Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The appointment of a guardian ad litemis a mechanism available to the courts to ensure the views and best interests of children are independently presented for consideration in child care proceedings. Chapter 11 of the Report on the Accounts of the Public Services 2015 looks at the operation of the guardian ad litemservice. In particular, the chapter reviews the process by which a guardian ad litemis appointed, the costs associated with the service and how the operation of the service compares with other jurisdictions. The figure being displayed for members seeks to summarise the current arrangements for the provision of the service. As members can see, it is a fairly complex and unusual arrangement.

Apart from the parents and children at the centre of child care cases, these arrangements involve a number of parties, including the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, which has policy and legislative responsibility; members of the Judiciary; the child and family agency, Tusla; the individuals who act as guardians; and, in many cases, legal representatives hired by the guardians to act on their behalf. The examination found that no agency was charged with formal oversight of the guardian ad litemservice. Although Tusla is usually a party to the child care proceedings, it also has responsibility for directly discharging guardian ad litemcosts, which in 2015 totalled around €14 million.

The examination found that insufficient data were being captured to allow for effective monitoring and evaluation of delivery of the service. Appropriate performance measures are required, including the number of guardians ad litemappointed, the average case load per guardian, the average cost per case and the number of guardians engaging legal representation. The most recent information on the frequency with which guardians adlitemare appointed in child care cases comes from the Child Care Law Reporting Project, a project supported by the Department to examine and report on child care proceedings in the courts.

Data collated by the project from a sample of District Court child care cases heard in the period from December 2012 to June 2015 show that guardians ad litemwere appointed in approximately 53% of the cases. To get an idea of the average case load per guardian, as part of this examination Tusla contacted the service providers known to it as at 21 April 2016 to ask for details on their current case loads. The information provided shows that, on average, each guardian ad litemhas approximately ten ongoing cases at any given time. Tusla also provided the examination team with information on the hours billed by 28 guardians ad litemfor the period from January to December 2015. This data shows a high level of variation in the average cost per case from a low of €4,800 to a high of €28,700. Factors such as the approach taken by a guardian ad litem, the nature and complexity of the issues in the case, the number of children involved and the number of court attendances required can affect the average cost.

The absence of key data means that demand for the service cannot be reliably estimated. It also makes it difficult to reliably forecast and budget for expected costs and to assess the overall cost-effectiveness of the service. In this regard, the service in Ireland compares unfavourably with other jurisdictions where such key statistical information is more readily available. The child care law reporting project found, based on the sample observed, that guardians ad litemsecured the services of solicitors in 82% of cases and of barristers in 7% of cases. The cost of guardian ad litemlegal representation in 2015 was approximately €5.9 million. Approximately 95% of this comprised payments to individuals or firms of more than €25,000, which is the normal minimum level at which open competitive public procurement is required. These legal costs are not subject to competitive procurement, mainly because no single entity is responsible for procuring these services.

In carrying out our examination, we were careful not to stray into policy matters or encroach on judicial prerogative. However, the chapter makes a number of recommendations regarding operational matters, including the development of performance measures to monitor and evaluate the guardian ad litemservice, the assignment of responsibility for the management and supervision of the service to a single entity and the examination of options for the engagement of guardian ad litemlegal representatives by way of a competitive tendering process. The Department and Tusla have indicated that they accept all the recommendations made. I understand that some legislative changes in this respect are in train. The Accounting Officer and the chief executive officer will be able to update the committee in that regard.

Finally, I would like to draw the attention of the committee to a transcription error in paragraph 11.34 of this chapter, which is about to be brought up on the screen. For the record, the total expenditure on professional fees for guardians ad litemin 2015 was €8.2 million. The comparable figure for 2014 was €9.1 million. The amounts shown in paragraph 11.34 of this chapter were reversed in error in the version of the report that was initially published. They are shown correctly in figure 11.1 of the report. I just want to put that on the record.