Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 9 Jun 2016

Vol. 912 No. 2

Priority Questions

Homeless Persons Supports

Anne Rabbitte

Ceist:

1. Deputy Anne Rabbitte asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs about her Department's responsibility for children who are placed in emergency homeless accommodation; if she will address concerns that neither her Department nor Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, is responsible for putting into place special care plans for children experiencing homelessness; and the level of monitoring Tusla is carrying out to ensure that homelessness does not have a detrimental effect on these young persons' development. [15260/16]

As Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, I am very concerned about the welfare of homeless children. While various Departments have responsibilities in the area, I want to ensure that we have an effective approach across all sectors.

In recent weeks, I have met with representatives from a range of organisations, including Focus Ireland, Threshold, the ISPCC, and the Peter McVerry Trust. Those meetings provided me with a valuable opportunity to become acquainted with those working directly with families who are homeless and to gain an insight into the key issues facing children who are in emergency accommodation with their families. Based on these discussions and those with the relevant statutory agencies, I am seeking to define a set of measures to better support children with their families in emergency homeless accommodation. I am committed to developing the most appropriate policy responses in conjunction with my Cabinet colleagues. My Department and Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, have responsibility specifically for child welfare and protection concerns. The accommodation needs of children who are in the care of their parents, where the family is homeless, is the responsibility of the local authorities.

Tusla is very much aware of welfare issues for families and has engaged in multi-agency working on this issue. Close working between agencies is vital. Tusla and the Dublin Region Homeless Executive are shortly to sign off on a joint protocol which includes guidance on working with families where child protection concerns arise within emergency homeless accommodation. I anticipate that the protocol will be in full operation this month. Tusla has also appointed a homelessness liaison officer to lead on its engagement with homeless services, particularly in respect of child protection issues. I will work closely with my colleagues in government and with all relevant agencies to ensure that we address this issue as a matter of major importance.

I thank the Minister for her reply. I am delighted that she referenced the role of the local authorities because on reading my brief, I could not believe that there was no role for the Department of Children and Youth Affairs in respect of homelessness and local authorities. This is a major concern throughout the country, not just Dublin. We must look at taking Tusla into that because there are serious welfare issues. While there might not be child protection issues, there are welfare issues because there are profound effects on the development of homeless children in terms of access to school, the GP, the family and the social network. It even affects simple things like play dates. During a meeting of the Committee on Housing and Homelessness, we heard about how one mother had to take four bus journeys to get her child to school. She could not afford the return journeys so she stayed there all day. The Department needs to work very closely with the local authorities.

I very much agree with that. The Deputy focused on local authorities. I know that Tusla is very concerned about ensuring that it works closely with local authorities. In addition, I had a meeting with the director of Tusla in order to look again at some of the measures it has put in place to be proactive in its care for homeless children. I have already mentioned the homelessness liaison social worker. An education welfare liaison role will replicate the education welfare home-school liaison service. A person has been identified and Tusla is working to get them in place.

In addition, family resource centres provide a ready infrastructure to support families and are proposing a greater mapping of these vis-à-vis the locations where the families are being housed so that they can provide a more specific outreach to the families. Two organisations funded by Tusla within its existing budget are also coming together to provide a package of summer projects for children living in emergency accommodation.

Unfortunately, I feel Tusla has a reactive role in respect of homelessness. I welcome any intervention the Minister can make in terms of giving it an active role to play in respect of children in emergency accommodation. According to an article in The Irish Times on 24 May 2016, more than 1,000 children are in emergency accommodation. I hope the Minister agrees that we can push this forward because Tusla has an important role to play in this area. In the past, it had a more dormant role in respect of homelessness and working with local authorities. I am glad to hear the Minister say that she is looking at appointing different people. We need to look throughout the entire country in our appointments.

Again, I very much agree with the Deputy in terms of initiating and building on some of the newer elements of a proactive approach. This is what I would like to see as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. Tusla plays a significant role in that regard. My officials and I also held a meeting with the Minister for housing, planning and local government and his officials this morning. We are looking to add significant value to the action plan for housing he is developing, particularly in respect of a chapter on children and homelessness that covers not just the policy commitments, but the actions in that action plan in which we will be involved. We have an ethical obligation to do more. We are trying to develop a whole-of-Government approach and will focus on family homelessness as well as young people in aftercare.

School Completion Programme

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

Ceist:

2. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she has considered increasing the budget for the school completion programme in order to protect those who are identified as most at risk within the school system and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15216/16]

The aim of the school completion programme is to retain young people in the formal education system until they complete the senior cycle. The programme is designed to improve school attendance and participation of young people who are at risk of educational disadvantage.

It provides targeted supports annually to approximately 37,000 children. Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, has had operational responsibility for the school completion programme since 1 January 2014, including the allocation of funds to local projects. In 2016, Tusla allocated €24.7 million to the programme.

I am sure the Deputy is aware that the Economic and Social Research Institute reviewed the programme on behalf of Tusla and its report was published in October 2015. Tusla has taken a number of actions to address the findings of the review and to strengthen the operation of the programme for the future. It is a very important priority for me, as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, to improve attendance and participation in education, particularly for vulnerable children. The programme for Government commits to publishing a new school completion strategy to improve school completion rates further, particularly in disadvantaged areas. I will work closely with the Minister for Education and Skills in developing the new strategy and in the context of the Government programme commitment to a new action plan for educational inclusion. The aim is to secure good educational outcomes for all children, especially those who are at risk of educational disadvantage.

The Government will consider further investment in the provision of supports for young people at risk of educational disadvantage in line with the programme for Government commitments and in the context of the annual Estimates and budgetary process. I hope to be in a position to bring forward recommendations in that regard.

I thank the Minister for her reply. I am very encouraged that the Minister is saying that supporting school completion will be a big priority of hers in this Government. As we all know, education is a hugely important tool in tackling disadvantage and taking people out of poverty. I am aware that the funding in 2016 was €24.7 million. However, the funding for that programme in 2010 was €31 million per annum and even at that level it was not an enormous figure. It has been reduced in recent years and I know the Minister would agree that these are young people who are among the most at risk in our society and who rely heavily on education in terms of their future prospects. These are some of the most vulnerable children and some of them are currently destined to be failed by an underfunded system. They face enormous pressures that are dissimilar to those faced in many other schools in the ordinary day-to-day classroom setting and they should be funded adequately if we are to get serious about preventing people falling through the cracks. This is a project and funding stream that needs to be expanded on. I am somewhat encouraged by the Minister's comments but it is absolutely essential the funding is increased.

I assure the Deputy that I absolutely share his deep concern on this issue. The issue is our children and especially those who may not have had the same kind of start that the Deputy, I or others in this Chamber have had. There was a section on funding in the ESRI review of the school completion programme. I am aware that there has been widespread dissatisfaction with the current level of funding at local level and that the impact of cuts in this programme has resulted in reduced provision in the context of growing needs. I do not find that acceptable but, having said that, reductions in funding have been applied proportionately across clusters but this does not necessarily reflect the level of need and the concentration of greater disadvantage in some local areas. Currently they say there is a lack of clarity about how funding is and should be divided within clusters with many arrangements reflecting historic decisions rather than need. I will take this into consideration when I am looking at this issue.

I thank the Minister for her reply. There is much to consider and I am very glad the Minister is taking the detail of the ESRI review into account. This programme is being aimed at school attendance and is targeted at those deemed to be at risk, generally coming from a particularly marginalised and impoverished community. In that context, does the Minister consider that proposals currently in the public sphere to link child benefit to school attendance are counter-intuitive when one considers that the children who are diverted into the system tend to be there to support school attendance and are usually there due to insufficient support? It is a ridiculous proposal that children like this should suffer indirectly by linking child benefit to school attendance. In the last week a Minister has again floated this proposal. Many of these children come from homes that experience a plethora of issues and social disadvantages. There seems to be some ambiguity on Government benches on this proposal. I would appreciate it, as many in the sector would, if the Minister could clarify the Government's position on it and whether the Government will rule out any possibility of linking the two, which I think should happen.

I thank the Deputy for raising the additional question on this issue. I referred to this issue earlier in the debate on the Adoption (Amendment) Bill because it came up in that context. As I said then, I am aware of the fact that we have a commitment to reform the monitoring of child benefit payments by amalgamating school attendance monitoring systems in order to address poor attendance within some families. That is contained in the programme for Government. As my colleague, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Leo Varadkar, indicated in response to some questions on this issue, he, Deputy Bruton and I have talked with our Departments, and I have talked to Tusla, to see if looking at the reform of the monitoring of child benefit would be an effective tool to ensure the school attendance of our children. To date, what has come back is that it will not be an effective tool and we are listening to that advice. That is not to say that I will not continue to have discussions. The Deputy is aware that my colleague, the Minister for communications, climate change and natural resources, Deputy Denis Naughten, has put forward some of these proposals. I will discuss and listen to him in that regard but as far as I am concerned I am listening to Tusla and the other Departments. It is not about cutting child benefit; it is about making sure all children who need our help with school attendance are given it. It is especially through the school completion programme that we can focus on that.

Area Based Childhood Programme

Anne Rabbitte

Ceist:

3. Deputy Anne Rabbitte asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs her plans to ensure that the area based childhood programme remains fully resourced and funded for the upcoming number of years. [14946/16]

Before I introduce the question as spokesperson for children and youth affairs, I welcome students from Scoil Bhríde in Roscommon who are sitting here watching us have our questions this afternoon. I ask the Minister to outline the Department's plan to ensure that the area based childhood, ABC, programme remains fully resourced and funded for the upcoming years.

The area based childhood programme is a joint prevention and early intervention initiative led by my Department and the Atlantic Philanthropies. It is a time-bound, co-funding arrangement with resources of €29.7 million from 2013 to 2017. It aims to test and evaluate prevention and early intervention approaches to improve outcomes for children and families living in poverty in 13 areas of disadvantage and to mainstream in existing services those interventions that have been most effective.

A broad range of interventions have been trialled across all 13 ABC sites and from these, interventions which are supported by the best evidence of impact will be identified and the learning disseminated. My Department committed to aligning all 13 ABC programme grant recipients and ensuring that effective services provided in each area can be supported until mid-2017. We have committed to the provision of an additional €400,000 to each of the three initial sites in Tallaght, Ballymun and Darndale, in this context. I know those sites very well in terms of my own professional experience.

I want to ensure that the learning from these effective interventions in the ABC programme is harnessed and mainstreamed into existing services. We are developing plans to enhance prevention and early intervention in children’s services. Future decisions will be informed by an examination of evaluation results already available from previous work, an evaluation currently being undertaken by the Centre of Effective Services and recommendations by a group that is helping to mainstream the learning from the most effective activities. My officials are working to ensure coherent strategic next steps for prevention and early intervention in Ireland. This is an area I have been promoting and committed to for the past 15 years of my professional life.

Before calling Deputy Rabbitte I want to join in welcoming the students from Scoil Bhríde, Four Mile House. You are very welcome. Céad míle fáilte. They are located just a few miles up the road from me so I hope they are enjoying their visit.

I am glad the Minister brought up the issue of the €400,000 for the three different projects. One of them I am aware of is Young Ballymun but, needless to say, I have concerns. The €400,000 being released is for another 12 months but I am concerned as to whether that is enough for what we intend to do. This started in 2007 when the philanthropists got involved and funding of €15 million was provided. The project in Ballymun, which I am only using as an example, has not got to completion. When we talk about what we need to do in the area based childhood, ABC, programme in terms of early intervention, we must see it as a cycle from preschool through to the school completion programme, and I do not believe we have done that.

I would like to believe we have a long-term plan in regard to any of the 13 centres, of which ten are in Dublin. We need to have a plan. The people who are providing the service for children in impoverished areas need to know that the Government has a long-term plan for delivery and that it is not just for the next 12 months. We should not be "Sellotaping" from year to year while wondering about funding. We need to know that from the time they enter into the parental programme they are brought through to the early intervention programme, that they get involved in the breakfast clubs and the schools programme, to completion of the leaving certificate and that we get the family support put in place. The Minister is well aware of what they have done in Ballymun because it is her area. Coming from east Galway I am not as aware but I do understand that with any amount of intervention, be it from our health service or educational system, regardless of how little, we will reap the rewards in years to come. The Minister and I, and other Members of this House, can give these children their best start in life but we cannot penny-pinch from them at the very beginning.

I am in agreement with what Deputy Rabbitte is outlining, although as she is well aware the area-based childhood programmes are largely focused more on prevention and early intervention. Having a life cycle plan is a great idea. There needs to be greater planning in terms of linking that prevention in early intervention through to school completion to keep our young people in school, with all the supports that are provided for that. In that regard I, as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, and the Department are responsible for providing services across that particular aspect of the life cycle. That is a great idea which I will bring it back to the Department. Perhaps it is already being implemented but it is something to consider, particularly in the context of the national youth strategy that has just been published.

The only response I can give to the Minister is that I am glad to hear her embrace what I am suggesting. I believe the Minister and I are on a similar page when it comes to early intervention from the cradle to getting them to the leaving certificate and then to college or on to the jobs market. That is what we need to consider, and that is where we need to deliver. There is common political will, which is the most important aspect. The child must be the centre of our focus at all times.

In terms of some of the issues Deputy Rabbitte raised in her second question, in terms of a multi-annual granting programme approach, that is certainly what was done in recent years, with the support of philanthropy. It is much more challenging when we do not necessarily have that kind of philanthropic support but I would be very much in favour of advocating for that.

Regarding the 13 sites, one of the aspects we are looking at in regard to the evaluations is whether we should continue to fund all 13 sites at the same level. Should we only fund those sites in the context of what are deemed to be effective services? Are there other areas that also require that kind of funding? I assure the Deputy that I would be very committed to an area-based approach to the reduction of child poverty and encouraging the potential of our young people to achieve what they wish to achieve, whoever they are and wherever they come from.

After-School Support Services

Bríd Smith

Ceist:

4. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if her plan in the programme for Government to tender school facilities to community groups and private providers is to use public schools for private child care; if she will offer publicly provided and funded after-school care in schools; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14719/16]

Would Deputy Smith like to introduce her question?

I welcome the refreshing clarity the Minister is bringing to the answers she is giving. The clarity she brought to the question on the linkage between child benefit and school attendance was very useful because we did not get anything close to that from the Taoiseach yesterday.

My question is on the plans in the programme for Government to tender out public school facilities for use as after-school child care by community and other organisations. I am delighted that public schools are being used for this purpose because it is essential, particularly for parents, and lone parents, who are in work but I am concerned about the use of public schools for potentially private enterprise. Would the Minister not be better off looking towards a publicly funded model for publicly controlled child care facilities? There are many problems with the private model and I may come back to them once I have heard the Minister's response.

I believe I understood the core of Deputy Smith's question but it is important to note that thousands of private providers currently deliver child care through publicly funded child care programmes including the early childhood care and education scheme, the training and employment childcare scheme and, since February of this year, the community childcare subvention programme. My Department is also currently developing a single affordable childcare programme that will enable any public investment in child care, be it for preschool or school-age children, to be directed to families through community or private child care providers.

As the Deputy outlined, the programme for Government indicates that community groups and private providers will be invited to tender to use school facilities, outside school hours, for child care purposes. A cross-departmental group has now been established to consider how best to implement this commitment. Officials from my Department and the Department of Education and Skills are developing a joint proposal for my consideration and the consideration of my colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Richard Bruton.

As part of this work, the group will assess, and this is part of the Deputy's question, the many issues surrounding this commitment and the funding implications of implementing an after-school scheme for school-aged children.

Matters to be considered by the cross-departmental group include the demand for services and the capacity to provide these, the development of an appropriate quality and standards framework and the development of criteria for the capital scheme providing €3 million in support for after school child care services to be funded by my Department as announced in budget 2016. In addition, the group will gather data, including the existing use of school buildings, and to consider collaborative models with existing community or private service providers.

I am also undertaking with my Department consultations with children to identify what children like and dislike about after school care and to identify the places where children most like to be cared for after school. A report on that consultation will be submitted to me shortly and I have asked the cross-departmental group to consider the voice of the child as part of its deliberations.

I welcome that response but I reiterate that all the research shows that low income families in particular find it difficult to access child care and the average family spends more than 25% of their take-home pay on child care, which is twice what is paid in the European Union. My sister raised her two children in Sweden where the child care facilities were second to none, but it was all publicly run and publicly funded. One paid a small amount into it but it was run by the local commune and it was an excellent facility. There was talk in the previous Government of moving to that kind of model because there are many problems with private child care. I do not know if the Minister is aware of a strike in Kilcoole, County Wicklow in a privatised child care facility called the National Childminding Association of Ireland, which is in receipt of €340,000 of the Department's money annually but which is forcing redundancy on long-term staff with between eight and 15 years' service and there is talk of replacing those staff members. That is not redundancy. If it is getting rid of staff it is because the jobs no longer exist. I will ask the Minister a direct question on that later but I am using that example to illustrate that problems can and do exist with private child care providers and we would like to see us moving to a publicly provided model.

I am in complete agreement with Deputy Smith's comment that there are problems in both the private child care setting as well as the community and not-for-profit setting. I have done much work in the area over the years and even in community settings for providing child care where there is public money going in, it is still not enough for the people whose children need to be cared for in a fashion that is completely publicly subsidised child care. A very important start was the free preschool year and we are now moving to additional weeks, which we call a second year. They are also provided in that context.

The question also raises absolutely the need for a quality standard, which we are developing. The question particularly relates to after-school care. Allied to that is a way of monitoring and ensuring that those quality standards can be implemented and that those who do not comply will have to answer as to why they should be in receipt of public money.

By now we should all see the evidence that the more we invest in our population at an earlier point, the greater the return at the other end. It is really well worth our while as a State putting resources into very young children in order to reap the benefits at the other end. There will be fewer problems with addiction, anti-social behaviour and repeated jail terms. It relates to the ability to have well-rounded citizens who can stand on their own two feet and see through their education. There is a need to invest in children when they are very young.

I could not agree more with the Deputy. In the context of my Department's spend, I am delighted that developing a more sustainable, affordable and quality child care system, particularly regarding prevention and early intervention, is second only to the expenditure for Tusla. For the past 15 years, in my professional life I have been a crusader and campaigner for prevention and early intervention, encouraging that kind of investment. With the likes of area-based childhood programmes etc., we have had to draw on philanthropic support and that may not be as much of a possibility in future. That should not represent a barrier to us finding adequate investment, especially for earlier years.

Care Orders

Catherine Connolly

Ceist:

5. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs in relation to the number of supervision orders applied for in the courts by the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, since it was established in January 2014, the number of supervision orders granted consequent on these applications and consequent on an application for a care order, but where the court granted a supervision order instead. [15262/16]

I welcome the opportunity to table this question and I look forward to the answer. I have been concerned about this for a very long time. I am asking the Minister to make a statement and clarify the number of applications made for supervision orders, indicating how many supervision orders were granted consequent on those applications to the courts and are consequent on the courts refusing a care order and giving a supervision order.

I am aware of the Deputy's concern in this regard in light of other exchanges we have had. Perhaps we can tease this out a little more.

The latest figures available from the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, are for 2014. They indicate that there were 435 children under new supervision orders throughout 2014 and that there were 413 children subject to a supervision order on 31 December 2014. These figures relate to the number of children and not the number of applications that may have been made and granted. Consequently, there may be several orders in respect of the same child over a period. Figures reported by the Courts Service are not counted on a like-for-like basis and are not directly comparable. However, I understand from cases reported as part of the child care law reporting project, conducted by Dr. Carol Coulter, that about 70% of applications for supervision orders were granted and a further 16% were adjourned by the end of 2014. The number of supervision orders that were granted in place of a care order is not available.

Each child welfare and protection referral received by Tusla is assessed and dealt with on an individual basis by the relevant social work team. All referrals are screened by a social worker to see if the child needs a social work service. If required, a social worker works with the parent or parents to support them in providing safe care for their child. In some instances, Tusla may apply to the District Court for a supervision order to underpin the ongoing social work role within the family. These orders can be particularly helpful when dealing with adolescents living at home who may be at risk due to their behaviour. Such an order allows the young person and their family to benefit from a structured engagement with social workers. In many cases, where a child is being discharged from care a supervision order may be granted as part of the child's care plan to facilitate reunification with the family.

I hope this is the start of a journey to find out precisely what are the figures as it is a cause of great concern for me. I welcome the figures provided by the Minister, indicating there were 413 children subject to a supervision order as of 31 December 2014. That is the first time I have got a figure and I thank the Minister for that. However, to understand the figure it must be placed in context. How many care orders were in existence at that point?

I have had the privilege of working both in law and psychology and I can only give my experience plus what people tell me. It seems that care orders are applied for much more regularly than supervision orders, as supervision orders have implications for resources. We know that in each area, city and county that there is a lack of social workers. The easier option - I use the phrase with the greatest respect - is to apply for a care order and take the child rather than putting in a supervision order with the necessary resources. That is particularly relevant in light of the recent high profile case when a seven year old child who spent half his life with his grandparents was taken. I am not going into the detail of the case but simply indicating the child was taken. It is the same experience with children taken into care when a supervision order might be much more appropriate. I am trying to establish the frequency of one compared with the other and if the lack of resources is leading to an abundance of care orders instead of supervision orders.

I have the greatest respect for the experience from which the Deputy asks this question. I recall her referring to the issue in earlier exchanges. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that social workers apply for care orders rather than supervision orders because care orders are less time consuming. I acknowledge that the Deputy has a suspicion or an intuition in that regard but there is currently no evidence to that end. The application to the courts for a care order is an intensive procedure involving the holding of a multidisciplinary case conference, the preparation of legal applications, the development of a care plan and finding a suitable placement, with arrangement and facilitation of family access. When in care, the child continues to have an allocated social worker with regular care planning reviews.

The Minister was doing great until the point we started getting bureaucratic speak. We cannot say there is no evidence as there is an obligation on Tusla to have the evidence. The figures should be before us today and if that is not possible, they should come before us at the earliest opportunity. That should be before a Minister would make a statement that there is no evidence. I can only speak from my experience and the representations made to me, which suggest clearly that care orders are applied for more frequently than supervision orders. The question is whether that arises because of a lack of resources. It seems to be the case.

Every Deputy in the House knows there is a lack of social workers for regular work, not to mention putting in resources for a supervision order. Ultimately, the welfare of the child is paramount in all the legislation, including the Child Care Act as amended. There was a referendum to put a special provision in the Constitution to protect children but none of this evidence was available at the time; it is still not available in 2016. In working with the Minister, I hope we can get those figures and make proper evaluations rather than statements that the evidence is not available.

May I say again how much I respect the Deputy's experience and commitment to the welfare of children, out of which she raises this question. I have argued there is no evidence and the Deputy has indicated that perhaps Tusla has an obligation to collect that evidence. I trust the context from which the Deputy speaks and her concern. I will commit to continuing this conversation and seeing how we can progress the issue.

On that basis, if I believe there is a strong reason to go to Tusla to request that this be brought forward, I will do that. That is what I suggest.

Barr
Roinn