Dr. Niall Muldoon:

I thank the Chairman very much. First, as regards anyone admitting fault, that is part of the process we do within our investigations. We engage with the services. In this case, we would have engaged with IPAS, Tusla and the Department. They accepted our recommendation. Is that an acceptance of fault? I presume it is an acknowledgment that they need to improve things and had not done things to the level that should have been done. As we have carried out a statutory investigation, the findings are strong. They accepted them and made strong commitments to the implementation of those recommendations. That follows on to the Chairman's question about the future and 2024.

It is possible that the difference between the McMahon report recommendations and our own is that we will statutorily follow up. We already have a timeline. We will follow up on the recommendations at six months and 12 months to see where they are and we have done that. We have shown a record. We followed up on a number of investigations after two years and three years so they know we are not going away. It is not just a case of handing in the report and leaving it for somebody else to push it. We will be pushing it and if it gets to a stage where we are not satisfied with the implementation as planned or it is not reaching the level we want, we can really challenge them on that. Certainly, from our point of view, our recommendations will not be going away. The White Paper itself has many commitments.

The Chairman also asked if there are any pitfalls. At the moment, sourcing accommodation and funding are probably the two pitfalls that could get in the way. The plan is very good; it is positive. We know there is already a discussion about whether it is being costed properly. From our point of view, the plan is crucially right. If it is about funding, the Department and the Minister in this case, Deputy O'Gorman, must strongly fight their corner to make this a reality. Hopefully, therefore, we can see a better future in 2024.

As I said in my original statement, we are not going to let them use that as a reason to postpone all the improvements that are needed here and now for the children who are currently in direct provision. If a child of six years of age living in direct provision is being told to wait for three years, that is half of the child's life - 50% of his or her life will be delayed waiting for something to change. Things need to work now. I ask my colleague, Ms Ward, to talk about the sectoral implementation plan around the Children First legislation because she would have more awareness of that.