Vol. 1060 No. 5
1. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth if he will consider looking at the criteria to apply for redress under the mother and baby institutions payment scheme, given the very high underspend in the scheme this year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43701/24]
I want to ask the Minister about the current position of the mother and baby institutions payment scheme. I welcome that he said yesterday there will be a review in the new year. That is important. In regard to the extension of the scheme, I have given the example a couple of times of Temple Hill in particular.
The mother and baby institutions payment scheme opened for applications in March this year. As of 21 October, almost 5,300 applications have been received. Nearly 3,900 notices of determination have issued to applicants, more than 82% of which contain an offer of benefits under the scheme. Applicants have six months to consider their offer before they need to respond.
While my Department's budget in 2024 was based on higher upfront applicant numbers, this scheme is open for five years so there is plenty of time for potential applicants to assess the scheme and to subsequently apply. It is difficult to predict at what stage across its five-year lifespan applicants will apply, although we know that in some previous redress schemes, significant numbers of applications were made towards the closing date. I have authorised the next phase of the public information campaign for the scheme to launch at the end of this month, October. It is hoped that this will encourage those eligible to apply sooner rather than later.
The underpinning legislation provides for a number of reports and reviews to be produced. Section 48 of the legislation provides for two reviews into the operation of the scheme to be completed. The first is to be completed within six months of the scheme's second anniversary. I think I might have said after one year to the Deputy yesterday, but it is within six months of the second anniversary. I apologise for saying that yesterday. The legislation sets out the issues to be considered within that review, but it also allows the Minister to add other points to be considered within that review as well.
The institutional payment scheme is one part of the Department's response to the report of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes. It is one of the seven key components, but all the others are being advanced at the national records centre, which we discussed yesterday. Birth information and tracing legislation has been provided. A total of 11,000 people have access to birth and early life information. Of course there is also the work on the site in Tuam, for which the agency has been established.
Could the Minister confirm that the review will be in 2026, within six months of the second anniversary? The review will look at the operation of the scheme, but I presume it would not include the possibility of extending it even if there is money there to do that. I believe that is the case. I do not think anyone could say there is not money to do it. Will the Minister consider extending the scheme if he is in his current position when the review is undertaken? As part of the review, will he also consider looking at the four institutions that were left out and the others that have been excluded? It has been stated that Temple Hill does not qualify for supports, redress or recognition because it was a hospital, yet babies were adopted and paid for on foot of newspaper advertisements. Many children went to America. I do not understand how such an institution is considered a hospital. I have never heard of a hospital that does that. If the Minister is in office, will he consider that as part of the review?
I thank the Deputy very much. The review must be completed by mid-2026. That will give a span of time through which the scheme has been operating. There will also be a stronger sense then of the level of uptake of the scheme. We were expecting a surge of applications at the start, in the way we had seen with the birth information and tracing legislation, but it is now clear that the level of applications will be more gradual. We will have a better understanding of the number of applications in late 2025 and early 2026.
It would be wrong for me to speculate what the Minister of the day will make a call on, in terms of the ambit of the scheme, but we designed the legislation in such a way as to list the various points which it allows the review to encompass. We put in a provision to allow the Minister of the day to make a decision and add additional points of consideration as well. There is flexibility for the Minister of the day in terms of designing the remit of the review.
I may not get the opportunity to raise this again. Coming new into this role, it is only now that I am meeting the survivors. Does the Minister not wonder about Temple Hill? I cannot understand how it can be regarded as a hospital when babies were adopted to America, via newspaper advertisements. How is that a hospital? I cannot understand that at all. I have never heard of a hospital that facilitates the adoption of babies to foreign countries, and does it via newspaper advertisements. There are four institutions in particular but others are also excluded. Will the Minister consider a review of some kind of the institutions that are excluded, given the number of people who have come forward? I again give the example of Temple Hill. Is the Minister not concerned that it is being treated as a hospital when babies were adopted from it via newspaper advertisements?
The scheme that was legislated for in this regard provides redress in the form of financial payments and enhanced medical cards for former residents of mother and baby homes and county home institutions. That was the definition and basis upon which eligibility for this scheme was decided. It was a response to the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and county home institutions. We all know that there were many institutions in Ireland, over decades, some of them run by religious organisations and some run by the State or privately, where heinous things happened. Deputy Kerrane has listed a number of them that were not defined as mother and baby homes but where mothers who had a baby somewhere else were brought and where their babies were subsequently adopted, often perhaps with very little consent from the mother.
This scheme is based on the definition of mother and baby and county home institutions. The scheme was designed to operate and be implemented on that basis. However, there is an opportunity to review it and the Minister of the day can make determinations then.
2. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth when the joint labour committee will meet, following the announcement of funding for a pay increase for early years educators in budget 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43702/24]
SIPTU and others, including educators within the early years sector, welcomed the funding increase the Minister announced as part of budget 2025. As previously, I presume the joint labour committee, JLC, will meet in order to determine what that increase will be. I am conscious of the work of the committee. Is the Minister aware of when it will meet on the back of the budget announcement?
We all recognise the hugely important work done by early learning and care staff and school-age childcare staff. We also recognise that the pay they receive does not meet the hugely important work that they undertake. It was my objective as Minister in the past four years to do more so that their pay would meet their requirements and recognise the hugely important role they play in supporting children's development, learning and care.
I wish to express my continued commitment to improving pay and conditions for early years educators. To date, outputs from the early years service JLC has seen two increases to the minimum rates of pay for workers in the sector. The first one impacted 70% of the sector and the second one impacted 50%.
As the Deputy said, in budget 2025 I secured an extra €15 million for next year across the full fourth year of core funding that will have a value of €45 million. That is absolutely contingent on a new employment regulation order. If we do not secure a new employment regulation order, ERO, and improved rates of pay for the various grades we have set, this money will not flow. It is really important that the Government is providing that carrot by looking to support increased levels of pay but the stick is the money will not flow if we do not secure this particular agreement.
As the Deputy knows, the JLC is an independent process. I must respect that. I might want to be more involved but I have to respect its independence. What I have done is put this money on the table and made it very clear that we will support the employers and providers and meet the cost of a raised rate of pay through this money I have provided for in budget 2025. I have always urged the parties to get around the table and have this agreement ready to go in September of next year.
It is important the Minister makes that call again, as he has now, for them to get around the table because the last pay increase was 65 cent and it took 14 months to negotiate. Frankly, that does not give me much hope. We know that SIPTU looked for a €1.50 increase. We also know that come January, when the minimum wage increases, there will be 15 cent between the minimum wage of an early years educator and the minimum wage itself. That is not right. The JLC needs to come together as quickly as possible, particularly if it will take it months and months as it has before and on every other occasion to get to what will now be a new ERO.
We have to be mindful that not everyone wants to see the money go to wages all the time. We have to make sure the early years educators come first. They deserve decent pay and if they do not get it, we will continue to have a retention crisis and a lack of people coming into the sector.
The improvements to pay are absolutely crucial and we agree on recruitment and retention. We will not attract the young women and men who graduate from early learning and care degrees around the country, both level seven and eight degrees, into this sector if they do not see a long term future for themselves. That is why when I first introduced core funding, I linked it to rates of pay. That is why there is an allocation in core funding for rates of pay and it is why we have provided this funding allocation in budget 2025, which was directly linked to improving rates of pay.
Just before the budget, I met with representatives of a number of the provider organisations such as Childhood Services Ireland, the Federation of Early Childhood Providers, Seas Suas and a number of others and I made the point that I felt the previous JLC process went on for far too long. There was actually money on the table to support pay increases that the Department of public expenditure nearly got back, which frustrates everybody. I have made that point and I am happy to make it again here today.
That is really helpful and important. We need to give certainty to early years educators that pay increases will come and they will continue to come. It is really important because we need to retain those we have; they are highly educated, highly professional, many of them have years of experience and we also need to encourage more people to join the profession. Where there is uncertainty about your wages and you cannot plan for the future, it makes it really difficult. When you are relying on a JLC that you do not know when it will meet and decide on a pay increase, it makes it really difficult.
The last JLC in particular did not cover itself in much glory when it took 14 months for a 65 cent pay increase which, frankly, was a slap in the face to these professionals. We must treat them properly and with the respect they deserve, which the Minister does and I take nothing away from that. He knows they deserve proper pay and I know that. We need to look at that JLC process and they need to be called around the table, as the Minister has done which I welcome, as quickly as possible to get this work done.
Significant steps have been taken over the last four years on improving pay but we absolutely need to go further. I would love to see a process initiated where we start to look at how we align the pay of early years professionals with the pay of other educators across our society. That will be expensive and we have to recognise that. It is really good value for the State because I see the investment and the work early years educators do with babies and young children and the support they give through education but also through care and supporting families with the decisions they make and balancing work and care commitments.
We have to recognise we are still not spending enough on early years education as a State. I have doubled it in the last four years but we still need to do more. A very significant portion of that additional funding, in my view, needs to be spent on aligning pay rates for early years professionals with other educators in our system.
3. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth the number of foster carers in 2014; the number today; the measures he will take to encourage people to become foster carers; if he will engage with stakeholders on how to do this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43703/24]
I met with some foster carers just before the budget and they outlined their current circumstances and the circumstances for foster carers in the Sate, which is fairly grave given how the numbers have reduced. We obviously need more foster carers. There were a number of moves made in the budget, which I very much welcome, and I know they do too. I am interested in knowing the number of foster carers we had in 2014, ten years ago, and the number we have today. I believe it has reduced significantly.
When a child cannot be in the care of their own family and when a child has to come into the care of the State, the very next best place for a child is in the care of another family. That is why foster carers are so important and that is why I have worked to stabilise and grow the number of foster carers we have. In 2014, we had 4,210 foster carers and this year, the most recent data shows we have 3,842 foster carers.
I have prioritised support for foster carers. In last year's budget and in this year's budget, I introduced significant measures. From 1 November, next week, the weekly foster care allowance will go to €400 per week for children under 12 and €425 per week for those over 12. This increase, part of which came in on 1 January and part will come in on 1 November, means foster carers will get an additional €1,700 per child this year. Next year, in a full year, it will be an additional €2,900 per child. That is a recognition of the really important role they play and also of the financial pressure foster carers face, like every other family.
In this year's budget I have taken two other steps. From January 2025, when a child enters a foster care placement for the first time, a double foster care allowance payment will be made because there are often additional expenses when a child arrives in a new placement. We are also providing additional funding for mileage because a lot of foster carers have to travel around the country a lot to support appointments, either medical or for disability services, or indeed appointments with their birth family. I have engaged extensively with the Irish Foster Care Association, IFCA. I have engaged extensively with the Movement for Change in Foster Care as well and, while recognising the many real challenges that still exist, there is a recognition we have met the core demand on the foster care allowance and I was pleased to do so.
The number of carers has reduced, obviously, but over ten years it is perhaps not as stark; we lost 368 from the system which would be for many reasons. In relation to bringing new foster carers into the system, is the Minister aware of any of the reasons foster carers may have chosen to stop foster care other than those who are getting older and naturally stop providing foster care? I am interested to know of those who have left by choice, what may have been the reasons for that. For them, it may not have been a choice; they may have been unable to keep going.
On bringing in new foster carers, and perhaps during his engagement with the likes of the IFCA, has the Minister looked at what we can do to encourage and bring more foster carers into the system? There are children who need foster carers.
I have found that for people departing, age is one of the major criteria. People who have fostered all their lives and are now in their mid-70s and simply are not in a position to do it anymore.
That is a crucial reason. Our biggest problem is recruitment. A lot of people who come into the foster care system as foster carers are care experienced themselves and know the benefit of what it did for them.
Tusla is taking a number of steps. It now has a strategic plan for foster care services and a new national director for foster care. It did not have that before and I asked it to appoint that person in order to prioritise this area. One area that we need to tackle is the issue of pensions. I am sure that was raised with the Deputy when she met representatives. There is a sense of there not being any kind of clear pension contribution. It is something my Department has raised with the Department of Social Protection and I will talk about it in the general election campaign. It is a crucial issue. We have done a lot on the allowance, but the longer term piece in respect of providing stability in old age for a family which has given much of their lives to foster caring needs to be answered more clearly.
I thought of that very point when the Minister said one of the biggest reasons people are leaving is age. Giving security to foster carers when they reach the age of 66 and ensuring they can access a State pension is important. I discussed that with the representatives. They said that perhaps a new system is needed. The best thing we can do is consider the new system introduced for family carers more generally from January of this year in the social protection system. I do not believe it would cost a lot of money because, in some cases, foster carers have worked for ten years and have 520 contributions, and will, therefore, be able to get a State pension. A small number of people are affected. The new system this year for family carers is something I have put to the Minister, Deputy Humphreys. Consideration should be given to using that system and the credit it provides for foster carers as well as family carers. That would be the easiest and quickest way to deal with this.
I thank the Deputy. There is certainly merit in considering her idea. The Deputy is probably aware that Tusla is in the AV room today, where I am hosting representatives who are coming in to talk to Members of the Oireachtas about foster caring and how some of us or our constituents who are interested in it can deliver that message and make it clear how people can sign up. Tusla is doing a lot of work on that. It did an amazing garden in Bloom this year, which had a huge amount of throughput and provided people with information on how they might sign up as foster carers.
It is doing huge amount of work on recruitment and I want to acknowledge that. The extra supports we have put in place, such as the new lead for fostering, are having an impact. As I said, we have stabilised things, as there has been a loss over ten years, but we need to grow the numbers. In particular, we need to bring younger families into the system because people cannot foster forever and we understand that.
