James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I would like to reiterate what I was saying about ICT. Capital moneys that were given to Tusla in 2014 and 2015 remain unspent. I met the chair and the CEO during 2015 to discuss this issue and the national child care information system, which I mentioned earlier. I do not think money is the issue hereper se. Tusla wrote to the Department in late November about the HSE-Tusla service agreement. The HSE indicated that Tusla received the same level of service as HSE staff. It undertook to draft a service level agreement. The issue is not whether the budget is 0.5% or 5%. It is about service. If Tusla is not happy with the service, we will have to look at it. The Secretary General is meeting the chair and the CEO next Monday. Obviously, ICT will be one of the main issues on the agenda at that meeting. We all understand the importance of ICT, When I talk about supporting social workers, for example, I refer to the level of ICT support they have, or do not have even though they should have it. This is an issue for us.

I will come back to the main questions that were asked. My colleague, Ms Bernie McNally, will speak about the mapping exercise because she has more up-to-date information on it than I have.

Deputy Troy is right when he says that the use of community employment scheme workers will cease in September 2016. He asked what supports will be provided to the workers in question. Ms McNally will address that in the context of the learner fund, for example. Additional moneys have been put into the learner fund to help to support these workers. The original timeline dictated that this would cease in September 2015, but we decided earlier this year, in light of the impact its cessation would have on community services, which depend on community employment workers, to give those services an extra year to get their people up to speed. We will always have this dynamic. Are we going to insist on quality in order to get the best outcomes for children, or are we going to continually accommodate those who do not come up to speed? I think we have struck a fair balance by giving them an extra 12 months. Many private providers are very cross about it because they have made the effort to invest in getting their staff up to speed, but they now see that others have not done so. I want to put it on the record that I have no intention of allowing this to travel beyond September 2016. I do not believe that would be the proper approach. I know that might present challenges to people, but they have been given quite a bit of support to date.

The rapporteur's report is being circulated to the various Departments because it involves so many different people. Senator van Turnhout raised this as well and she also asked for a report to be done on existing law. We can examine this but it is probably a matter for the next Government.

A number of members asked about the figure for social workers. A total of 400 additional staff will be recruited in 2016, 174 of which will be to social work posts. This is a reply to Question No. 20 from the Chairman. Tusla has been requested to provide a detailed plan showing how the recruitment targets are to be achieved. As of September 2015, it was actively recruiting 344 staff, 258 of which relate to social work posts and 51 to other line services such as social care work, family support, psychology and counselling. The agency has the money but I do not want the committee to get the wrong impression. When I met the board members, I was complimentary to them. They have done a great job. They have set up a new agency and everybody is trying his or her best but having secured them the resources, the ball is very much in their court. There is no question that is a challenge for them and they know it. However, we will support them in every way we can.

The overall amount is €36 million but of that, approximately €16.5 million is for GALs. The Department is working up a document on that and we have to engage in a manner that will allow us to change this but there will be a great deal of resistance to it. The major problem we have is there is no control. I do not mean to be critical of any individual but there is a sense overall of people lawyering up every time they go to court and that is costing the State a fortune. That money should be spent on child care, not on legal fees. We are all agreed on that and we are all seeking a resolution to that. I am supportive of Mr. Gordon Jeyes and Tusla in resolving that.

Deputy Troy asked whether I had confidence in the management of Oberstown; I have. A ballot will be taken but I am reassured by the fact that even when it announced the ballot, IMPACT said it would continue to work with management to resolve the issues. The changes that are taking place present a challenge to staff but they are changes for the better and nobody in this room could think that it is a good idea to have three separate schools or three separate managements and three separate administrations and no crossover in support when somebody is ill or absent and cover is required. That is not the way to move forward and there will be no yielding on that. Other issues are being brought into play and it is not up to me to step into the middle of negotiations in an industrial relations dispute. I have confidence in the management and I also have great confidence in the workers. They will manage to resolve the issues with goodwill.

There is also the issue of shorter sentences in Oberstown. It makes it difficult for staff to build up relationships with young people. No one would suggest that sentences should be longer but these are all challenges that come as a consequence of change.

Senator van Turnhout raised the occupancy issue in Oberstown. We can examine that. The more transparent the position is, the better for everyone. Some people see it is a threat but I believe it is a protection for those who work there. I mean no disrespect to the Judiciary but there will be a need for a greater uniformity in terms of the use of Oberstown because no matter how much its capacity, it will always be limited. Sentencing to detention should always be a last resort. Members of the Judiciary - some of whom mean well in this respect - say, "If there is nothing else for the child, what else can I do?" but that should never be the case. That is why we are investing in community services. If we all work together, we can achieve a much better outcome for the child. That is what we all want and I include the Judiciary in that.