Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Health and Children debate -
Thursday, 18 Oct 2012

Children and Youth Issues: Discussion with Minister for Children and Youth Affairs

I welcome the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Francis Fitzgerald, and Ms Elizabeth Canavan, assistant secretary, Ms Moira O'Mara, director, and Mr. Peter Hanrahan, assistant principal officer, at the Department of Children and Youth Affairs.

Our meeting comes at an opportune time as we are in the middle of the campaign for the children's referendum - an important plebiscite. I thank all members of the committee for their interaction in the preparation of the heads of the Children First Bill and I encourage all of us as committee members to seek a "Yes" vote and ensure all eligible citizens cast their vote. I pay tribute to Deputies Ó Caoláin, Troy, McConalogue and Healy and Senator van Turnhout from the non-Government parties for the great work they have done and co-operation they have shown in this committee on this referendum. It is a tribute to all members of the committee that we are all seeking a "Yes" vote in the referendum. This referendum is not just about changing the Constitution, it is an opportunity to offer children a second chance at family life. It puts them at the centre of all we do so this is a vital referendum.

The Minister's presence comes after the publication of an appalling report on St. Patrick's Institution, which paints a bad picture of inaction. It is a damning indictment and it is important to note the Minister and the Minister for Justice and Equality have moved on this. As a committee, we have been involved in the appointment of Mr. Joe Horan as the chairman of the board of management of Oberstown and we look forward to hearing about that in the Minister's remarks. We should perhaps invite Mr. Horan and Mr. Michael Donnellan of the Irish Prison Service to appear before us because the report on St. Patrick's is appalling.

I remind witnesses and members of the position on privilege and call on the Minister to make her opening remarks.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to give an update on the current work of the Department and the issues it has been dealing with since I last appeared before the committee in July. I also repeat the thanks for the work the committee has done and for the response of members of the committee and of Members of the Houses to the discussion on the referendum. We had a wide range of contributions from Members, not least from members of this committee, and we spent more than 30 hours discussing this in committee, with a lot of detail and some very nuanced contributions from a range of Deputies and Senators. Clearly, important points were made about the Constitution. The change for children is not just about the Constitution but also about our legislation and how we deliver services and resources.

All of that was made clear in the discussions we had on the referendum. It was not an adversarial debate. There was a rare moment of political consensus on the wording. As a consequence, we did not get a lot of coverage of the contributions despite this being a referendum on which people will be asked for their vote on 10 November. I agree it is vital that information reaches people, and one of the ways that is done is through coverage of these Houses, and it was unfortunate such a wide-ranging debate did not get the sort of coverage we would like to have seen given that it was a rare moment of political agreement.

Since then, however, coverage has increased on the issue. It is critical the public understands what the referendum is about. If they do not understand, there is ambivalence and confusion. I thank all members of this committee, the political parties and the Independents for their efforts to ensure the information is made available to everyone. The Referendum Commission has published its document and members should have a copy of it. That will go to every home in the country. There is also a dedicated website, childrensreferendum.ie, and my Department and the Government will be delivering a document to every house in the country as well. Information is available from a wide variety of sources and I hope that deals with the information deficit at present.

At its heart, the referendum proposes to place a dedicated article, Article 42A, in the Constitution which has children as its central focus. This is not about giving more power to the State. It is about putting children at the centre and focusing on them and their rights, ensuring we listen to them when they speak, and that the institutions that deal with them, particularly the courts, make a greater effort to listen to the voices of our young people, hear their experience and consider their best interests. To present this referendum as one that will grant more power to the State is not correct. It is about putting children at the centre while having greater clarity about child protection in our Constitution. It is about focusing on the children's issues that have been ignored for so long.

Yesterday we saw once again evidence in the report into St. Patrick's Institution of the failure to look at the best interests of the child. If anything, that report supports what we are doing, that there should be a greater focus on young people and services for them. As the Ombudsman for Children said, she was not listened to when she made her points on young people. She was reflecting the views of young people, so again this is an endorsement of the need for constitutional change, if anything. It is not an endorsement of not holding a referendum, as some claim. It speaks to the need for such a referendum because our commitment in the referendum and our obligation is to protect children from abuse. It puts a greater onus on the State to protect children.

Currently, the State's intervention is to arise only in exceptional cases where parents fail in their duty towards their children. This, however, is more child-centred than what went before because the focus is clearly on the impact of the parental failure on the safety and welfare of the child and ensures the intervention is proportionate, as provided by law. We want to ensure there is support for families at an early stage. It also treats all children equally when it comes to adoption. Clearly, further adoption legislation will also be necessary.

The new amendment recognises children in their own right and, for the first time, will put into the Constitution an explicit statement on the rights of individual children while giving constitutional standing to the best interests and views of the child in child care and family law proceedings. We have this in legislation already but this will give it constitutional standing, which gives it greater strength. I urge everyone to engage with the referendum and examine the issues for themselves and look at all the information available. A great deal of care and consideration has gone into choosing the balanced wording that aims to respect the rights and interests of all parties involved - the family, parents, children and the State.

The referendum serves as a backdrop to the wider programme of change for children being pursued by the Government. These reforms focus on improving capability to promote the safety and welfare of children and to ensure child protection services can respond appropriately to all child protection concerns. We have 30,000 referrals to the child and family services in this country every year and we have 1,500 confirmed cases of child physical and sexual abuse every year. These are real children where real abuse is taking place and who must be protected. The referendum puts a clear focus on that.

The proposed amendment gives the voting public a rare opportunity to consider how we all view children in society and how we reflect that view in the Constitution. It is not only a question for now but also for future generations. It merits the fullest attention and consideration of the voting public.

I support the Chairman's comments on St. Patrick's Institution and welcome his suggestion that the chairman of Oberstown be invited to the committee. He has appeared before but this is a new appointment where he is carrying out a programme of change in order that we have the best possible facilities when we detain young people there.

It was suggested the director general of the Irish Prison Service, Mr. Michael Donlon, should be called before the committee to discuss the appalling report presented by the Inspector of Prisons who inspected St. Patrick's Institution. The Minister for Justice and Equality dealt immediately with the issues raised in the report. It is absolutely shocking to read it and hear details of how young people were being treated in St. Patrick's Institution. As the Minister said, that culture has now ceased. He has taken a range of initiatives to deal with the issues outlined in the report and announced his plans to close St. Patrick's Institution by 2014. It is absolutely unacceptable that the Inspector of Prisons should have to report on a culture in St. Patrick's Institution that results in the human rights of some prisoners, children and young adults, being either ignored or violated. His report identifies significant concerns about the welfare of detained children such as the prohibition on family visits as a disciplinary measure. In fact, he states he has seen things happening in St. Patrick's Institution that he has not seen in any other prison or centre. It is damning evidence about the regime in place. It is extraordinary that it was allowed to continue for so long.

Before I saw any report, I went to the Government and received support to take young adults aged 16 years out of St. Patrick's Institution. All those aged 16 years were moved from it by 1 May as a result of the Government's decision. The Government also made a decision to provide funding for the centre in Oberstown in order that we could move 17 year olds from St Patrick's Institution to Oberstown. This involves a new build, for which I have permission and on which work is under way, as there were no objections to the planning application. It is my intention to move 17 year olds from St Patrick's Institution as soon as we have other facilities available for them. That still leaves 18 to 21 year olds in St. Patrick's Institution. As I said, the Minister has stated it is his intention to close St. Patrick's Institution. In the meantime I will examine whether we can begin to move some of the more vulnerable 17 year olds from St. Patrick's Institution to Oberstown. We are involved in some changes to the staffing arrangements that might make this possible and I hope they will be concluded satisfactorily and that we will be in a position to deal with some of the 17 year olds. As of yesterday, there were 27 young people aged 17 years in St. Patrick's Institution.

When the Ombudsman for Children approached me earlier this year to extend her remit to St. Patrick's Institution, I immediately agreed and wrote to the Minister for Justice and Equality who then agreed to extend her remit to St. Patrick's Institution. That request had been refused for quite a number of years. I was very happy to support her request to extend her remit in order that she would have the opportunity to go into St. Patrick's Institution in her official capacity. When she visited it previously, it was in an unofficial capacity and she met the young people there informally.

I will comment on some of the other issues on which we have been working. Members will be aware that we concluded an administrative agreement on intercountry adoptions with Vietnam which was witnessed by the Minister for Justice of Vietnam during his visit. The agreement was signed on 24 September between representatives of the Adoption Authority of Ireland and the Vietnamese central authority. It is the first international administrative agreement for intercountry adoptions entered into by the Adoption Authority of Ireland and Vietnam since the two countries ratified the Hague Convention on intercountry adoptions. That signing will open the way for the resumption of adoptions between Ireland and Vietnam. Obviously, there is some administrative work still to be done, but I am confident that adoptions will open shortly between Ireland and Vietnam.

The necessary legislation for the child and family support agency is being prepared by my Department as a priority to ensure we can establish the new agency by January 2013, when it is my intention that the agency will assume statutory responsibility for services for children and families. That is at the heart of our reform programme. We need to do significant work to ensure we have a safe transition of staff from the HSE to the new agency. There are a number of governance issues to be resolved, not least that the child and family support agency will require a strong legal identity, given the number of legal cases that come before the HSE. We are examining the range of governance issues involved, but I will ensure there is much stronger accountability directly to the Minister than we have seen before. We must ensure we have new innovative arrangements for governance issues between the child and family support agency and the Department. The new agency will assume responsibility for the child and family services provided by the HSE and the family support agency. It will have a workforce in excess of 4,000 and be headed by Mr. Gordon Jeyes, as the chief executive designate who will be supported by a senior management team, the recruitment of which is at an advanced stage. I will not go into detail on the preparations to be made, but they have been informed by the report of the task force on the child and family support agency which I set up and which reported to me earlier this year. The priority will be to legislate for the transfer of child welfare and protection services as set out in the programme for Government from January next and devise arrangements for other services for consideration. We will have a short, medium and longer term plan in terms of the services which can come under the new Child and Family Support Agency.

I thank the Chairman for the work the committee did on the Children First national guidelines for the protection and welfare of children. I have had an examination of the report carried out by the Department. The Department is examining how many of the identified priorities can be translated into legislation. I hope to have the required new heads of the Bill in the coming weeks and we can then proceed to process the legislation. A wide range of submissions were made to the committee as part of the finalisation of the heads of the children Bill. While recent reviews by the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church and the HSE show, for example, that progress has been made in the Catholic Church, it is essential that there are legislative obligations backed up by sanctions applying to all organisations involved with children, including but not confined to faith based organisations. Last week the HSE published its audit of the child safeguarding arrangements in 24 Catholic dioceses. A separate audit of safeguarding practices in 150 congregations and religious orders is continuing. There are two audits continuing. It is very important that the audit of the congregations is completed as speedily as possible.

There are other issues, but perhaps members might wish to ask questions at this stage. We published the survey, How We See It: Report of a Survey on Young People’s Body Image, which tells us a great deal about young people and how they are doing. There are a range of issues on which we are working. At this point it might be best to leave it to the committee to raise issues of concern to it.

I welcome the Minister and thank her for her report. I have a few brief observations to make and wish to raise a number of questions with her.

The forthcoming referendum is generating little traction. I am concerned about the lack of media attention in terms of having an informed debate in the wider community. We fully support the referendum and have done so all along. We have arranged a number of public meetings in the constituency, as well as neighbouring constituencies, but while people are coming, the crowds are not. Does the Minister have plans to ensure we will have an informed debate? I am aware that information booklets will be sent by post to households, but that will not generate the level of debate required.

While we may disagree with the "No" side, I suppose it is welcome to see someone coming out to make that case. If nothing else, it will ensure the media gives this matter the attention it deserves while complying with the 50-50 rule.

I have highlighted the issue of resources every time I have spoken on the forthcoming referendum. While I welcome the wording that will be used to enshrine children's rights in our Constitution, I will continue to make the point that this amendment will not be enough if it is not accompanied by adequate resources. The referendum alone is not a panacea. It is critically important that we provide adequate resources for child welfare and protection. If we do not do so, we will not have a robust system.

I wish to refer to the Minister's reply to written questions I tabled recently. I do not question her commitment. In the times we are in, however, and as we approach next month's referendum, I would like money to be ring-fenced. Resources are going to be crucial in the implementation of the referendum.

The horrific report on St. Patrick's Institution makes for very sad reading. I compliment the Minister for extending the remit of the Office of the Ombudsman for Children to the institution. She was right to do so. The Government rapporteur on child protection called for this in his last report. It is to be welcomed. I commend the author of the report. Much of what it unearthed would never have been unearthed without the dogged and determined efforts of the author of the report, who called to the institution at unorthodox hours. He must be complimented. In light of the severity of the report, will the Minister support his call to bring forward the May 2014 date?

I welcome the signing of an agreement on intercountry adoptions. The Minister promised to introduce legislation on information and tracing. Ireland is one of the few European countries that does not have such legislation. Where is this important legislation on the Minister's priority listing?

I welcome the establishment of the child and family support agency. I am glad to see it is progressing. Can the Minister give a commitment that the agency will start with a blank canvas? It would be a retrograde step if it were to start with a deficit it had carried over.

Child minders are exempt from the provisions of the Children First legislation. Has the Minister thought further about that?

I would like to speak about the HSE church audit. I welcome the improvements that have been made. They were long overdue. However, some dioceses have been identified as not giving the critically important issue of child protection the sense of urgency it deserves. Can the Minister outline what her officials are doing to ensure those dioceses meet the standards that are required?

I would like to refer to the survey of how young people feel about their bodies. Bullying and mental health issues are of great importance for young people. The cross-party group on mental health organised an informative seminar in the AV room yesterday. Frankly, I was disappointed that Members showed such a lack of interest in it. I know all Members have busy schedules, but the small turnout was disappointing in light of the importance of the topic. We need to examine this matter further, perhaps by inviting some of those who contributed to yesterday's seminar to a future meeting of this committee.

How frequently does Dáil na n-Óg meet? I will conclude on this matter, which I have raised in a written question. I thank the Chairman for his leniency. The Constitutional Convention will consider the possibility of allowing 17 year olds to vote. We are being asked to vote "Yes" in the children's referendum to give children a voice. Despite that, there will be no representative of young people on the Constitutional Convention.

That is not a matter for this committee.

I am mentioning it because the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs is in attendance.

I remind the Deputy that representatives of Dáil na n-Óg will come before the committee on 22 November next.

It is an important issue. We are talking about giving children a voice. We are talking about changing our Constitution. We are holding a Constitutional Convention. The manner in which the membership is selected - one has to be 18 to be on the register - means young people will not have a voice. This matter needs to be raised and highlighted by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. I thank the Chairman for his leniency.

The Minister and her colleagues from the Department are very welcome. I will make a few comments on the children's referendum. There can be no complacency. I am concerned that there might be a degree of complacency across the political spectrum because there is such strong agreement across all parties and elected voices in these Houses. We have a collective responsibility to advise and inform the electorate of the importance of turning out to vote "Yes" on 10 November. I urge members of all parties and independent voices to use the intervening time to play a proactive part in encouraging people to support the proposed constitutional amendment. The non-sitting week will give us an important opportunity to urge people to vote "Yes" and we should employ it to the best effect in our constituencies. Those with national responsibilities should play national roles.

It is important for us to acknowledge that legitimate concerns are being expressed. The failure of the State with regard to the protection, care and welfare of children is not just historic. The report on St. Patrick's Institution that was published this week shows that it is a current phenomenon. We need to sit up and face our responsibilities in this regard. This committee has agreed that the institution is unacceptable. Provision needs to be made for access to Oberstown to accommodate that cohort of young people, who should not have been in an institution associated with Mountjoy Prison at any time over its years of use.

As the Minister knows from the debate on the legislation that has facilitated next month's referendum, my view is that the proposed wording is deficient in so far as it addresses a limited number of situations where the child's interests may be at stake. I wish it encompassed a range of additional areas where the child's best interests should also be paramount. I want to make it absolutely clear that the wording being presented to us is not deficient in what it seeks to address. That is very important. Those of us who argued for it to go further view what is proposed as a strong and important platform on which to build. I know that view is not unique to me or my Sinn Féin colleagues. I have no doubt that the Minister hopes to be able to build on it in the future. I acknowledge that would be the disposition of all voices concerned with the rights and welfare of children. The comments I have made should serve to underscore the fact that I have no hesitation in commending to people the proposal for a "Yes" vote in the referendum on 10 November. Along with my party colleagues, I will play a full part in aiding that objective.

I have a couple of brief questions on the Minister's responses to the three questions I posed in advance of today's quarterly meeting. Regarding the national children's and young people's policy framework for the years 2013 to 2017, the Minister indicated the new policy framework will be shaped by the principles underpinning the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. She also noted that the convention protects these rights by setting minimum standards governments must meet in providing health care, education and legal and social services to children. What status does the framework have given that the rights to which it refers are not legally enforceable? What will be its impact? What has been the experience in terms of the impact on the lives of children of the first children's strategy published in 2000? Will the Minister incorporate in future legislative provision children's rights that build on what will, I hope, be the successful passage of the referendum on children?

On children in high support residential places in special care units, the Minister's response does not provide all of the information sought. Is this information available? I would like to ascertain the current occupancy rates and average periods of residence in such units. What follow-on supports are available to children once they reach 18 years?

I welcome the Minister and her officials. I will ask a number of supplementary questions before briefly discussing the forthcoming referendum. I asked a question on extending the remit of the Ombudsman for Children. The report on St. Patrick's Institution is timely. I welcome the statement from the Minister that she is looking favourably at the Ombudsman for Children's request to extend the remit of her office to cover the National Council for Special Education to ensure an appropriate system is in place for dealing with complaints by parents related to special needs assistance. I encourage the Minister's work in this area.

On the Ryan report implementation plan and the child death review group implementation plan, while I welcome the Minister's response, the joint committee also has a role in monitoring and tracking progress in this regard. The committee must be a part of the agenda for change and provision made for it to have a role in this matter. I was disappointed we were not recognised in having a role. I will pursue this matter again at a later date.

The reason I asked the Minister a question on safe care for trafficked children into Ireland was that confusion surrounds this issue. I thank her for clarification on whether inspections are undertaken of private foster care agencies. However, on receiving the Minister's reply, I spoke to researchers who stand over their position that the Health Information and Quality Authority informed them that there is some ambiguity on this issue. I hope the Minister's response will clarify this ambiguity and clear up the confusion on this matter of concern.

On child protection standards for children in disability services and direct provision, the Health Information and Quality Authority yesterday launched draft national standards for care centres for children and adults with disabilities. Standards cover all children and we should retain the option of having specific standards for certain categories of children. I am concerned that independent inspections are still not carried out on services for children with disabilities. Once implemented, the new HIQA standards will address the issue of children in disability services. When I have asked in the Seanad and joint committee which standards cover children in direct provision, I have been moved from person to person. In his most recent reply, the Minister for Justice and Equality asked me to raise the matter with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. I refer to the national child protection standards. I am confused because the information I have received relates to children in the care of the State or cared for by the State and I have been informed that children in direct provision are not in the care of the State and are not being cared for by the State. The State provides their accommodation, living arrangements and everything else. We are being caught up in legal language. The children in question are not covered and direct provision services are not being inspected by any child protection services. If we do not act on this issue now, in 20 years we will be horrified and shocked to receive a report into current practices in direct provision centres. I will continue to pursue this issue.

I do not propose to repeat the contribution I made in the Seanad on the referendum on children. While I would have preferred the wording of the proposed amendment to have gone further, I share Deputy Ó Caoláin's view that most of the relevant issues can be addressed in legislation. Members will pursue these matters.

I have been unequivocal in my support for the referendum. Voter mobilisation will be a major issue. To go back to the sixth amendment to the Constitution, the vote in favour of the Adoption Act was 99% on a turnout of 28.61%. The referendum was held on the same day as another referendum on the Seanad. I worry that children will be seen and not heard in the referendum campaign. While posters have been put up, we are not seeing or hearing much about the referendum in the media. I have given a number of briefings and attended public meetings as part of the campaign in recent weeks and it is clear there is an appetite to be informed not only about children's rights but also the wording. We need to inform members of the public about the wording.

The Minister is correct that questions are being raised about the lack of trust in the State. This is an issue we must address collectively. I agree that the issue of vaccinations continues to be raised at public meetings. However, the latest issue to be raised is a belief that the referendum is about child benefit. While I am tempted not to seek to disabuse people of that idea because I would want them to vote in favour of child benefit, I will not do so on the basis that our role is to inform people about the purpose of the referendum. The Minister has outlined her reform agenda and we need a strong and significant "Yes" vote to send out a signal that her agenda for change is considered important by the public.

While it is great to have a Minister for Children and Youth Affairs at the Cabinet table, a strong turnout is needed and I will do everything possible to achieve that objective. As I do not have a constituency, I will be pleased to travel to any constituency to inform and brief people if Members so wish. I am an independent voice. Some of the public meetings I have attended have had large audiences, which demonstrates an appetite for information on the referendum. Much more coverage of the issues is required in the media. I note the Referendum Commission appealed to the media yesterday to provide much more information and I hope they will respond.

I concur with Senator van Turnhout that people are seeking information. As someone who has engaged in door-to-door canvassing on the referendum, I note that people welcome calls to their doors but also want further information. In addition to public meetings, all of the political parties must become involved in campaigning on the referendum.

While I accept the issue of children falling between Departments is not on the agenda, I propose to raise the matter briefly. I have raised previously, including with the Department of Education and Skills, the issue of Life centres. When young people drop out of the education system, they fall between three or four different Departments, primarily the Departments of Justice and Equality and Education and Skills. While the issue is not directly linked to the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, I seek a co-ordinated response to this issue. I am involved in a Life centre which has 30 young people who have dropped out of school, many because of drink or drugs. The total funding the centre receives from the State to look after 30 children is €47,500. We have been advised that the local vocational education committee will cut the teaching hours provided to us this year. We now rely on people providing a back-up service on a voluntary basis. Last year, 18 qualified teachers who could not find employment worked with us on a voluntary basis, providing one-to-one education for the children in question.

This issue falls between a number of Departments. The centre provides the only support available to 30 young people.

While it should come under the Department of Justice and Equality and funding should be available from that Department, that is not happening. I ask for that matter to be examined. I appreciate the Minister may not be able to give an answer today but I will write to her. We have raised the issue with the Department of Education and Skills, but I was disillusioned that it appears to have spent more time trying to find out what amount of money we are getting from other sources rather than trying to find funds within its own Department. As it is an important issue, I ask the Minister to come back to me on it.

A common theme is the need to ensure an informed debate on the referendum. There are dozens of public meetings taking place in each of the constituencies which political parties attend, and in some cases constituencies have come together to hold these meetings. The campaign for children has had the campaign bus going around the country. Many politicians have met those involved, have gone on local radio and have contributed articles to local newspapers. I commend local radio which is covering the referendum. I have done many local radio interviews and I am aware that colleagues have also done so. There is an openness to a discussion on the referendum. I support what Deputies Ó Caoláin and Troy have said that everyone has a responsibility across the political divide. We have all supported the referendum and we have to go out and do the work to ensure the people are fully informed.

The Referendum Commission has a budget of €1.9 million. Members will have noticed that the commission asked this week that it would have more time from the media. I cannot underestimate the importance of the role of the media. People get their information from the media on so many topics but if the media will not cover it in any great detail, there is an even greater onus on all of us at local level to ensure the information gets out and that we, as politicians, do everything possible by canvassing door to door, as Senator Burke and others are doing, and by providing information in places where people gather. The non-governmental organisation community is doing much work to get the information out. There will also be the usual information campaign on the media, using advertising to inform the people of the date of the vote and the issues involved. There will be much more information in the newspapers and in the media in the next three weeks. That should begin to deal with what has been a deficit in interest in the referendum.

At public meetings, a large number of issues are raised and people are very interested. The referendum is getting a strong and positive response from many of the people I meet. As Deputy Ó Caoláin said, if there are concerns, let us deal with them. If there is a concern that it is about too much State power, let us say it is not and that it is about putting the child at the centre. Let us be careful to impart what it is and is not about. It is following on from the work of the committee and it is about a range of issues. It is not about all issues to do with children but about specific issues, especially in family law, and about inserting a general right in the Constitution. I note that Deputy Catherine Byrne is reading the commission's report. As the report states in respect of the rights outlined for children, it will be for the courts to decide at a future date what precisely are those rights. The commission makes that point very clearly. We have put in an enabling provision that highlights the rights of children, for the first time, in an explicit way. We give rights to all sorts of people in the Constitution: rights of association, rights of religious freedom and rights to the family, but rights for children have been missing. That will be provided for if the people support the referendum, and that is the key point.

We must continue to give information to the people, hold public meetings and get the information out. The Referendum Commission has a budget of €1.9 million and my Department has a budget of €1 million to ensure the information gets out. We will use it in every way possible to impart information. The next three weeks are crucial in getting the information out.

Deputy Troy made a point about resources. I agree that resources are crucial. However, I have consistently made the point that it is not simply about resources, it is also about reform. We must do better with the money that is being spent in this area as in every other area, and we must prioritise. I assure Members that change is under way under Mr. Gordon Jeyes. One can see it in the way cases are being dealt with. It is much clearer now whether a case needs family support or if it is a child protection issue. As we have reduced the number of managers from 34 to 19, there is more direct accountability from the front line to the managers in the system. That is critical. I received an increase in funding last year from 2011, but a severe financial situation is facing every Department and my Department is not immune. Nevertheless, we have to do the best we can to preserve the front-line services. There is still considerable funding, more than €700 million, being put into child and family support services and child protection services by the HSE, and there is another couple of hundred million from my Department. Therefore, approximately, €1 billion is being spent in this area and we must ensure it is spent in the best way possible and that we have agreed priorities between the voluntary sector, which is working in this area, and the statutory sector. That has been missing in the past. We are keen to have strong reform.

We are moving to standardised business processes to ensure we record properly everything around the country that comes to the attention of the child and family services. We have a new national ICT system, which will make a difference, and a strong service plan with key performance indicators being collected much more coherently than heretofore. I have said repeatedly at the committee that I was not satisfied with the quality of the data I was receiving at national level, but steps are being taken to deal with that issue.

I am pleased to say that, in November, HIQA will, for the first time, commence inspection of child protection services in Carlow and Kilkenny, under the new standards. HIQA launched its inspection standards to ensure child protection services reach the desired standards. Yesterday HIQA announced it will inspect residential settings where there are children with disabilities. While these inspections have been delayed for far too long, we are moving to a situation where standards are in place for child protection that have to be met throughout the country. As Deputy Ó Caoláin said, this is not just about historical issues. There is a job to be done currently which is part of a new regime. These are changes that will make a difference.

I was asked about the monitoring of the dioceses and standards therein. Effectively, the director of child and family services works with Mr. Ian Elliott, CEO of the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church in Ireland, on the monitoring of the dioceses. The development of the Children First legislation will be very important because it will mean people will be under an obligation to report. Also, the Criminal Justice (Withholding of Information on Offences against Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012 provides that where any person has information that a crime is being committed or a sexual crime has been committed and he or she does not report it, that is a criminal offence. That strong legislation has been in play from 1 October.

Dáil na nÓg meets once a year. I have raised with the Taoiseach the point about the involvement of young people in the constitutional convention and we will see how that can be progressed further to ensure liaison with young people. Dáil na nÓg is an effective system which operates at county level. It meets formally once a year but it does much in between at county level. The report on body image published this week was part of an initiative from Dáil na nÓg. It is an active organisation which listens to the views of young people. The research involved young people who played a major role in designing the questionnaire and presenting the findings. It was a very positive initiative.

A question was asked about the availability of places for 17 year olds in Oberstown.

The difficulty is that to move the 17 year olds from St. Patrick's, we must find approximately 30 places. There will be 30 places available by 2014 in the new building in Oberstown. In the meantime, I will examine whether it is possible to use some of the places currently available in Oberstown for some of the more vulnerable 17 year olds. I must examine the situation carefully and ensure we have the supports and security that will be needed. I will do this as a matter of urgency to see if some of the 17 year olds currently in St. Patrick's can be moved.

A number of governance issues with regard to Oberstown are being examined. Roster changes will be required to create more space. I am confident this will be sorted shortly and that it will create more places. We will need the new building to deal with the number of 17 year olds involved. I will continue discussions with the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, and within my Department to see whether we can increase the number of spaces that may be available in Oberstown for 17 year olds. Despite this, we will have to wait for the new building to have 30 spaces available. I will discuss with the Minister, Deputy Shatter, whether there are alternative arrangements that could be considered in the meantime.

I think I have covered the points made by the Deputy.

I asked about the information and tracing Bill.

The information and tracing Bill is at an advanced stage and we are close to heads going to Government. This is important legislation. There are some constitutional issues with regard to access to information, but I will go as far as I can in the legislation to ensure people who wish to trace are supported in doing that. I will also introduce strong legislation to ensure all records are gathered together in one place and to ensure people have proper access to them. Currently, records are scattered throughout the country, but ensuring they are available centrally will be part of the legislation. Work is under way to do this.

Deputy Ó Caoláin made the point that there was no room for complacency with regard to the children's referendum. I agree with him. He also pointed out that everyone has a role in ensuring the information gets out to people and that we deal properly with legitimate concerns. In the context of State care, it is very important that we get the point across to the public that State care does not now mean residential care for the most part, rather it means foster care. It means giving a chance of a second experience of family life to a child who comes to the attention of the State because of serious concerns about his or her care. State care is about foster care for the most part, exclusive of some children who need residential and specialist services. Therefore, when we talk about State care, we are not talking about the institutions of the past. St. Patrick's is an obvious example of an area where there was no reform, and this must be dealt with and changed. That is accepted by the Government and it has taken action to ensure this is done. State care means giving a child the opportunity of a second home where his or her first home has failed him or her.

I wish to take up the point made by the Deputy with regard to the policy framework. It is a policy framework informed by best principles and what is important about it is that it impacts across all Departments and that it is a clear statement on our targets for children. For the first time ever, I have set up an early years group to examine best practice from birth to four. We did not have this previously, but it will be included in the new policy framework. It is important to have a vision of what we want for our young people and that is what the policy is. It also needs to have a practical implementation plan. Perhaps I can come back to the Deputy with the outcomes of the previous framework as that is probably the best way to deal with that. I would be very happy to put together a document on the impact of the first framework. I am not in position to go through the detail of that here, but quite a number of important initiatives for young people flowed from that first policy framework.

The Deputy also asked about the number of children currently needing special care and high support. The number in high support currently is ten, the number in special care is 17, and four children are currently awaiting placement. One of these is very recent and has just been referred while the others are waiting slightly longer. All children in special care are there as a result of a High Court order. From time to time, children with more immediate needs move ahead of some of the children on the waiting list, and we had one example of that this week. A decision had to be made to put a child with very high risk behaviour ahead of one of the children whose need was not as immediate but who is nevertheless high need, given the High Court has said the child should go into special care.

Children who need this level of intensive support are identified in the High Court. The case is then put to the national care admission and discharge committee and it examines each case. If approved by the committee, the child is put on the list and as soon as a place is available, the case is put before the court and it provides for a special care order. This is how it works currently, but there is always the possibility of an escalation of need. Of the four children waiting for places, one has been waiting since April, one since September, one since mid-October and one in recent days. It is clear we need more high support places and we have increased the number of places. We have started using one of the settings that was investigated previously where it was found improvements needed to be made. Those improvements have now been made and we are able to supply quite a number of places in that setting.

This is an area that needs special attention. It has been ignored in the past and we need to have a clear policy and high standards, something we have not had in the past. This is evident from the HIQA reports on some of our residential settings. However, there are improvements and I believe the area is being monitored significantly more at national level. The director of the child and family support services is paying more attention to it and is devising a national policy for the first time. A more local approach was taken previously, but that approach was not good or acceptable enough. The standards in this area were not acceptable. Now, work is ongoing to improve them.

Senator van Turnhout raised the question of direct provision and Deputy Ó Caoláin raised a point related to the Ryan report. I would be very happy for this committee to have a role in regard to implementation of the recommendations of that report. I chaired a meeting of the Ryan recommendations implementation committee earlier this week. Significant progress is being made on the recommendations. Many have been implemented and I would be very happy to come back to the committee to discuss the details. Satisfactory action is being taken on the recommendations of the Ryan report.

I believe I have responded to the point made about HIQA. Direct provision is a concern for me. I confirmed with the HSE this week that it has a responsibility for children in direct provision if there is any question of those children being at risk and in need of assessment as regards care and protection. That is quite clear if a report is made.

Is that if a report is made to the HSE?

That is right. It is if a report is made. I am happy to examine this area further. We are looking at the report published recently. This area is covered by inspectors from the Department of Justice and Equality, so the Minister has asked for a report based on the findings presented in the recent document to which the Senator referred. It is an area about which I am concerned. These children were excluded from many of the provisions relating to child care in this country. I will examine whether we can take some action to ensure the situation is more satisfactory and that there is more accountability and responsibility with regard to standards and the lives of these children. However, this area comes under the remit of the Department of Justice and Equality.

It comes under very specific national and international legal obligations, and I do not know at this stage the outcome of those discussions. I plan to make the directors of such centres designated officers for the purposes of Children First, which will mean there will be proactive rather than reactive reporting of any concerns.

That would be positive.

I will ensure that is in the Children First Bill. That recommendation came from the committee and I am pleased to accept it.

In relation to the referendum, Senator van Turnhout said that people were still raising concerns regarding vaccinations. The referendum has nothing whatsoever do with vaccinations. There is a 94% vaccination compliance rate here. Senator Crown would be more of an expert on this but the figures I saw indicate a very high level of vaccination uptake for Irish children. There are no plans by the Government to introduce legislation to force vaccinations. The referendum does not deal with this issue and there is no question about that. There is no precedent in our courts of interfering in such a micro way in family decisions. The referendum is about cases where there is risk to the safety and welfare of the child, where it has been prejudicially affected, and the response must be proportionate. Any interference in relation to vaccinations would not be acceptable or proportionate and would not meet the criteria in the referendum wording. The referendum is not related in any way to child benefit either. I will follow up on the points made by Senator Burke outside of committee.

I thank the Chairman and welcome the Minister and her staff. Last night I participated in a debate on the referendum on radio and it struck me that the main thrust of the argument of the opponents of the referendum was that we should not trust the State. In that context, does the Minister agree that the key point for us to get across is that the referendum is designed to ensure vulnerable children are brought up in a family situation? When that issue is raised, it is very important for all of us who favour the passing of this referendum to keep making that point because all those who are opposed to the provision have to do is raise enough doubts in peoples' minds. We must get across the message that the point of the referendum is to ensure vulnerable children will be brought up in a family situation, even if it is not their natural family situation.

I have checked out the legal situation regarding the McKenna judgment and, in that context, it is very important both sides of the argument get fair play and are allowed to explain their position clearly. However, there is no obligation to have a 50-50 situation in any debate, and I appeal to the media to take that point on board. Having said that, genuine concerns that people may have must be addressed.

I welcome the Minister and her staff. I have been canvassing in County Louth in recent weeks and the response has been great. One question keeps coming up and I promised the citizens of Louth that if I got a chance, I would put it to the Minister. People want to know if this referendum will make it easier for children to be taken from their parents in exceptional cases, and also when exactly the State can intervene to ensure a child's interests are at the centre of all decisions being taken about his or her welfare. I have confidence in this referendum proposal and believe it will protect the most vulnerable children and will support and protect families. When families are in trouble, early intervention can prevent more serious problems developing.

I received a copy of the information booklet on the children's referendum and believe it is very important that as much information as possible is provided to the public. I commend the Minister on deciding to hold the referendum on a Saturday because it gives the whole of Ireland an opportunity to vote.

I apologise for being late. The information booklet is very good and I understand it will be delivered to every home. A number of people have asked me why this referendum has taken so long and perhaps the Minister can explain that because I am unable to. Apparently it is 19 years since Ms Justice Catherine McGuinness first prompted this idea and people have been asking me why it has taken so long to get to this point. They want to know why people have been allowed to continue to abuse children physically and mentally while the State dithered. In that context, the State has failed children. I ask the Minister to respond to that question because I am struggling to answer it on the doorsteps. I know what I would like to say but I am restricted.

My main advice to the public when they ask what they can do is to be the eyes and ears of their communities. I tell them that they know the children in their areas and to watch out for them. In my own community, there are people who know what others eat for their breakfast. They must also know when children are not being looked after properly. I am trying to emphasise to people that child abuse and neglect is everyone's problem. It is not just an issue for the State, social services, the Garda Síochána or teachers but also for every one of us as individuals. We all know of neglected or abused children in our communities. We meet them every day. In my previous life as a community volunteer, I regularly dealt with difficult children in the youth club at my local community centre whose older siblings also had behavioural problems connected with their family problems. It is sad to say that there are some families who have had difficulties over three generations and who struggle in vain to keep their children out of prison and away from anti-social behaviour.

Perhaps this is not an issue for the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs but I have grave concerns about the money that is spent on projects in communities. I want to know where the money is going because in many of those projects, people are dealing with the second and third generations of the same eight to ten families. There is something radically wrong when the same families are filing through the door of community projects, year after year, generation after generation.

The referendum information leaflet states that "the views and wishes of the child should be taken into account, as long as the child is sufficiently mature to make this appropriate". How will the State and its agents define "mature" in that context?

I thank the Chairman and also thank the Minister for coming here today. We would all like to see this referendum pass but the biggest doubt for members of the public is whether they can have confidence in the child protection services and in the reform that is taking place. I have asked previously for a more localised breakdown of the figures on the numbers of child protection cases as well as on the numbers of staff and vacancies in social services. That detail cannot be provided to me as the information is only available on a regional basis. It is not acceptable, in the context of, for example, the damning report relating to the infamous Roscommon case, that I cannot tell people in Roscommon how many social work staff are employed in the county, how many vacancies exist or how many cases are on the books of Roscommon social services. Those are basic data that should be available to me, as a public representative, and to the wider community. This must be addressed.

One of the recommendations relating to the Roscommon case was that an audit be carried out in County Roscommon regarding cases of serious neglect. When that audit was completed, more than 18 months ago, the national director said the HSE would publish a redacted version of it. Since then, the story has changed consistently over time. First, the audit was to published in a redacted form, then in an executive summary. We are now being promised a composite of the audits of Roscommon and two other areas. The last time the Minister came before this committee we were told publication of that report was imminent. Here we are again. The report is still imminent. When will the composite report be published? What is the delay in publishing it? Why is the Roscommon audit not being published? That audit identified the fact that one in four of the neglect cases in County Roscommon were deemed to be at risk, and that was a mere snapshot of 30 cases. There is continuing concern about the operation of services in County Roscommon but the people who are concerned about the audit have sought its publication without success.

I wish to record my unambiguous support for the referendum. There are understandable fears, arising from the fact that the State, State agencies and national organisations, such as the Catholic Church, have failed children. It is important that the message go out that the referendum is about protecting children, giving them rights and, as far as possible, ensuring that they grow up in stable family situations.

There is also concern about the old problem of theory and practice. The Minister has a role to play in proofing the budget with regard to children and to poverty. Child poverty is a serious issue. It is understandable that it has been raised in relation to the referendum. The Minister has a duty to ensure at Cabinet that budgets, particularly the upcoming budget, is child proofed and poverty proofed.

Deputy Healy, the committee will discuss child poverty in the next couple of weeks.

I also welcome Mr. Dan Kelleher of the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. The committee has received an apology from Deputies Regina Doherty and Michael Colreavy.

Deputy Dowds asked if the goal of the children's referendum was to protect vulnerable children. It is clear that is what the goal is. I remind the public that this is already in the Constitution. It is long established in the Constitution that the State has a role in protecting children. We have taken that provision, made it clearer and looked at the impact on the child as a prime reason to take a child in and protect that child. One must look at the impact on the child. We have reformulated the Article so it focuses, not on the parental failure but on the impact on the child. We have also built in other aspects of caring for children that are very important, such as looking at their best interests and hearing the views of the child, and I will answer questions as to how that will be done. We have also added a general provision that has never before been in the Constitution.

The Deputy is absolutely right that the first goal of the referendum is the safety and protection of children who are at risk. I have already given the numbers of children who are coming before our child and family services. This is reality. Children are abused, mostly in their own homes. It is exceptional and affects a small number. Our absolute support is for the family and for every child to have the opportunity to be brought up in his or her own family and for that family to be supported wherever that is needed.

There are, however, exceptional cases where we have to do what is best for the child, to give that child a second chance. We are making it easier to give those children a second chance of family life by changing the adoption legislation. At present, one must, effectively, be abandoned until one is 18 years of age for an adoption to be allowed, that is where it is not voluntary. Voluntary adoptions go ahead. A child of married parents cannot be adopted at all.

We built in careful safeguards. This is not about snatching children. It is not about trying to undermine parents. The first goal of the State is to support parents. It is in exceptional cases where the child is not being cared for and is at serious risk that we want to give that child a second opportunity of family life.

The Deputy is right to focus on that. I take the point he is making about McKenna. Most of us are happy to debate any place where we are given an opportunity, with whoever. It is for the media to decide how they work out that balance. They are beginning to do that and to ensure that there is more coverage. I notice increasing coverage. During the campaign on the stability treaty referendum, the coverage built up as the campaign went on. This is a one-page amendment. The stability treaty had 20 pages. It should be possible for us to examine and get the information across about what is intended

To answer Deputy Fitzpatrick's question, the State already has a role in protecting children. Under the child care legislation it is very clear that the State has a role to intervene and protect children who are at risk. That continues to be the same. We are ensuring that the perspective of the child is more central than it has been in the past. For a very long time, the perspective and experience of the child has not been as centre stage as it should have been when decisions were being taken in court rooms. One can see that absence in many of the reports that are being presented to me and which have been examined in this committee.

It is not about giving more power to the State but about a balance between a family's rights and a child's rights and making sure we look to the protection of the child at all times and do not return children to situations that are dangerous. Many of the children cited in the report of the independent child death review group died at home, and 67 of them died when they were out of State care. We must be realistic in making decisions about children who are at risk and try to give them the very best chance. That is why we are putting this referendum forward.

Early intervention remains the goal, and to get support to families. That is why the word "proportionate" is included in the amendment. It allows for supervision orders, for family support and for intervention to support families. The goal is not just to place children in care. That is the last thing we want to do. If it is necessary, however, it has to be done.

Deputy Byrne asked why this has taken so long. The committee could spend a long time examining why it has taken so long. There was a combination of factors. People have called for his for a long time. For decades, we have had information about how children have been treated in Irish institutions and we did not think one of the solutions would be to put a stronger provision for children into the Constitution. For the last 20 years it has been recommended that we would do this. There were concerns that if power, authority, equality or rights were given to a member of a family, like a child, it would weaken the family. People said the same about equality for women. The truth is that if one empowers members of a family one empowers the family.

There was a political hesitancy about doing this. Catherine McGuinness called for this 20 years ago and the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children called for it. Previous Ministers of State, Barry Andrews and Brian Lenihan, and the joint committee chaired by former Deputy O'Rourke spent three years examining whether or not we should do this. If a committee of the Oireachtas is to mean anything, we should take the recommendations of that committee seriously. It held 64 meetings and heard a huge number of submissions. The committee concluded that we should do what we are now putting to the people. The Government has not delayed in putting the wording forward. We put an undertaking in the programme for Government and a referendum will be held on Saturday 10 November.

Deputy Byrne made a point about giving more accountability to projects in communities. She is right. Our reform agenda for the new child and family support agencies must involve working more closely with the bodies we are funding.

We will need to work more closely with those bodies who will be in receipt of funding and we will need to be clear about the criteria because there will need to be more accountability. Funding has been given out in an ad hoc manner in the past. We must align the priorities of voluntary organisations and statutory agencies, not least because we are in a time of such financial difficulties.

On the question about who decides on the maturity of a child when his or her views are to be taken into account, the courts have begun to take the views of the child into account. This is already a feature of child law in some areas referred to in the amendment but the amendment will strengthen this feature as it will be a constitutional provision. Judges are taking the views of children into account. In some instances the guardian ad litem system is used whereby a social worker or other advocate is appointed to meet the child in order to understand the child's perspective, to spend time with the child and to clarify the issues.

It is acknowledged that any child who can express a view has that view heard but there is no pressure on the child to express a view. It might not be appropriate in some circumstances such as in custody or access cases where such expression of views may be too traumatic for the child. A child may not wish to express a view or may be ambivalent in his or her views. The weight to be attached to the views of a child is a matter for the judge. The view of the child does not determine the outcome but it is very important that it is heard. A combination of common-sense in the approach to hearing the child's view along with information from expert witnesses such as psychologists and others and information from the parents, would be critical. The judge will form a view. If and when the referendum is passed the courts will have to examine how this provision will be implemented by them. I think they can learn much from international practice where the views of children are given more recognition. In my view, an eventual move towards a system of family courts is the way to deal with this issue. The Minister for Justice and Equality has spoken about moving to family courts which are less adversarial and where it will be easier for the views of everyone concerned to be heard. That is the medium to longer term solution for dealing with this issue.

Deputy Naughten will have noted in my reply to his question that quite significant progress has been made in Roscommon. It is very clear that practice has improved with more management and more services. There have been many positive outcomes arising from a dreadful situation. I commend the Deputy on his attention to this issue and the care with which he has pursued it. I have given the Deputy a number of examples of how there has been a very significant improvement in the care services.

I agree with Deputy Naughten about the need to have information at regional and local level. That information is being made more available. As soon as the new systems are in place, I will be happy to give information about services in a region or local area. Such information is important, not least because of what other members have said. It is important, for instance, to know how many children are being abused and neglected in Roscommon, Kildare, Cork and Dundalk. The community can then begin to take responsibility and be aware of what is happening in their community. As many of these cases are heard in the family courts, that information is not available. As I do not have the statistics about local areas that I would like to have, I am unable to provide them to the Deputy. However, these statistics are being gathered and collated nationally. The Department has a new ICT system and business model to ensure that kind of information is available. I expect that in the next few months I will be in a position to give the Deputy more data than has been possible to date. The Deputy's key point was about the basic data and community responsibility and I can only agree with him that we need to move to a position where more detail is available.

Deputy Naughten also asked about the audit. Gordon Jeyes has the audit and I hope we will be in a position to publish it fairly shortly. It was compiled by an outside consultant and it took that length of time to carry out the audit which is a national representative sample from a number of areas. We are not in a position to audit every case but I think it will provide useful information. I do not have a timeline for its publication but I will come back to the Deputy about the timeline. My intention would be to publish the audit as soon as possible.

The composite audit?

What about the individual audit? There was an original commitment given to publish a redacted version of it.

The composite audit will include the three audits in order to maximise the lessons to be learned. The audit will contain data on Roscommon and also data on Waterford and Dublin. The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, will audit the national child protection standards as and from November. This inspection is another important method of ensuring that the standards are reached to our satisfaction and to avoid what happened in Roscommon.

People are anxious for the Roscommon audit to be published in whatever version is required-----

Yes, it will be published.

-----rather than just being amalgamated with other areas. When other areas are included there is a difficulty that the waters may be muddied. There are specific concerns with regard to Roscommon and a specific recommendation was made. The people of Roscommon who deal with the child care services and who have concerns are anxious that the report on Roscommon be published in whatever form, even if it is redacted.

As I stated in my reply to the Deputy's question, an external consultant conducted a review of practice and audit of the management of cases of neglect in Roscommon. I wish to put this information on the record of the House. This review highlighted the following: the strengths and challenges and the positive outcomes; well-established multi-disciplinary arrangements and organisational structures which facilitated team work and communications; initial assessments routinely completed; an emphasis on direct work with children and young people; and a commitment to listening to children and ensuring their voices were heard. The review found that in a majority of the cases, staff and managers displayed a commitment to early assessment of need and provided a range of supports to assist children and families, resulting in improved parenting capacity and better outcomes for children. The review concluded that the challenges involved are similar throughout Ireland and the UK, including: the need for more authoritative social work; senior managers reviewing and auditing files; national supervision policy implementation; and establishment of thresholds where legal intervention in cases is required.

It is important for the Deputy to acknowledge that an audit has been carried out. It has shown that the issues that were highlighted in the inquiry are being addressed in Roscommon. I have always said that reform of the child protection services will not happen overnight but there have been what I would call fairly major improvements. The audit will be published and it will include Roscommon.

Perhaps the Minister could deal with Deputy Healy's question.

Deputy Healy raised the matter of child poverty. The figures on child poverty are of concern. The best way out of poverty is through employment and that is the reason the Government is focusing on the creation of more jobs and tackling the economic issues. If we want to deal with child poverty we have to deal with the economy. Deputy Healy is correct that we have to ensure that the strongest possible supports are in place to enable those families to return to the workforce. A job is the road out of poverty and unemployment and is one of the key methods for tackling that issue. We must ensure that those families most at risk are given the most support. This will be my intention in the budget.

I thank the Minister. Child poverty is one of the issues the committee will discuss in November. Deputy Ciara Conway is the committee rapporteur on that report.

What is the progress with regard to the national early years strategy?

I have appointed a group under the chairmanship of Dr. Hennessy from UCD. The group has begun work on examining the national policy for the early years and will give me a report which I hope to receive early in the new year.

I thank the Minister for her attendance. The committee will endorse the "Yes" campaign with a photo next week as part of the awareness campaign.

I thank the Minister and her officials for attending and for raising and addressing the issues discussed.

The joint committee adjourned at 11.10 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 25 October 2012.
Top
Share