Mr. Bernard Gloster:

Lest I be accused of being a poacher turned gamekeeper, I note I have just moved from the HSE and I am sure some of my former colleagues will have a view of whatever response I give to the Deputy's question. I was the chief officer of the mid-west area and had good engagement with CYPSCs. Part of the difficulty for any such committees when they emerge, especially as new constructs, is that with the greater number of local authority committees and other committees, everyone wants the chief to be on their committee. That leads to a circular of committees, where if the chief is not there, it is seen as less valuable. CYPSCs have moved into a much better place whereby senior people, though not necessarily the chief executive officer of various agencies, including the HSE, now participate much more actively.

Relationships are always a part of the strength of a community. They dissipate when people leave and I am not sure how that can be legislated for. If a culture of inter-agency working is built up in an area, it will have a better chance.

The issue of CYPSC coming onto a statutory footing is one for the Minister, the Department and the Government. My plan is to ensure that CYPSC will continue to be invested in, supported and driven. Equally, however, my plan is to find as many other agencies as possible that are champions of CYPSC in order that it will not become, by default, identified as being within the exclusive remit of Tusla. The way to create real inter-agency ownership is not through one agency owning everything but rather it should be variable. I have no doubt that in some parts of the country, a district superintendent in An Garda Síochána could be the most effective chair of a CYPSC. That is the approach I favour because it is the respect in which inter-agency working is effective. If it is led by one agency, it will be difficult for another agency, which will have its own statutory pressures, to invest in it. It is a challenge.