Mr. Ian Elliott:

On the communication with Tusla, there is an active working relationship. Our understanding of the situation prior to receiving the letter was that we had a good, solid, open, transparent working relationship with all the statutory agencies, not just with Tusla but also with the Garda Síochána and those in the Northern jurisdiction. We were actively committed to that and when the letter was received, it was a shock but it was not dismissed. It was accepted, seriously considered and examined to determine how we should respond or understand it. One must understand that the issue was completely unknown to us.

The helpline has been in operation since the day following our last appearance before the committee, which was 21 November. We set up the helpline and made it clear what we were doing, how we were doing it and what we sought to achieve. It was not intended to exist on its own but rather in the context of two other helplines that were run by two statutory agencies, namely, the Garda Síochána and Tusla. The Garda helpline is staffed by Garda personnel, the Tusla helpline is staffed by Tusla personnel, while ours is staffed by Scouting Ireland personnel. I undertook to supervise the creation and operation of the helpline. I have relevant experience in the area from my career, given that I was the responsible director for the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and oversaw the provision of its 24-hour child helpline, which was a national service with more than 200 members of staff and which responded to several thousand calls. We also provided specific helplines for specific situations that arose. I had relevant experience, therefore, and I applied it to the task that lay before us at Scouting Ireland. It is important to understand that it was a helpline and it was designed for that purpose, namely, to be available to those who wished to speak to us, with a view to accessing help that Scouting Ireland could provide.

We made it clear that, overall, the organisation felt a great deal of sadness and disappointment because the legacy organisations which had preceded the establishment of Scouting Ireland had not performed well and that a number of children and young people had been abused through contact with them. Scouting Ireland felt a responsibility to those individuals and wanted very much to provide help to them. That the issue is in the public domain is as a result of work undertaken by Scouting Ireland and not as a result of anything done by An Garda Síochána or Tusla. We have done this. We have shared with the committee that information as well as our commitment to addressing those issues and doing what we can today to try to ensure that those who have been hurt are helped. The helpline was part of that provision.

There was an issue with the limitation of resources but we and I provided not only training for the individuals involved but also live supervision for a number of calls that were received. I listened to the service in practice, therefore, and to how calls were being received and engaged. I ensured that the practice met the requirements and expectations I held as a supervisor. I also supervised individual members of staff and took a number of calls myself. I answered the phone and responded to individuals because there were days on which we were under a great deal of pressure. It was very hard because such calls are challenging to manage. It is emotionally draining, as an individual, to receive and engage with somebody who is perhaps speaking about something that happened to him or her many years ago but he or she may be speaking about it for the first time, which is challenging. There are only a certain number of those calls that one can take in any working day. I had a responsibility to manage that and ensure that every call was answered, appropriately recorded and dealt with in a way that was not only satisfactory to me but which also met the expectations of Scouting Ireland.

As the committee will know, we had a large number of calls - approximately 180 - and a great deal more than the other agencies. Every call was recorded and every situation was shared with the statutory authorities. To ensure that happened, we set up an inter-agency meeting involving Tusla, An Garda Síochána and us. We regularly checked with them as to whether they were satisfied with the responses we made to the situations, particularly victim disclosures, which presented themselves to us, and it was always confirmed to us that they were. We corresponded with them and shared with them the information we had gathered. It was a surprise, therefore, to find ourselves in the situation where suddenly there appeared to be issues because we had never been aware of those issues. There were concerns about the service which had been in place since November but there had never been any mention to us of any such concerns.

We are anxious to learn from the situation and we want to hear the detail of where the information has come from. Tusla has shared with us that it received a complaint but, despite our request, it is not in a position to give us any detail about the complaint on the grounds that it is concerned about the breach of confidentiality, although I do not fully understand that. It is difficult for us to address issues when we do not know what those issues are, which is our apparent problem.