerns that this database did not capture information from all 16 rape crisis centres as only 11 centres are affiliated with the network.
In addition, Tusla did not always have timely access to the data collected, which is essential to support the delivery of high quality services across both the domestic violence and sexual violence services sectors. Consequently, Tusla has taken the decision to put in place a comprehensive data system that best meets the current and future data needs of a developing service.
The information that the RCNI has developed over the past 40 years was very comprehensive. It is not necessary for every centre to be involved in supplying the information, although at one stage all 16 centres were involved. The type of information they gathered did not need full representation. It was not designed as an operational administrative tool but can easily deliver that small area of data. It is not representative of the population as the service users are self-selecting and rape crisis centres are ad hoc. Therefore, full participation by all centres, while desirable, is not critical to the validity of the data. RCNI data have provided ground-breaking research findings which have been used to inform responses to different types of survivors and to form prevention strategies.
I challenge the Minister's statement that "Tusla did not always have timely access to the data collected". According to the RCNI, over two years only one deadline was missed by three days due to illness. In every other instance, Tusla received timely information.
Tusla's position, as given to me, is that it has issues with the timeliness of the data collected. I am mindful of the need to ensure that we have comprehensive and timely national data across the system to assist in monitoring and evaluating existing services and to help in planning for the future delivery and development of these services. I have raised with the board and the executive of Tusla the issue of how the quality of data can be improved as a priority for 2015. I understand that the development of information systems to capture and analyse data on sexual violence and domestic violence services is a priority for Tusla and I support its efforts to address shortfalls in this area. Funded sexual violence services will provide information directly to Tusla, creating, for the first time, a comprehensive dataset on all such services funded by the agency.
If there is a system that works why break it? Why bring it into a bigger organisation that does not have, but would like to have, the expertise that RCNI has? Why was RCNI not brought into the system to give and maintain that information in a proper way?
Since January, Tusla has not collected the information as set up by the RCNI, which is recognised internationally. The European gender equality groupings are considering how the data are processed, collected and used. I cannot understand why this has happened. Maybe the Minister can intervene and meet up with the RCNI and Tusla. No one has even seen the review the Minister talks about. RCNI did not have an opportunity to respond to, challenge, raise issues around or expand on it. Tusla has always received information it required from the RCNI on time, except once. I hate when there is one side saying one thing and another saying something else. There is an opportunity here to bring the groups together and examine comprehensively how the information will continue into the future to design policies for this important area.
Two of the biggest centres, including the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, the centre in Galway and several others, are not members of this group and they have a considerable volume of information which would be essential for planning. I do not have the full list with me. Tusla is not the only provider of funding for the RCNI although it provides a substantial part of its funding. We maintained, and I issued an instruction, that front-line services should be protected. Although we are coming out of an economic recession and the Department's budget was increased, there is still huge pressure on that budget. We have to make choices and the choice Tusla has made, which I support, is to support the front-line services. Each of the rape crisis centres that delivers care and services to the victims of sexual and domestic violence received its funding this year, as last year, to a total of approximately €4 million. My job is to protect the service to the front line. In respect of the reorganisation of information being collected Tusla believes it can get more complete information in a much more timely fashion by going about it in a different way. The important point from the Deputy's point of view, and certainly from my point of view, is that front-line services are protected and that victims and survivors of sexual and domestic violence receive the service when they need it.
Early Childhood Care Education
Robert Troy
Question:4. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the measures his Department is taking to improve access to the early education and preschool care for children with delayed development and special educational needs. [27467/15]
The supports the Minister and the Department are putting in place for children with special educational needs to access, and participate in, early education and preschool are scandalous. I would appreciate if he could inform the House what measures the Department, which has been in existence for four and a half years, is putting in place to ensure these children, who need additional supports, will get those supports, starting from next term.
The early childhood care and education, ECCE, programme is a free and universal programme for all children in the eligible age cohort, including children with special needs. Approximately 65,000 children are availing of this programme in the current school year.
The issue of access to the free preschool year for children with special needs was considered when the ECCE programme was launched and a number of measures were introduced to make the programme more accessible for these children. The measures in place include an exemption from the upper age limit where a child would benefit from starting primary school at a later age. In addition, children with special needs can apply to have the preschool year split over two years on a pro rata basis, for example, availing of the programme for two days a week in the first year and for three days a week in the second year.
Many children with special needs participate in the free preschool year without seeking these exemptions, so while there are 544 children with special needs availing of these exemptions for the current school year, the number of children with special needs availing of the ECCE programme would be far in excess of this. The Health Service Executive, HSE, works in partnership with the relevant disability service providers to address individual needs as they arise. This is done, for example, by funding special preschools that cater specifically for children with disabilities. In some limited cases at local level, disability services have also facilitated children with disabilities in some instances to attend mainstream preschools by providing assistant supports where possible and subject to resources.
The Government recognises that co-ordination and provision of appropriate supports for preschool children with special needs must be improved. Accordingly, when I established the interdepartmental group on future investment in early years and school age care and education I included in its terms of reference the need to examine how best to provide for children with special needs within the ECCE programme.
To advance this, the Departments of Children and Youth Affairs, Education and Skills and Health are working together to develop a new model of supports for preschool children with special needs. A group comprising representatives from these three Departments, the HSE, Tusla, the National Council for Special Education, the National Disability Authority, Better Start and the Dublin city childcare committee has started its work. This group aims to have an agreed model by early September, with a view to making a cross-departmentally supported proposal for the resources required in time for the Estimates process.
The Minister focused his answer on one year, the ECCE programme, but the question was on the whole of the early years programme. Early education should start before the free preschool year, particularly for children with special educational needs. While the programme is welcome, the Minister mentioned a leniency in its application for children with special educational needs. The number of people on a split year or availing of the upper age threshold is only in the region of 500 but various reports indicate there is in excess of 6,000 children with special educational needs. Can the Minister's Department confirm the number of children under the age of five who have been diagnosed with special educational needs and the number of children currently awaiting assessment?
Earlier this week, I met a parents group which was set up to fight for greater supports for their children. One mother told me that for a parent of a young child with special educational needs, everything is a fight and that she feels beaten down. This is a direct consequence of the lack of inclusion policies the Minister's Government has presided over for the past four years.
As the Deputy will be aware, yesterday the Minister for Education and Skills announced additional special needs assistants, SNAs, for those with special needs in the school system. The number will be in the region of 600. As part of that conversation, I made a strong case for the need for special assistants who would provide special assistance to children in the preschool years. This would not necessarily follow an SNA-type model.
Deputy Troy asked a number of questions which relate to other Departments. My Department would not have that information. In particular, those awaiting assessment would be a matter for the HSE. Nonetheless, this group is doing its work. It will look at how best to address these issues and how best to support children with special needs. I wish to put it on the record of this House that I believe that had we had a proper system in respect of this area, the later necessity for much of the support in the primary school system would have been obviated and children of two to five years, and younger even, would be getting the special additional support they need. Much of that, however, is beyond my remit in terms of speech and language therapy and other therapies.
The Minister is very good at saying it is someone else's fault or that it falls within someone else's remit. He should know, as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs with responsibility for early childhood care and education, how many children under the age of five have special educational needs. The announcement by the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy O'Sullivan, on the increase in the number of special needs assistants for primary school is welcome, but what is the Minister doing for children in early education? He is doing nothing. He has established another interdepartmental group which will report at some time in the future. He put forward an amendment to our committee a number of weeks ago which confirmed that between the Departments of Health, Education and Skills and Children and Youth Affairs, no one wanted to be the lead agency to pursue policy to ensure children with special needs would get additional supports.
After four and a half years in office, there should be a national policy to support children with additional needs in the early needs sector, but there is not. At best, it is disjointed and inconsistent and at worst there are no supports in certain areas. Only yesterday I received a phone call from a constituent whose child was refused entry to a preschool. If the preschool were to take the child, the parents would have to pay out of their own pockets for the special needs assistant. Not only that, they were being asked to pay for the increase in public liability insurance as well, which is scandalous.
It was inevitable at some point during the course of these questions that Deputy Troy would revert to type. He stands there pontificating from the far side of this Chamber about the scandalous state of the services his party left us to deal with. He speaks of our lack of action when I have outlined clearly to him that serious action is being taken and that this group will report in September, which will be in time for the Estimates process. He chooses to ignore that and goes off on a rant. The bottom line, as everyone in this Chamber well knows, is that we were left with no money and a totally dysfunctional HSE when we arrived into Government. A lot of progress has been made since then. His party had 14 years in Government before that with unprecedented wealth to deal with this issue and one can only say it made a bags of it.
The Minister was three years in the Department of Health and he was moved over because he was not doing his job.
I am not prepared to allow Deputy Troy continue to try to pretend progress has not been made when it is being made-----
Listen to the parents.
-----in extremely serious circumstances. If Deputy Troy continues to interrupt, I will continue to talk because I will not be silenced by him or his ilk.
Child and Family Agency
Sandra McLellan
Question:5. Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the spend for Túsla-Child and Family Agency in 2014; if there will be increased investment for the coming year; and his views on whether Túsla-Child and Family Agency is in need of a reassessment and review of how funds are currently being allocated to it. [27367/15]
My question concerns the funding of Tusla. What was the total spend for Tusla last year? Will there be an increase in investment for the coming year? Does the Minister agree that the Child and Family Agency is in need of reassessment and a review of how funds are currently being allocated to it?
The Government is delivering the most comprehensive reform of policy and provision for children, young people and families in the history of the State and our commitment to continuing that work remains very strong. Tusla's accounts for 2014 show total expenditure of €627 million. In accordance with the establishing legislation for the agency, I will be laying its full 2014 accounts before both Houses of the Oireachtas over the coming weeks.
In 2015, Tusla has a total budget of €643 million, which accounts for 63% of the Department's total Vote allocation and includes €631 million in current funding and €12 million in capital. This represents an increase of €34 million and is a 5.6% increase on the allocation to Tusla's in budget 2014. This funding increase demonstrates that, despite the budgetary constraints, the Government remains strongly committed to delivering the critically important support and reforms needed to support Ireland’s children and families. This additional funding is helping drive key priorities in the reform of services and assists Tusla to deliver on its mandate from Government.
Like all State agencies, Tusla has reviewed the scope to make savings across various areas of expenditure and to ensure that services are developed where possible. It has identified areas where resources need to be provided and it has also identified areas where available funding can be used to better effect to support service delivery. The key focus has been on ensuring that services are streamlined and rationalised where necessary, with any overlap in service provision and duplication of costs eliminated. I have specified to Tusla that it should do everything to defend front-line services to children. I am very supportive of the approach Tusla is adopting in terms of the reform of services, the targeting of funding at front-line services and the work being done in developing a new approach to the commissioning of services.
I put it to the Minister that the Taoiseach was incorrect when he stated recently during Leaders' Questions that Tusla was well funded. Our recent crisis in child protection, the lack of social workers and misappropriation of case files all point to a system that is not adequately funded. If so, there are serious flaws in the system. Changes in our child protection regime will take time and will require resources. All children stakeholders and many of those working with children today will attest to an acute lack of resources for social work, mental health and family support and early intervention services for children in this State. As stated recently by the ISPCC, the lack of a countrywide, funded, 24-hour social work service is a national scandal. Does the Minister believe it is acceptable that a child presenting with urgent child protection needs on a Friday afternoon will, in the vast majority of cases, have to wait three nights to have his or her case passed to a social worker, as outlined by the ISPCC?
I will finish what I was saying in my opening statement. Officials in my Department are working closely with the board and senior management of the agency to ensure the continued provision, within the significant resource provided, of high quality and responsive services to vulnerable children and families. A key component of this engagement is associated with the 2016 Estimates process and it is to determine the resources required to ensure the agency can continue to provide and develop the important supports and services to children and young people.
I take issue with the Deputy if she believes what happened in Laois-Offaly is purely a resource issue. It certainly is not. A number of issues have been identified there concerning how protocols were followed and the lack of uniformity in how reporting is carried out through the ranks. There is no question or doubt but that there is further support required for social workers in terms of staffing levels, staff supports and IT. All these matters are being addressed through a business case by Tusla, which will report shortly.
On the issue itself, the chief operating officer, Mr. McBride, has taken personal control of the matter and was in the area regularly to offer support. He brought in a team to address the backlog. A similar operation has taken place in Louth and Meath.
The ISPCC childhood support staff have reported that children as young as nine are using drugs in some areas. These are children in acute need. The ISPCC reports that in some parts of the country, a child in need must wait 18 months to see a psychologist. This is not a picture of a well-resourced child protection and child welfare regime.
Despite the resource constraints, Tusla has begun preparations for the Children First law but the professionals working with children, including my colleagues in the ISPCC, are more than a little frustrated over the lack of momentum in the Dáil. I refer again to my points made during my priority question alluding to the Children First Bill. There is concern that the Bill will be passed but not enacted for some time due to the lack of resources being allocated to Tusla. We believe Tusla should be sufficiently supported to cope with current demands and the extra workload likely to arise with the passing of the Bill. Can the Minister guarantee sufficient resources will be provided?
To ensure that people are very clear, notwithstanding statements made here and by the ISPCC, I must state all cases involving immediate risk are dealt with immediately. They would not be left over the weekend. If a child is at serious risk, the matter is dealt with. If a teacher is worried about a child in the morning, a social worker will have arrived by the afternoon. That is not to say there are not problems in the system and in respect of other priority cases at different levels of priority. It is not to say there are not substantial numbers of children who have an unallocated social worker. While Tusla is recruiting aggressively, this still remains an issue. It is for the Estimates process to deal with this problem by having a proper business plan put together to help us address it. Tusla received increased funding, as I pointed out in my initial answer, but there is no doubt that further resources will be required. There is a real need for the reorganisation of some of our services, as previous questions indicated, so we will be able to spend the money in the places where we can get the outcomes we need and so we will look after those most at risk in the first instance. However, I must remind the House that I am the Minister for all children and all youth affairs and that there is a broad remit involved, with many needs to be met and priorities to be recognised.