Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Dr. Shannon once again. I said it at the time and I will say it again. The audit was a remarkable piece of public service. The report underlines that there were examples but some of the examples given in the approximately 91 cases were shocking. Anyone would find them harrowing. They show the adverse and difficult circumstances in which many young people in Ireland grow up. It was well worth shining a light on that and the way it is being dealt with.

One aspect that was clear in the audit was that there were difficulties between the two agencies specifically involved, namely, the Garda Síochána and Tusla. It is worth stating that the audit clearly shows that there is a high level of commitment on the part of the individuals involved, and I acknowledge that the work is very difficult. There are great difficulties facing social workers and gardaí and they show a great deal of commitment but in regard to Tusla in particular, and we discussed it last week, there seems to be both structural and cultural issues which raise very serious concerns. We discussed individual cases, but the concern was not simply about the individual cases. It was the structural and cultural weaknesses that existed. As far as I recall, the culture referred to by a number of gardaí was one of people leaving it until the last minute on a Friday to get in contact with the gardaí. I ask Mr. Shannon to comment on that and on his experience of cultural issues because that seems to be a significant concern.

The issue of inter-agency co-operation has been largely dealt with, but I might return to it later. On the area of out-sourcing which we discussed in considerable detail last week also, I expressed my concern about that. The level of reliance on agencies, particularly the Five Rivers agency, in the past 15 to 20 years has become very significant. A huge proportion of the out of hours cases are referred to it. In particular, I expressed my concern that that agency has the ability, and exercises it, to refuse to accept children who it perceives as displaying problematic behaviours and who could then end up in Garda stations or other unsuitable places. That is a very unsatisfactory, dangerous and problematic situation. I would like to hear Dr. Shannon's response to that and what he believes should be done about that reliance.

I was interested to hear Dr. Shannon's comment on the issue of an audit because as he noted, it was an issue I raised last week and on a number of other occasions. The question of whether our child protection services are fit for purpose needs to be asked. If they are not, how do we get to the bottom of that? Does it require a full audit of our child protection services and, if so, what would that involve? Are we looking specifically at section 13 or is a much broader audit of child protection services required? Dr. Shannon might give us a roadmap on how to get to a child protection service that is adequate and fit for purpose in an Ireland that passed the children's referendum.

We had a brief discussion on Tusla's response to the audit on the day and subsequently. A press release was issued. It was withdrawn. Last week's statement from Tusla stated that no member of staff was involved as part of the methodology for conduction the review or writing the report. I would be interested in Dr. Shannon's response in terms of the nature of his communication with Tusla, his subsequent communication with Tusla and, harking back to the previous question, his engagement with Tusla on a further audit.