Vol. 886 No. 3
6. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his views on the 0.2% of gross domestic product investment in early-years services by comparison with the average of 0.8% across OECD countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27318/15]
Some 0.2% of GDP in this country is allocated for early years services by comparison with an average of 0.8% across the OECD. Does the Minister accept that the early years services model, dating from the Administration of Fianna Fáil, is not acceptable, and will he deal with the issue? Should a lot more money not be devoted to early intervention and child care?
Funding of more than €0.25 billion is invested annually by my Department in early years services. This funding, which is in addition to the direct support provided to all parents in the form of child benefit, supports more than 100,000 children each year. This high level of investment has been maintained despite the difficult budgetary circumstances that prevailed in recent years.
The rate of 0.2% of GDP, quoted by the Deputy, only represents my Department's expenditure on the free preschool year provided under the early childhood care and education programme, amounting to €175 million. This figure does not include my Department's expenditure on the community child care subvention programme and the training and education child care programmes, which amounts to an additional €70 million per year.
Further, the OECD, in drawing international comparisons on public expenditure on early years services, adjusts for cross-national differences in the compulsory age of entry into primary school. Therefore, for countries where children enter school at age five, such as Ireland, expenditure on early years services is adjusted by adding up the expenditure corresponding to children aged five who are enrolled in primary school. When Ireland's expenditure is adjusted in this way, the OECD reports that Ireland actually spends 0.5% of GDP on early years services compared to the OECD average of 0.8% of GDP.
I would like to be in a position to increase our investment in early years services to be more in line with the OECD average. This will take time as the benefits of economic growth generate the required resources. However, I am determined that all such spending, whether existing or additional, will be based on good evidence and co-ordinated strategically so that we achieve the best possible benefits for children. To this end, I established the interdepartmental group to develop a coherent whole-of-government approach to investment in early years and after school care and education. This group will report shortly and will present the Government with costed options for increased investment in quality services over a period of years.
A report commissioned by Tusla and the Irish Research Council is to be published soon by NUI Maynooth. It will show that the early childhood and after school care and education system offers too little too late in a child's life to have any real impact. Since the introduction of the early childhood care and education programme, child poverty has not decreased. It has almost doubled, from 6.3% in 2008 to 11.7% in 2013, the year for which the most recent data are available. A further 17.9% of children are at risk of property. Children are 1.4 times more likely than adults to live in consistent poverty. These are shocking figures to feature under the current Government's watch. Even during a recession, governments have choices. The choices made in one or two other countries in Europe have been to protect the most vulnerable but the Irish Government has failed to do that. Irrespective of the Government's interdepartmental review, these issues must be dealt with very quickly and very seriously.
I take issue with the Deputy's analysis of the Maynooth report. It does not state it is too little too late-----
That is what I am saying.
-----but refers to the need for further supports to achieve the better outcomes we seek. The early childhood care and education programme has helped considerably and there is a lot of evidence to support that. However, there is a need for further assistance and support, and that is why the interdepartmental group is so important. As with many steps taken in government, there is a need for cross-departmental involvement to achieve a coherent approach so we do not end up with silos of activity that sometimes do not complement one another. I believe the report will be good. It is currently in its final drafting stage and I hope to have it very soon. It will add greatly to our ability to plan in a more complete way for meeting the needs of young children under the age of six.
Child poverty, in particular, and adult poverty, which has increased recently, could have been prevented had the Government made different choices.
The Minister said the previous Administration left a terrible system in the HSE, which is correct. At that stage, I believe approximately 70 people were awaiting scoliosis treatment in Our Lady's Children's Hospital in Crumlin. However, under the present Administration, 174 children are waiting for those services four years on from 2011. In certain areas things have got worse for children and that money urgently needs to be put into early years services across the board.
The Government is very concerned about the child poverty situation in the country. Hitherto we have not had the resources to address this issue in any meaningful way, but the resources are becoming available. I am not saying we can cure this problem overnight. It is very hard to undo a situation that grew up over many years. I will not get into political point scoring about the state of the country's finances, but we have to be realistic. Many different things need to be done, not just with children, but in the health services, in education infrastructure and many other areas.
As Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, I believe in children being the future of our nation. I believe in their right to a present, not just a future, that should be safe. It is a priority for me that they can learn to their fullest ability and feel connected and respected. Across Government we need to examine further how to address the issues of child poverty in a way that will address it completely and in a fashion that is sustainable.
7. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the preparations he is making for the upcoming review with the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27090/15]
The Minister's predecessor, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, submitted the third and fourth reports to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. If the Government survives, I understand the Minister will represent us in January at an examination of those reports. Some of the subjects he will obviously deal with will be child poverty, which he just discussed, child protection, services for children, education, health, disability services and so on. I hope that among the issues he will cover will be the impact of homelessness on our children.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes the Committee on the Rights of the Child, comprising independent experts, as the monitoring body for holding state parties to account regarding compliance with the convention. That process involves states submitting periodic reports to the committee and appearing before it for the purposes of discussing the report submitted.
Ireland’s most recent attendance before the committee was in 2006 and its most recent consolidated third and fourth report was submitted to the committee in July 2013. Ireland is scheduled to appear before the committee again in January 2016. While the actual meeting date has yet to be notified, it will occur between 11 and 29 January.
Before meeting individual state parties, the committee receives reports from, and meets, civil society interests and national rights monitoring bodies. These contacts inform the identification of issues the committee intends to discuss with the state party concerned. In Ireland’s case the committee met such interested parties, including a meeting with young people as facilitated by the Children’s Rights Alliance, last month.
To my Department's knowledge, the committee also received three parallel reports, from the Children’s Rights Alliance, from young people with the support of the alliance and from the Ombudsman for Children. The information gained from these sources has culminated in the recent receipt of a list of issues from the committee, regarding the combined third and fourth report of Ireland, to which the committee is seeking a written response by 15 October 2015. The committee has made clear that the list of issues is not intended to be exhaustive and it should not be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing the type and range of questions which members of the committee might wish to pose in January.
Given the breadth of the UN Convention, the committee’s scope of interest is very extensive and essentially covers the responsibilities and activities of most, if not all, Departments and many State agencies. Consequently, engagement with the committee involves a very considerable exercise of cross-government liaison and consultation around issues that are relevant to particular Departments or to a number of Departments. The co-ordination work is the responsibility of my Department. In that regard, it has established liaison arrangements with all Departments to process issues identified in the run-up to meeting the committee on which input from the individual Departments would be required. The current position is that my Department is preparing to communicate shortly with other Departments on the contents of the list of issues recently received from the committee.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade liaises closely with my Department to facilitate communications to and from the committee.
Will the list of issues include the impact of homelessness on children, the children of those families - almost 3,500 - who are homeless in this city and county as well as other urban areas around the country? On 28 June, 1,122 children were in emergency accommodation. I represent dozens of families in that situation, as would the Minister and other Deputies present today. We know from meeting the children of homeless families that they are often very insecure and sometimes distressed. They are unable to get easily to school, to recreation and to other basic facilities. As the Minister will be aware from his constituency, living in hotels and guesthouses often makes it very difficult to have an ordinary child's life.
The Minister mentioned the parallel reports. Two of the organisations, including the Children's Rights Alliance, are focusing on the impact of homelessness on children. Along with some of my staff, I recently met Dr. Niall Muldoon, the Ombudsman for Children, to discuss the impact of homelessness on children. His report states, "The State must address delays in the provision of social housing and ensure that emergency housing support provided to families who are experiencing homelessness is appropriate to children’s needs."
I thank the Deputy.
The Minister has said he was working with other Departments. Is he meeting the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Kelly? Is he bringing to his attention the very real distress and suffering of our children in this city this very minute regarding homelessness?
I thank the Deputy.
What has the Minister done in this regard? He has said-----
I will come back to the Deputy.
-----that he is the Minister for all our children. What is he doing right now to protect our homeless children?
The issue of homelessness has been on the Government agenda for quite some time. I am a member of the Cabinet committee on social policy. As Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, I am very concerned about the impact of homelessness on children. I am very concerned about the provision of accommodation and that emergency accommodation should reflect, in so far as it can, normality for those families. I accept that many times they do not if there are no cooking facilities, etc.
Equally, I am concerned, as I am sure the Deputy is, about other child protection issues forcing large numbers of people into less than ideal accommodation at times on an emergency basis. While it is necessary to avail of bed and breakfast and other accommodation of that nature on an emergency basis, they do not represent a long-term solution. There have been numerous meetings involving the Minister, Deputy Kelly, and me to address this issue at the Cabinet committee on social policy
In this region, has the Minister met the city manager, Mr. Owen Keegan, and the Fingal county manager, Mr. Paul Reid? Has he or his officials met Mr. Dick Brady or members of the Dublin Region Homeless Executive? Does he have any plans to inspect the conditions in which these homeless families are forced to live for nine or ten months and in some cases more than a year?
Has the Minister spoken to the children on the issue? He mentioned that in the preparation of the report to the UN committee he had a parallel report into which children gave input. Has he spoken to them, even outside the type of information clinic or whatever situation in which he might meet these children? Has he actually looked at the accommodation and brought it to the attention of the Minister, Deputy Kelly, and the Taoiseach?
The situation we have now, in which the number of homeless children has doubled in eight or nine months, cannot go on. We need it to end. First and foremost, we need to stop children from being made homeless.
I have met all the individuals the Deputy mentioned on more than one occasion. The Government's homeless policy statement was published on 21 February 2013 and makes explicit the Government's commitment to a housing-led approach to end long-term involuntary homelessness by the end of 2016. Significant measures are being taken, under the Dublin region homeless pilot scheme, including the homeless assistance payment, the Department of Social Protection's tenancy sustainment protocol and the purchase of NAMA properties. There are also a range of other measures relating to the allocation of local authority tenancies. Under these measures, key local authorities are required to prioritise homeless and other vulnerable households in the allocation of tenancies under their control. The four Dublin local authorities have been directed to allocate 50% of available dwellings to this cohort, while the local authorities in Counties Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford have been directed to allocate 30%. It is expected that as a result of this initiative at least 500 homes will be provided to prioritised households in the Dublin region, with a similar total for the other areas combined. These measures were identified in the Government's implementation plan on the State's response to homelessness in May 2014 and the action plan to address homelessness last December.
8. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs his views on the discontinuation of funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland by Tusla, the Child and Family Agency; the measures that have been put in place to ensure the data collection role played by the centre is maintained under the proposed funding plans in view of the fact that 80% of survivors of sexual violence do not contact a State body; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27357/15]
I want to ask about the cuts being implemented by Tusla to Rape Crisis Network Ireland. Measures have been put in place to cut its data collection role and its funding. Bearing in mind that 80% of victims of sexual violence and rape do not contact a State body, how does the Minister envisage that Tusla, a new organisation, will be able to fulfil the role the Rape Crisis Network of Ireland has had for 40 years?
Following a review, Tusla considers that there is scope for a more co-ordinated and equitable provision of sexual and domestic violence services across the country. It seeks to address any identified gaps in services, avoid duplication and support effective delivery. It is in this context that Tusla has decided to cease funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland, RCNI, and to take direct responsibility for the development and maintenance of a database of information recorded on behalf of the rape crisis centres. Tusla will create a comprehensive national dataset, including information from all funded sexual violence services.
Tusla was concerned that the existing database did not capture information from all 16 rape crisis centres, as only 11 centres are affiliated to the network. In order to plan properly for the future, Tusla needs access to complete and reliable information, and it did not always have timely access to the data collected by RCNI. Consequently, Tusla decided to establish a comprehensive data system that best meets the current and future data needs of a developing service. I am very mindful of the importance of comprehensive and timely national data for planning the delivery of these services and evaluating outcomes. I have raised with Tusla the need for an improvement in the quality of data as a priority for 2015. I support Tusla’s efforts to address shortfalls in this area.
In 2015, Tusla is funding 60 non-statutory specialist domestic violence and sexual violence services, including 44 domestic violence services and 16 sexual violence and rape crisis services. These will provide information to Tusla on the services they provide, including those provided to survivors of sexual violence. This information is critically important as Tusla continues to reform services to ensure we provide the best possible response to survivors of sexual violence. I want to emphasise that in my discussions this year with Tusla I asked that particular priority be given to protecting front-line services. In this context, I am pleased that funding for the 16 rape crisis centres nationwide, which provide services directly to rape survivors, has been protected in 2015, with funding of almost €4 million allocated to them.
If the Minister did a straw poll outside these gates and asked people whether they trusted Rape Crisis Network Ireland or Tusla, the new quango established by the Government, to serve the interests of rape victims, we all know what the answer would be. Rape Crisis Network Ireland has been doing this work for 40 years. It has been an advocate and an independent voice for rape victims from a time when the State did not care about rape victims, when there were mother and baby homes and Magdalen laundries and control over women was in full swing in this country. Now Tusla has cut core funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland, using the excuse that its data collection was not of the requisite standard. Its data collection is considered groundbreaking and a model of best practice by the European Institute for Gender Equality. The excuse is that funding will be maintained for the front line. If funds are cut, rape crisis centres will have to close. It is not for the Minister to decide about the autonomy and independence of an organisation that has been doing this work, and for him to tell it where to put its money and where to take it out. He has employed eight new people but he has cut the funding for Rape Crisis Network Ireland. Why is he doing so?
The Deputy is quite right. I am not instructing anybody or interfering with Rape Crisis Network Ireland regarding how it spends its money or what it does with itself. That is its business. What is the business of a Minister and an agency representing the needs of those who have been victims of sexual or domestic violence is to ensure they have a front-line service. In her question the Deputy asserted that front-line services would close. They will not close, because they have been given the funding to stay open. Their funding has been protected. Funding has been removed from an element of RCNI relating to data collection. This is clearly very much incomplete, when only 11 of 16 rape crisis centres are affiliated to it. Those I remember straight off which are not affiliated to it are the centres in Dublin and Galway, which are two of the biggest. The decision of Tusla's board is correct. One would love, in an ideal world, to have the money to do everything, but one does not, and therefore choices must be made. When it comes to a choice between a front-line service and a data collection service I will stay with the front-line service, particularly if I am assured by the board of Tusla and its management that it can do the data collection itself in a more complete and efficient fashion.
It cannot and it will not.
A total of 80% of rape victims do not report their experience or seek counselling. That is four out of five rape victims. They will not go to Tusla, but they will contact rape crisis centres, at least on the phone. The information being gathered by Rape Crisis Network Ireland is very important. In Ireland, one in five girls will be sexually abused over their lifetimes, as well as one in six boys. One in ten women will be raped in their lifetimes. This is how the Minister is treating women in this country. Rape Crisis Network Ireland has much more experience of dealing with this than Tusla. Tusla is a child agency, by the way, and it is not equipped to deal with sexual violence. The Minister should just admit this is a cut. Tusla cannot do what Rape Crisis Network Ireland has done. The Minister is interfering by telling it to manage with less and keep its front-line services open. Front-line services need back-up and independent information. Of course rape crisis centres will close. When refuges for victims of domestic violence closed last year, the Minister did not care and councils had to step in. The Minister said he expects centres to remain open even though their funding has been cut, but he has employed people in a new quango. First we had the HSE and now we have a sub-quango of the HSE being used to cut funding to rape crisis centres and women.
Again, the Deputy fails to acknowledge that no funding to the rape crisis centres has been cut. Their funding has been protected. Front-line services are being protected. The cut in funding relates to data collected by Rape Crisis Network Ireland, which does not provide front-line services.
Do we not need the data?
That data can now be collected by Tusla in a more complete and efficient fashion. I do not agree with the Deputy's contention that people will not contact the rape crisis centre. I believe they will. If they contact anybody they will contact the rape crisis centre.
They will not contact Tusla.
Excuse me. I did not interrupt the Deputy. These are the people who are the professionals, who are proficient and have given a commitment. They have been there morning, noon and night to help support the survivors of sexual violence and domestic violence.
My role is to ensure that those who provide the services are supported and have their funding protected. I have done that.
9. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if he will provide an update on the current status of negotiations between Russia and Ireland on a bilateral treaty on adoptions. [27335/15]
As the Russian Irish Adoption Group enters its sixth year of lobbying on a bilateral agreement between Ireland and Russia regarding adoption, will the Minister provide an update to the House on the current status of the negotiations between him and his Russian counterpart?
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. The Adoption Act 2010 provides for intercountry adoptions from countries that have ratified the Hague Convention on adoption and from countries with which Ireland has a bilateral agreement. Currently, adoptions are taking place with countries that have ratified the convention, having agreed to adhere to the standards of the convention. The Russian Federation has not ratified the convention and therefore a bilateral agreement involving both governments is necessary. This make the process of agreeing an intercountry adoption system much more difficult and time-consuming. Efforts have been ongoing on a bilateral agreement on intercountry adoption between Ireland and the Russian Federation for a number of years. There has been a number of meetings with officials from the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and a delegation from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation regarding a draft bilateral agreement on intercountry adoption between Ireland and the Russian Federation. The Office of the Attorney General has also provided advice to the Department on the draft agreement.
I know there are difficulties for parents. The Russian authorities have sought assurances about post-adoption reporting that raise legal difficulties for Ireland. In this context, the Irish Constitution protects the integrity of family life and, once adopted in Ireland, the child is treated as if he or she is the natural child of the adoptive parents. People in this House would agree with that process. This means there is limited scope for the State to intervene in a family when a child’s welfare and protection is not compromised. In these instances, the State has no legislative power to enforce compliance with legal or other commitments to provide post-placement reports given by Irish families to the Russian authorities. This and a number of additional issues require further clarification, which must be addressed so as to ensure that further discussions on other aspects of the bilateral agreement are beneficial. Efforts are ongoing in my Department in progressing this work and I will do everything possible to advance this matter. However, the difficulties raised by the issues outstanding should not be underestimated. I will keep continued contact with the Russian Irish Adoption Group to keep the group informed of developments.
We can all agree that the interests of the children must be paramount; that goes without saying. It remains the case that thousands of children remain in Russia in questionable care who could greatly benefit from a second chance in life. There are certainly hundreds of parents in Ireland who are willing to give a child a second chance in life with a loving home. Everything must be done to make this a reality. There is a concern that this is not a priority of the Minister or his Department.
The Russian Irish Adoption Group has held extensive consultations with the Irish Embassy in Russia and the Russian Embassy here but every time, there seems to be a different excuse. A previous excuse was a concern relating to the equality referendum, despite the fact that marriage equality is in place in France and there is a bilateral agreement between France and Russia. We have been told today that post-adoption reporting is being requested. When was that request made? When was the last time the Minister engaged with his Russian counterpart? The Minister stated that he will continue consultation with the Russian Irish Adoption Group but will he give a commitment on that today? A representative of the group was recently on the "This Week" programme on RTE indicating that the Minister had failed to meet the group. Will the Minister give a commitment to the House that he will meet the group and the Adoption Authority of Ireland to iron out what outstanding issues need to be resolved in order to progress this? Will the Minister confirm this is a priority?
I did not hear the radio interview to which the Deputy alludes but it is inaccurate to say I have not met representatives of the Russian Irish Adoption Group. I have done so.
Not recently.
We can define "recently". The bottom line, as the Deputy knows, is the issue with Russia has been ongoing since at least 2008 and, subsequent to the Adoption Act 2010, these discussions have been predicated on Ireland's legislative requirement for a bilateral agreement, as I stated earlier, on intercountry adoption with non-Hague Convention countries. However, recent indications are that the Russian authorities are seeking bilateral agreements with all countries where adoptions take place from Russia. Those authorities have just ratified one with Spain. Our constitutional elements relating to the family and the Russian requirement for post-adoption reporting are immutable issues that do not seem to be resolvable.
There is no reluctance on our part in this process and I will do everything in my power to move this forward. I want what is best for children and to facilitate what is best for them, no matter what nation they come from. I am particularly aware of families that already have a Russian adopted child and would love to have a sibling of the same nationality. I fully support such a concept but I am bound by law and the Attorney General's advice. I can only negotiate so far with the Russians.
I am pleased to hear the Minister confirm that this is a priority of his Department and something he will work hard on to ensure it is advanced. When did the Minister last meet representatives of the Russian Irish Adoption Group? If he has no problem with further consultation, will he confirm that he will meet the group, along with the Adoption Authority of Ireland, to hammer out the outstanding issues? Is it possible to resolve those issues? If that is not possible, the group just wants to know the truth. They have been in limbo, which has caused unnecessary anxiety for the past number of years. The Minister should be truthful for the group. Will he confirm today whether the process can be advanced? Will he meet the group and the Adoption Authority of Ireland and tell them how this stands?
I cannot give the Deputy a categorical statement on the likelihood of resolution as this would prejudge what the Russian delegation has to say. It is a negotiation. We have explained our difficulty under the Constitution and they have a certain requirement. The nature of negotiation means that other issues may be identified that could help get around the requirement or some other means could be found. That is not the current state of play. I have no problem confirming that we will continue to try this and negotiate with the Russian people. As long as they remain in this rock-hard place and it goes against another rock-hard issue - our Constitution - there can be no movement. That is as honest as I can be.
Will the Minister meet the group?
