Ms Tanya Ward:

It is not only Tusla that will need to be held accountable in these scenarios. Potentially, the judge could make a decision that the child would need to question, and challenge, as well. It is an important check and balance in the system to ensure that decisions are made in the best interests of children. As one can imagine, social workers throughout the country can be overburdened with high volumes of cases. Perhaps they are not able to give a child the attention that he or she needs. Perhaps their supervisor takes a particular view on something or perhaps the judge takes a particular view on something. There needs to be someone there to defend and vindicate the rights of the child. Sometimes the parents can do that but, as one can imagine, it is difficult for a parent, if, for example, he or she has been prosecuted for neglecting his or her child, to play that special role.

As a final point, to echo what Mr. Finlay said, we recognise that a real attempt has been made to restrict the role that Tusla has in the management of the money in respect of the guardian ad litemservice in the scheme but, from an independence perspective, it would be much better that Tusla would not have a role in managing the moneys around the guardian ad litemscheme. It could be the Department of Children and Youth Affairs or it could be another body. That is really important, particularly in the context of the perception of the system and the perception of independence.