Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that because it is important. Is it the case that they will have full access to the social work file while present? That is important also.

Many issues came under the Shannon report, but I re-emphasise my concern about the reliance on private placement including the Five Rivers agency.

Five Rivers wrote a good letter to the committee outlining the service it provides. I wish to emphasise that my criticism is not necessarily of the organisation, but it underlines the point made by Dr. Shannon. These organisations can refuse children who present with difficult behaviours and obviously they are entitled to do so. However, this exposes our reliance on private providers. The under-provision of State intervention and residential care options in these circumstances means children end up in Garda stations and I do not believe that is appropriate. We need to reduce our reliance on these private providers.

The last point relates to the audit issue. I raised the issue of the need for a far broader audit during the Topical Issue debate the week after the report was published. I believe this is still the case, whatever about section 13. Issues are coming up with Tusla regularly. I accept that it is a new organisation and that resource issues have arisen, but structural and cultural issues must be tackled as well. We need a full overall view of our child protection services in the State to provide us with a roadmap to get to the child protection service we need. I still absolutely believe that it will back up what Tusla needs. It will back up what the social workers are telling us they need in terms of support. I still believe it is required.

My next question relates to the section 13 work that has been commissioned. I am uncertain about why Tusla commissioned the work. If the Minister initially saw the need for it, why did she ask Tusla to commission it rather than commissioning it herself? The Minister has designated a person as the State's child protection rapporteur. I am not referring to a particular individual but to a particular office. The office was deemed suitable by An Garda Síochána to carry out this further work. Why did we not identify this office as a suitable place from which to carry out this follow-up work? Notwithstanding the need for a wider tranche of work, that office would have been entirely suitable to carry out this work.

When the report is returned and when the investigation or audit or research is carried out, will the board or the chief executive of Tusla have a veto over its recommendations? Will the report return directly to the Minister? Will the recommendations be published in full?