This matter, which I have raised previously, concerns the need for new accommodation for St. Andrew's national school in Lucan. The Department of Education and Science accepts the school needs a new school building because the present building is not suitable. It is old, has limited capacity for increasing accommodation and is not an appropriate site for expansion. When I raised the issue previously, the Minister seemed to accept the need for new accommodation but progress is slow, despite the fact the Office of Public Works, OPW, advertised for sites before the summer. Has there been further progress?
Adjournment Matters.
Schools Building Programme.
I thank the Senator for raising this matter as it provides the opportunity to outline the position of the Department of Education and Science regarding the proposed school building for St. Andrew's national school in Lucan. The Department has always acknowledged the need for a replacement building to meet the future needs of St. Andrew's. As it has been established that the present site is unsuitable for this development, a suitable site must be identified and acquired.
The fact that the school is located in a mature part of Lucan complicates the identification of a site, particularly given the school's desire to remain in close proximity to its church. Previously, the school authority undertook to carry out its own negotiations to acquire a site and to submit its proposals to the Department. However, these proposals did not subsequently materialise and the Department recently took over the task of site identification. This resulted in its requesting the property management section of the Office of Public Works, which acts on behalf of the Department in regard to site acquisitions generally, to explore the possibility of acquiring a site for the school.
I am pleased to inform the Senator that a number of site proposals were received by the OPW under normal advertising procedures. A technical assessment has been carried out on all these sites and the OPW is currently awaiting the site reports. When a suitable site has been secured, the project will then be considered for progress in the context of the school building and modernisation programme from 2007 onwards.
Equality Issues.
I welcome the Minister of State. I raise this issue so that I can learn from the reply. It arises in response to the European Court of Justice's ruling this week that women can be paid less than men on the basis of length of service in a firm, even if they must take time off to bring up children. They also found that length of service is a legitimate criteria by which to award higher pay rates to certain workers.
My initial reaction to the ruling may be wrong — I have been told I may have misinterpreted it. I feel it discriminates against women who take time off to have children. As I stated in the House recently, we have worked hard over the years to improve maternity leave and parental leave for mothers and fathers who wish to take time off to be with their children. This decision will discriminate against mothers or fathers who take time off.
I accept that if a mother chooses to take leave of absence, perhaps for five years, that period minus the legitimate maternity leave to which she is entitled should not be taken into consideration when awarding pay, particularly when this depends on length of service. I am confused in this regard. I have always believed that the principle of equal pay for equal work helped to remove discrimination against women in the workplace. The fact that one has spent a long period working in a job does not necessarily mean that one has gained great experience. I heard recently of a young teacher with very little experience who was able to carry out the duties required when a promotion was offered. The promotion involved additional pay for doing certain jobs after school hours. However, the young teacher did not get the job, while an older teacher did. It was thought that based on length of service he or she was more entitled to it, even though the younger teacher had been doing the work.
I hope the Minister of State will be able to explain to me in plain English the impact of this ruling on Irish workers, particularly women. It should be clarified so that I will understand it and be able to interpret the ruling correctly when we have a debate on this matter in the House.
The real issue behind this court case is the gender pay gap. More than 30 years after the introduction of equal pay legislation, a significant gap between the average pay of men and women remains, not just in Ireland but throughout the European Union. Women in the EU earn 15% less than men and progress has been slow in closing the gender pay gap with men, according to a recent European Commission report.
Twenty years ago, the gender pay gap in Ireland was about 25%, while ten years ago it was still over 20%. The latest statistics show that the gender pay gap is still around 12 to 13%. While significant progress has been made, it remains a cause for concern in an age which fully endorses gender equality.
The Government believes that a multifaceted approach is required to address this complex issue. This is the approach we have taken with a good degree of success, although research has presented us with new challenges. In 2003, Irish research on solutions to the gender pay gap found that increased labour market participation by women was important. It found that while the arrival of children in the family had little impact on the labour market participation of a man, a woman with identical qualifications and experience would typically have nine years less labour market participation by the age of 47.
These findings led to a series of policy recommendations by a working group, the most important of which were that the Government should continue to develop child care services; that the national minimum wage should be reviewed regularly; and that there is a need for better maternity and parental leave. We have made considerable progress on these key recommendations which has, no doubt, contributed to the reduction in our gender pay gap to just over 12%.
In the year 2000, Ireland was far behind the rest of Europe in the development of child care services. However, as the House will be aware, we have made up on that considerably. Over 41,000 new centre-based child care places have been created in the past seven years.
The issue of affordability of child care is a key topic. All parents in Ireland are assisted with the costs of caring for their children through significant increases in child benefit which is now a minimum of €150 per month per child under 18 years of age. We have recently added a special annual payment of €1,000 for each child aged under six years of age. We have also increased paid and unpaid maternity leave to a similar extent. This development has also been complemented by parental, adoptive and carer's leave. It is a major support for women in the labour force who have child care and-or other responsibilities.
Research such as this shows that the gender pay gap is every bit as complicated as we all believe. If we are to bring it right down to parity, policy makers and social partners need to look at the many different influences through education policy, employment practices, social supports and career development. We also need to find a multifaceted response which will enable us to achieve the goal of parity.
The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is in contact with the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Finance about the implications of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Cadman case. It is too early to say what the full implications of the case are. However, a preliminary assessment indicates that the judgment does not represent a major change to the case law as was understood up to now. The European Court of Justice has characterised the judgment as containing only a clarification of the case law in thisfield.
Mental Health Legislation.
I welcome the Minister of State to the House. Yesterday we discussed the latest appearance of Ireland before the committee monitoring the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. While we agreed that progress had been made as regards the rights of children in this country, there were large gaps.
There are large gaps regarding the treatment of children in the area of mental health. For the first time, section 25 of the Mental Health Act 2001 allows for the involuntary detention of children. While the consent of the child's parents is considered to be very important, if consent is not given, a social worker or another official may apply to the courts, on an ex parte basis, to have a child admitted to an approved centre. The problem is that in some areas we have no approved centres for the detention of such children. Those who have to accept them from the courts into a centre could, in fact, be sued for taking them into an unsuitable place under sections 63 and 64 of the Act, which define approved centres.
Figures provided to me on inpatient places indicate that they vary from 20 to 35 in the whole country — some in Dublin and some in the west — for children who are so seriously mentally ill that they need to be admitted. We have no notion of the number of child patients who may need admission because mental illness is not included on inpatient waiting lists. We have a serious problem in that, from 1 July, professionals in this field could be before the courts because they do not have adequate facilities in which to treat these children. A considerable number of children who are admitted are older children. That is because psychosis and schizophrenia are more likely to occur in teenagers than in children under 12. Currently, 16 to 18 year olds are de facto treated in adult services even though that is considered to be entirely unsuitable. For example, the Mental Health Commission is bringing forward regulations whereby staff working in these services for children who have to be admitted should be screened under the children first regulations. I do not know how that is going to happen, however. It is recommended that they should be seen by adolescent or child psychiatrists but these people may not be working in the centres to which the children are admitted.
Even if two, three or four beds are segregated within an adult unit, it is most unlikely that there will be proper play facilities for young children or educational facilities. Many of them will be admitted for serious reasons, particularly for attempted suicide or because they are considered to be suicide risks. These children are badly in need of treatment, yet as far as I can see we have made no effort in recent years to do anything about this issue, even though it was known that it was coming down the line. It is recommended they should be cared for in separate areas or, if not, in well segregated areas in psychiatric institutions because otherwise it is considered they will not be properly treated.
There is also a shortage of psychologists and other personnel in the service to deal with these children. Even if we have the facilities, the shortage of staff is woeful. It is reckoned that 120 places are needed. With early treatment being much more preferable in treating those suffering from mental illness, it is sad we have allowed this situation, to which we should have been alert, develop because it has been pointed out for a long time. I would be glad to hear from the Minister of State how it is proposed to deal with the issue in a timeframe of fewer than three weeks.
I thank Senator Henry for raising this matter on the Adjournment. I assure the House that work continues towards ensuring that appropriate child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient services are put in place without delay. In addition, I assure the Senator that it is not anticipated that the Mental Health Act 2001 will lead to individuals being brought before the courts in the circumstances she outlined.
As the Senator said, the full provisions of the Mental Health Act 2001 will come into force from 1 November. This is significant legislation which replaces the outdated 1945 legislation that currently governs involuntary detentions of people suffering from mental disorders.
The Department of Health and Children, the Health Service Executive and the Mental Health Commission have been working together to ensure the successful implementation of the Act. It defines a child as anyone under the age of 18, bringing mental health law in line with other legislation. A very small number of children require involuntary admission due to mental illness. However, we have an obligation to provide the highest standards of care and treatment to this vulnerable group.
It is accepted that additional beds for the treatment of children are needed. This was outlined in a Vision for Change and these required facilities will be delivered within the capital programme of the HSE. In the meantime, children and adolescents requiring inpatient treatment, both voluntarily and involuntarily, will continue to be admitted to adult units when necessary. Recognising this interim situation, the Mental Health Commission has prepared a draft code of practice on the treatment of children in adult facilities.
The HSE established a working group on child and adolescent mental health services. The group consisted of representatives from the Irish College of Psychiatrists, the Irish Hospital Consultants Association, the Irish Medical Organisation, senior HSE managers and practitioners. The group explored options capable of creating immediate additional capacity for the regional provision of inpatient facilities for those children and adolescents who require involuntary admission under section 25 of the Mental Health Act 2001. The group's report has been adopted by the HSE.
The report proposes how services can best be delivered in an integrated and holistic way and has identified additional inpatient bed capacity for children and adolescents. Each HSE region will identify three or four beds in adult units for the treatment of children and adolescents on an interim basis pending the provision of dedicated units. Each unit will be supported by a consultant-led child and adolescent multidisciplinary team. Staff in these units will receive additional training and appropriate clearance.
Eight additional consultant-led child and adolescent psychiatric teams per year will be established nationally for the next four years to enhance community and inpatient services. This year the HSE has allocated an additional €3.25 million for this purpose and recruitment is under way.
As the Minister for Health and Children has previously stated, it is not acceptable for children and adolescents to be treated in adult units. However, the Mental Health Act 2001 does not prevent the treatment of children in approved adult facilities. Therefore, the question of somebody being brought before the courts and subjected to a custodial sentence or a fine does not arise.
I am sure the House will agree that the full implementation of the Act from 1 November next is to be welcomed as this will provide without any further delay much needed protection to all adults and children who are involuntarily detained. I take on board the points made by the Senator and I will convey them to the Minister for Health and Children.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply and additional remarks. I am afraid the position is as bad as I thought.
The Seanad adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 18 October 2006.