Colette Kelleher (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for their presentations. In a session last week we heard from the National Safeguarding Committee, the Support and Advocacy Service and the HSE. It is important to capture the reason we are discussing the legislation. Almost 8,000 cases of suspected adult abuse were reported to the HSE in 2016.

The National Centre for the Protection of Older People at UCD estimates that 32,000 people over the age of 65 were mistreated last year, so it is important to always remember why we are looking at this area. According to a RED C poll, a third of people think abuse of vulnerable adults is widespread, and I think the numbers reported to the HSE are probably the tip of an iceberg. There was strong consensus among the witnesses last week on the need not only for adult safeguarding policy, but for legislation, with the gap in the legislative framework universally highlighted. For example, in his opening statement, Mr. Pat Healyof the HSE noted that "there is now a strong expectation on legislators, policy makers and service providers to take adequate measures to combat abuse.". He pointed out that the current constraints to the HSE, such as the inability to enter nursing homes as being a clear gap, and he went on to say that a statutory framework is needed. Ms Patricia Rickard-Clarke noted the urgent requirement for adult safeguarding to be placed on a statutory footing. Mr. Mervyn Taylor, representing the citizens, talked about the need for law, particularly the importance of independence in any safeguarding mechanisms, and emphasised the importance of the independent advocates.

We now have a Bill that is progressing through the Seanad. It was interesting to note that the HSE highlighted the need for an easy-to-understand definition, which I believe we have in the Adult Safeguarding Bill 2017. Sage highlighted the need for an independent national safeguarding service, which is also in the Bill, and the independent advocates and the national safeguarding committee highlighted the need for mandatory reporting, which is another feature of it. The national safeguarding committee also stated that the responsibility for the legislation should lie with the Department of Health, but there was a strong interest from other Departments, including the Department of Justice and Equality.

I will now ask a few questions of the Department of Health. Is the Department of the view that there is a need for legal framework? Would witnesses from the Department concur with those from last week that there are gaps in the legislation? Moreover, do the witnesses view the Department of Health as being the lead Department on this issue and how do they propose to work with other interested Departments? Assuming that the witnesses are in agreement with the enactment of such legislation, how do they envisage their responsibilities? The witnesses mentioned proposals coming to Government in November. Could they give us an outline of those?

I now address the witnesses from the Institute of Public Administration. The key issue in any mechanism is independence. From the work that the witnesses have done, how can that be ensured in any mechanisms that are put in place for the citizen?