Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 7 Mar 2013

Vol. 221 No. 12

Adjournment Matters

University Status Applications

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon. On a number of occasions I have tabled motions on the jobs situation in Waterford and the Minister of State has often come to the House to reply, and I thank him for that. I have also constantly raised the need for a technological university for the south east and its critical importance for improving the awful situation in Waterford and the south east in general with regard to job creation.

The unemployment figures for the south east and Waterford city and county are truly appalling. They are well above the national average. According to the most recent figures from the Central Statistics Office, the unemployment rate in Waterford city is 25.1%, which is not just an unacceptable figure but also a dangerously high one. The Government must seriously examine the very high level of unemployment in Waterford city and ensure it takes the appropriate and necessary action by putting in place the required interventions to help the city, county and region. I believe a suite of interventions is necessary. It should include added support from enterprise agencies, government spending in the city and region, prioritisation of capital projects and a focus on educational attainment. A university is a critical element of that.

An amazing figure relating to Waterford city emerged from the census figures published last year. A total of 48% of the population of the city have not completed secondary level education. That is a huge figure and is probably due to the over-dependence on manufacturing over the years. Obviously, the figure has increased substantially and now represents a sizeable proportion of the population. There is no doubt that we must examine educational attainment levels across Waterford city and county and the south east in general and consider ways in which we can improve them.

The establishment of a technological university would be hugely important for a number of reasons. The last Forfás report on unemployment in Waterford, on foot of the Talk Talk job losses, looked at a number of strengths and areas in which the south east could major. Agri-food is obviously one of them. There is huge potential in milk and dairy production in the future. The triangle of Kilkenny, Wexford and Waterford is doing very positive work in the tourism area. There are also the pharmaceutical and science sectors, as well as telecommunications and software. We have, for example, the wonderful Telecommunications Software & Systems Group, TSSG, a research and development company based in Waterford Institute of Technology. It gets its funding almost exclusively from the private sector and from contracts.

However, we need a technological university that is closely aligned with all of those sectors and which has strong links with industry and enterprise to drive change from research and development to connections with industry and turn out graduates who can take up job opportunities. That should be part of a long-term, perhaps ten-year, strategy of the Government for the south east. It should focus on those five or six big sectors in which the south east can major, align all the agencies, including the enterprise agencies, in that strategy and set real targets. The missing ingredient at present is a technological university.

I did some research for this motion. Almost two years ago, after the loss of the jobs at Talk Talk, the Irish Examiner stated that a positive announcement would be made shortly by the Minister for Education and Skills and it was expected that by next year, which is this year, Waterford would have a technological university. That was the statement by the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn. I am seeking an update on how matters stand. Will the Minister explain to me and the people of Waterford and the south east what the position is with that application? What is the process involved? How long will it be before a decision is made by the Government? It is in the programme for Government but it is absolutely critical for the economic and social development of Waterford city and county and for the south east region. I appeal to the Government to prioritise this as an issue that must be fast-tracked as soon as possible. I look forward to the Minister's response.

I thank the Senator for raising this issue.

The framework for system development laid out in the national strategy for higher education to 2030 includes a developmental pathway towards designation as a technological university for merged institutes of technology which seek to apply. The Higher Education Authority, HEA, has been asked to implement this framework. The implementation process is well under way. The Landscape document published in February 2012 lays out a clear four-stage process and criteria for institutes of technology that wish to apply for designation as a technological university. The process for designation is designed to ensure educational quality, objectivity, international expertise, fairness and transparency.

The process consists of four stages overseen by the HEA, with an independent international panel of experts to advise the authority in the final stages. The first stage of the process required institutes of technology which wished to merge and seek designation as a technological university to submit a formal expression of interest to the HEA last July. The HEA will submit its formal advice on an outline configuration for the future higher education system after Easter. This will include advice on the progress of institutes of technology interested in seeking to move to the second stage of the designation process.

The second stage of the process involves detailed project planning followed by submission and evaluation of those plans. How long it then takes for applicants to formally seek designation will depend very much on the capacity of the applicant institutions at the time of plan submission and how long their developmental trajectory towards meeting the criteria will take. Full legal consolidation of the institutes of technology seeking designation also has to occur before the final application for designation is submitted. The drafting of legislative proposals to provide for the amalgamation of institutes of technology and the establishment of technological universities will be advanced in tandem with the designation process as part of the work that is under way on implementing the higher education strategy.

In view of the process that has been put in place to assess proposals for designation as technological universities, it would not be appropriate to comment specifically on any potential applications for designation by any group of institutes of technology.

I thank the Minister for his reply. I accept the limitations he might be under, given that a number of applications will be made.

This is socially and economically critical to the people of the south east. The Government recognised that when it included it in its programme for Government and I commend the Government for that. I am worried we have opened up a four-way process that might lead to a delay. It might place more hurdles in the way of the institute of technology. We have had too many hurdles and I am also deeply conscious of university politics, which are also at play. The Government must drive this through and take a decision to deliver the university for the people of the south-east–––––

The Senator can ask a supplementary question, not make a speech. He got a good run.

I do not have a supplementary question, I just want to thank the Minister of State for his response.

I thank the Minister of State and I thank everybody.

Special Educational Needs Services Provision

This is a very disturbing case. I am asking the Minister for Education and Skills to investigate the serious case of an 11-year-old boy. I have given the boy's name and school to the Department. He has high-functioning autism and ADHD. His rights appear to be infringed in that he is not receiving an appropriate education for his needs. He has been locked in an isolation room from 15 to 18 January and he now faces expulsion because he is unable to do his schoolwork. The parents have given me the details of the case. I have not met the child or the parents but they have asked me to put on record the case of Oisín, who is attending Clocha Rince national school, Moyvalley, County Kildare. I have been contacted by friends who are friends of the family.

It appears the boy has challenging behaviour. He has high-functioning autism and he attends the school's ASD unit, where he was mainstreamed against the parents' wishes and the best professional advice available to the school. The services he requires, such as occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, psychiatry and psychology are delivered by the westside Beechpark services team working out of Johnstown, Naas. The boy also has a behavioural analyst supplied and paid for by Irish Autism Action. Once every two months, for the past two and a half years, the multidisciplinary team met to assess Oisín's progress and to deal with any matters that have arisen since the previous meeting. His behaviour has been a major concern for the team, which is acknowledged by the parents. His behavioural analyst has made recommendations on how to manage his behaviour to the team and the school has constantly ignored the recommendations, according to the parents.

At the end of the school term, last July, the parents were informed that the resource hours Oisín was receiving were to be taken away because he was in the unit and was not entitled to them. The problem is that the unit did not put anything in place for Oisín and the progress made in the past number of years started to be lost. The family started the 2012-13 school year with Oisín spending all day in mainstream education, with no resource hours of any kind. He was struggling to comprehend maths. He is now receiving nothing in terms of special education, in keeping with his attachment to the unit and his educational needs.

Before the Christmas break, he had a number of days where he spent almost the entire day in what is called the isolation room or the quiet room. It is an empty 8 ft by 6 ft space that Oisín is taken to when he has a meltdown or when he needs some time out. The room is used with the parents' permission but only for short times and was never intended to be used for hours on end. The December issue was resolved and the principal turned down an offer by Beechpark to have the January multidisciplinary team meeting changed to December, saying he was happy that everything was sorted to his satisfaction. Upon the recommencement of the school year in January, after the Christmas break, it became clear Oisín was having a lot of trouble being in the mainstream class all day. His lunch breaks were usually used as punishment to get him to complete his schoolwork because his use of the OT room had been stopped since before Christmas. This was also some form of punishment. Everything a child with ADHD would need during a school day, including movement breaks, yard breaks and OT, were taken from him.

On Monday, 14 January, the parents report that Oisín had an okay day at school but the next day, the trouble started. By close of school on Tuesday, 15 February, he had spent the better part of the day in the isolation room. By Wednesday and Thursday, 16 and 17 January, he had spent two entire days in the quiet room. It was made clear to the staff that the parents did not believe this was working but they were told to stick with it. By Friday, Oisín had had enough. On Friday morning, 18 January, he was in a distressed state and had not been sleeping well because he was concerned that he would be locked in the isolation room again. Oisín's mother had to leave to bring her sick mother to hospital in Dublin but explained to the teacher that she had grave reservations about leaving her son there because of the distressed state he was in. His distress was made worse by the fact he had been told he could bring his skateboard into school and it was then taken from him. The teacher and the SNA assured the mother everything would be fine and told her to head off on her way. A text sent at 10.30 a.m. told the mother he was okay and that all was under control.

Within an hour, phone calls were being received from the school by both parents. Oisín's father has Parkinson's disease and was not in a position to drive so the mother had to leave her sick mother in hospital in Dublin and return to the school, not knowing what was the problem.

The Senator's five minutes are up.

This is so critical to put on record.

I know it is critical but everything is critical.

Will the Acting Chairman listen? I beg his indulgence.

It is the job of the Minister of State to listen.

When Oisín's mother arrived, she found access to the corridor blocked. She was met by the deputy principal and brought into the secretary's office. She was told gardaí were on their way. When she saw her son, he had cuts to his forehead and blood coming from one nostril. Later that evening, a number of shards of glass were removed from his feet and hair. He had broken the window in the isolation room to get out.

I could say much more but, having been an educator myself, it appears we have a boy with challenging behaviour. All types of hope are being offered to the school. The resource hours were stripped from him and the school has not been availing of the help available. Under the Education Act, under the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act and under the Education (Welfare) Act and in respect of child protection issues, there are serious issues.

We will hear the Minister of State's reply because the Senator has taken six minutes and 18 seconds.

There is a meeting at five o'clock-----

The Senator made a very good case. The Minister of State can reply.

If I can just finish with one sentence-----

I am chairing the session and six minutes have elapsed------

The principal is offering expulsion to the child but that gives rise to the question of where he would go.

I thank the Senator for raising the matter. The policy of my Department is to ensure all children with special educational needs can have access to an education appropriate to their needs, to secure the maximum level of inclusion of students with special educational needs in mainstream schools or, where a special school or special class placement may be required, to ensure that such placements are provided for. The National Council for Special Education, NCSE, is responsible, through its network of local special educational needs organisers, SENOs, for allocating additional teaching resources and special needs assistants, SNAs, to schools, to support children with special needs, in accordance with my Department's criteria. The NCSE has advised that the child referred to by the Senator is enrolled in a special class for children with autism spectrum disorder, ASD, attached to a mainstream national school. My Department provides enhanced pupil teacher ratios in ASD classes of 6:1 to provide dedicated teaching support for children in such classes. SNA support is also provided in special classes to assist with the care needs of children. Many children who attend special classes ultimately integrate into some mainstream classes during the school day in accordance with my Department's policy of inclusion and taking into account the abilities and needs of each child.

I understand the child referred to by the Senator attended both the special class and mainstream classes in the school. I understand that the school received SNA support to cater for the care needs of the child concerned. The NCSE has capacity to review the levels of SNA support provided to schools. The NCSE has advised my Department that the child referred to by the Senator is currently suspended from school. The NCSE has also advised that a meeting has been arranged between the child's parents, the principal and the board of management of the school, in order to consider the suspension of the child, and the child's education in the school. This meeting will take place this afternoon, Thursday, 7 March.

It is appropriate that such a meeting should take place and in circumstances where a parent is dissatisfied with the manner in which education is being provided to the child in school, the parent should bring this matter to the attention of the school's board of management. Under the provisions of the Education Act 1998, the board of management is the body charged with the direct governance of a school and employs the staff at the school. If a parent or guardian remain unsatisfied, having brought matters to the attention of the school board, they may bring the matter to the attention of the Office of the Ombudsman for Children.

If a parent wishes to report a child protection concern, he or she may do so to the school board of management, to my Department or to the Health Service Executive, which will deal with this report in accordance with established guidelines and procedures.
I am hopeful, however, that the meeting which has been scheduled for today will be able to resolve any matters of concern the parent or the school might have. I can advise that in circumstances where a child has been suspended from school for more than 20 days of the school year or has been expelled from a school, the parent or guardian of that child may appeal such a decision to my Department under section 29 of the Education Act. I understand that the parents of the child in question have been made aware of this right of appeal. I thank the Senator again for raising this matter.

I have given the Minister of State the details of the case. This boy has not been in school since 18 January and it is now 7 March. If that was his child or my child, we would be very worried. I note there is recourse to the Office of the Ombudsman for Children, etc. Does the Minister of State think this is good enough, based on what he has read and heard?

I am confident the meeting taking place this afternoon may resolve the issues which have arisen. Ultimately, responsibility for the governance or running of the school rests with the board of management. If the parents are not happy with the decision taken by the board of management, they have recourse to a higher appeals process and they are aware of those options. From the reply given to me and from the indications received locally, it is the intention to resolve these issues through discussion and co-operation and collaboration with the parents and the child concerned.

Why was home tuition not provided in the meantime? This child has had no schooling since 18 January.

I am not aware of why home tuition was not provided.

I presume it is possible to apply to the Department for that.

Dumping at Sea

I wish to raise the issue of the dumping of chemical weapons off the coast of Donegal which, according to British records, took place between 1940 and 1957. The British Ministry of Defence only admitted to these dumps in the 1990s. In 1995 politicians raised this issue in the Seanad and Dáil. The late Hugh Coveney, who was Minister at the time, said that by 2000, a comprehensive analysis of the situation would be arrived at. As far as I know, it has not been forthcoming, so it is 13 years overdue.

There are ongoing concerns along the north west coast of County Donegal about the nature of these chemicals and the risk to inhabitants, sea life and the environment. From what I have read, previous Administrations were happy with the information they received from the British Ministry of Defence as to the composition of the types of weapons. However, I would be reluctant to accept the word of the British Ministry of Defence because this was done during and after the Second World War when controls, which would be in place if it was happening today, were not in place.

I am very keen to get an updated report from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and possibly from somebody in the British Ministry of Defence to clarify the types of chemicals dumped, where exactly they were dumped, although I know there are some indications, and how dangerous they are and to perhaps get an independent expert to verify what the British Ministry of Defence is saying. I would be keen that it would be independent because I am sure many people would be wary of the UK Government admitting to dumping something which was dangerous.

I would like an up-to-date report and an independent person to verify the information given to the Government because I am concerned that material may leak into the sea and cause a catastrophe of some sort. I thank the Minister of State for listening and look forward to his reply.

I thank Senator Harte for raising this matter. The UK Ministry of Defence undertook sea dumping of chemical weapons stocks and conventional munitions as a means of disposing of redundant and surplus stocks and dealing with the legacy of weapons produced in the World Wars. Information on the precise location of the dump sites used by the UK for the dumping of chemical weapons between 1945 and 1957 in waters adjacent to Irish territorial waters and the volume and composition of the weapons has, in the past, been made available to the Government. Information in regard to the dumping off the Donegal coastline has been available since 1986 and in the public domain for a number of years.

The dumping of munitions in the sea does not fall under European Union law. The Oslo Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft 1972, now OSPAR, is the appropriate forum. The OSPAR Convention applies to the waters of the north east Atlantic and Ireland is a party to the convention.

At the end of the Second World War, in the United Kingdom alone, there was in excess of 1.2 million tonnes of surplus ammunition and bombs. The disposal method adopted by most nations at the time was dumping at sea. Although in some cases the location and type of munitions dumped is well known, the full extent of munitions dumped in the OSPAR area will never be known.

We are not alone in our concern about the use of the sea as a location for dumping such material. Information on the location and type of munitions dumped in the convention area was supplied by contracting parties and published by OSPAR in 2005. The report identified more than 140 dump sites throughout the convention area and this is believed to be the best information available. In general terms, the distribution of known conventional munitions dump sites tends to be in inshore waters whereas chemical weapons were dumped further offshore.

Detailed information on the appearance and types of chemical munitions is given in the OSPAR framework for developing national guidelines for fishermen on how to deal with conventional and chemical munitions encountered at sea. Marine Notice No. 16 of 2001 issued by the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources to all fishermen and other users of the sea relates to explosives and other explosive missiles sighted, picked up in trawls at sea or removed from wrecks. This notice covers chemical and conventional munitions and requires all encounters with such munitions to be reported to the Irish Navy and the Irish Coast Guard.

OSPAR Recommendation 2010/20 on an OSPAR framework for reporting encounters with conventional and chemical munitions in the OSPAR maritime area, updating an earlier OSPAR recommendation in this area, promotes, inter alia, the reporting of encounters with conventional and chemical munitions by fishermen and other users of the sea and its coastline and the establishment of a record of such encounters with the aim of facilitating discussion and informed decisions on the management options for dumping sites. This recommendation applies to contracting parties which are coastal states of the OSPAR maritime area.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply which I think is the same one given in the late 1990s. According to the late Hugh Coveney, that report was due to be completed in 2000. The part from the UK Government was awaited. My information is that it was never received. It is called the quality status report and, as far as I know, the British Government's submission to it was not received, although I stand corrected. It was due in 2000. In 1995, the late Hugh Coveney expected it within five years. Will the Minister of State ask if that report has arrived? Is it sitting on a shelf or was anything done with it? The question will be asked again and again.

Youth Services Funding

I welcome the Minister of State. I raise this matter because the Department of Children and Youth Affairs is currently considering proposals from the City of Dublin Youth Services Board on the funding for youth work services announced in the last budget.

I want to draw the Minister of State's attention to the devastating impact the proposed cuts will have on youth services. I would like the Government to reconsider them. The youth work services provided to young people are invaluable, particularly in disadvantaged areas. I am sure the Minister of State knows that a small investment can have a huge impact. This country spends just €4 per week on each young person who is served by the youth work system.

Indecon undertook an economic assessment of this sector last year. It showed that for every €1 the State invests in this area, it saves over €2 in the long term. Obviously, this investment has a positive social impact on young people who benefit from these services. The figures show that it makes economic sense to invest in youth work because it saves the State more money in the long term. It is important to remember that for every paid member of staff who works in a youth service, there are dozens of volunteers. The paid staff are needed to leverage, manage and train the volunteers, particularly following the recent move towards greater professionalisation in this sector. Staff are trained to ensure they deliver a quality service. I know from the services in my local area that a significant emphasis is placed on reviewing and undertaking needs analysis of what is being provided. The whole sector has become much more professionalised over the last few years.

This sector is struggling as a result of the substantial cuts it has suffered in recent years. While groups and services initially responded as best they could by trying to rationalise and do more with less, they have had to cut hours and staff. Over the last year or two, they have increasingly had to cut programmes. As a result, some young people are not receiving the services they used to receive. In my local area, I am familiar with the services that are provided in places like Darndale, Kilbarrack, Kilmore West, Donnycarney and Coolock. I understand the impact that services like St. Monica's service in Edenmore and the Trinity service in Donaghmede can have on the confidence of young people in some of the most disadvantaged parts of the country. The needs of young people who have left school and are not in education and training are not being met by the State in its other areas of activity. Young people from disadvantaged areas who are at risk of leaving school early often do not have the self-confidence or self-esteem to take up the opportunities that are available to them. I have seen how the staff and volunteers involved in youth services and youth work have been able to boost the self-esteem and confidence of young people and get them to take up formal education, apply for jobs and have confidence in their own ability to take up opportunities.

It is shame that cuts are being imposed in this area at a time when unemployment is such a problem, particularly among young people. This country's rate of youth unemployment is shockingly high. I appreciate that cuts have to be made. I understand that the Government has to make savings somewhere. The imposition of cuts in this area is particularly short-sighted, however, given that the Indecon report and other research shows that youth services save more money in the long term. The services have not yet been told exactly how much they will lose. There has been a great deal of speculation and there is a great deal of fear. According to rumours in north Dublin, cuts of between 2% and 14% will be made. I am not sure if the Minister of State can confirm that. Such cuts, particularly at the upper end of the scale, are of concern. For many of these services, a cut of 14% would result in the loss of a member of staff. They might not be able to continue to offer a programme that currently serves young people who badly need it. I would like the Government to reconsider its approach and to find savings elsewhere. There is a social and economic case for doing so. I do not doubt that cuts of this nature would have a devastating impact on youth work services.

I welcome the opportunity to address this issue. I thank Senator Power for raising it. The Department of Children and Youth Affairs is providing €53.173 million in 2013 to support the delivery of youth work programmes and youth services to all young people, including those from disadvantaged communities, by the voluntary youth work sector. Youth work programmes and youth services are delivered to approximately 400,000 young people by over 1,400 youth work personnel, who in turn support a large volunteer base of approximately 40,000 people. Like all areas of the public sector, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs has had to find savings as part of the Government's collective effort to reduce this country's unsustainable day-to-day deficit.

The comprehensive review of expenditure, which was published in December 2011, clearly sets out the savings required from the Department in 2012, 2013 and 2014. The review, which is available on the website of the Department of Public Expenditure, contains a detailed seven-page chapter outlining the savings required from youth work funding schemes. The overall level of savings required under the comprehensive review of expenditure in respect of 2013 amounts to almost 10%. The funding allocations for 2013 were notified to the administering bodies in recent weeks. The Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, and officials from her Department have met representatives of the youth sector in recent months with a view to determining how best to minimise the impact on youth services of the 2013 budget reduction in the challenging budgetary situation that we currently face. Administering bodies have been advised to consider salary levels, conditions and administrative costs across their projects and services, if these have not already been addressed. Every effort is being made to safeguard front-line youth services and services for the most vulnerable young people as far as possible.

The Department, in trying to maximise the use of the available funding for youth services and programmes, has given the local grant administering bodies - normally the VECs - the flexibility to propose the reconfiguration of the allocations provided, having regard to the knowledge available to these bodies about the needs of young people at local level. In this context, the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, as the local grant administering body in the Dublin city area, submitted a proposal to the Department last week requesting that percentage reductions, different from those outlined in the comprehensive review of expenditure, should be applied to projects in the Dublin city area. The proposed rationale of the board is to seek to minimise disruption to front-line youth provision and to protect smaller projects. It should be noted that under the board's proposals, most projects would receive a significantly lower reduction. However, the City of Dublin Youth Services Board has also proposed that some larger projects should receive greater reductions. The Department is currently examining the board's proposals. At the request of the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, officials from her Department met representatives of the board last Friday to discuss the proposals. The Department will advise the City of Dublin Youth Services Board of the outcome of its examination shortly.

It should be noted that no cut in the funding provided to support local voluntary youth clubs has been provided for under the comprehensive review of expenditure. This modest funding of more than €1 million plays an important role in supporting volunteer-led youth groups and promoting and leveraging valuable voluntary activity in youth work. Some €1.5 million in capital funding is being provided in 2013 for youth cafes and youth projects. The Department will announce further details of the application process for the 2013 funding programmes soon. Funding of €500,000 was provided in 2012 for the development of a number of youth cafes which had applied for previous youth cafe funding schemes. With respect to future funding provision, the Department has commenced a comprehensive value for money review of youth funding. The outcome of that review is expected by the middle of the year. The Department has also prioritised the improvement of quality provision in youth work through the publication and ongoing implementation of a national quality standards framework for youth work. The Department has also developed national quality standards for volunteer-led youth groups. Those standards were launched by the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, on Monday of this week.

The Minister of State said that the Department is considering the proposals that have been made by the City of Dublin Youth Services Board. I sought a debate on this matter to ask for the whole approach to be reconsidered in that context. One of the problems is that greater cuts will be imposed on some projects than on others, as the Minister of State mentioned. The VECs and the City of Dublin Youth Services Board have essentially been placed in the invidious position of having to try to choose between equally worthy initiatives. I invite the Minister of State and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to visit the projects I mentioned to see the work they are doing in communities that have struggled for a long time. A great deal of work had to be done to get these projects off the ground. They built up a position of strength over the years before the succession of funding cuts of recent years. It is unfair for projects to be pitted against each other.

The Minister of State suggested that this process will be good for smaller projects because a smaller cut will be imposed on them. That does not assist larger services like Sphere 17 in Darndale, which is one of the biggest projects in my local area.

Under the rationale set out by the Minister of State, the project will suffer severe cuts, despite serving one the most disadvantaged areas in the country. The City of Dublin Youth Services Board faces an impossible choice as it weighs up the merits of the various projects, each of which deserves continued support in its own right. I urge that the Minister would reconsider the approach that has been taken to this issue. I invite the Minister and Minister of State to visit the projects in question to see for themselves the work that is being doing in the areas concerned, the difference the projects are making and the amount of money they are saving the State in other areas.

Perhaps I will be able to take it up at some point and I would certainly like to do so. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs is actively engaging with the providers of youth services in each of the relevant areas and the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, the entity responsible for the overall administration of services. She is obliged to find a 10% saving in her 2013 budget. If she had not undertaken this engagement, she would have been accused of being dictatorial and irresponsible. The implication of the Senator's contribution is that by carrying out this engagement, the Minister is somehow pitting one service against another. This was not the Minister's intention and it is not the outcome of the engagement. She is seeking to use the wisdom of the City of Dublin Youth Services Board and its experience in administering services across the city of Dublin to determine how exactly we will implement the required saving across the sector in a manner that minimises its impact on front-line services. Her engagement was important and will prove fruitful. It did not have any negative elements and its outcome will be available shortly. With the co-operation and collaboration of the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, we will succeed in minimising, as best we can, the negative impact of this saving in 2013.

The Seanad adjourned at 2.15 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 12 March 2013.
Top
Share