Ms Sinéad McGarry:

On withholding information, we know from information we have sought under parliamentary questions that nobody has ever been brought before the courts in respect of the caveat within the criminal justice Act. That has occurred despite the findings of the Brandon report such that abuse of residents that has been acknowledged and accepted by the HSE took place with the full knowledge of staff and HSE management. Clearly, that, in and of itself as a legislative measure, either is not in place as a measure or is not being used effectively.

We need to ask how that can occur over such a long period in one congregated setting and not have any legal consequences for those who are seeing people being harmed in their care. That is not specific to Brandon; it could happen in any service. Clearly, the legislation is not working.

In terms of HIQA and the HSE safeguarding protection teams, it is very important to note that HIQA has a very distinct and separate role to the safeguarding protection teams, as does the Garda in the investigation of abuse. They are distinct, separate and equally vital, and it is important that a person living in a centre receives access to all three services. That would very much be our position. HIQA comes in and does the overall systems regulation, but it cannot look in detail at individual complaints. Mr. Colfer outlined very clearly the significant safeguarding measures that it takes, but HIQA has also called for strengthened powers. We need to start to see that this is not just an either-or scenario. One service should not substitute for another. We do not do that with children and we should not be doing it in respect of adults who are at risk.

Very quickly, to go back to Deputy Cairns point on how safeguarding legislation can align with the will and preferences of people and ensure that reporting does not happen against the consent of somebody, social work is a relationship-based profession. We look to build trusting relationships over time with people. It is really important that safeguarding legislation does not actually worsen the well-being of people by introducing paternalist measures which mean that the State can start to intervene for the sake of stopping abuse, but leaving someone, as Professor Phelan discussed earlier, in a less happy state. The will and preferences of people have to be at the centre of what we do, but we also need to recognise that the lessons from domestic violence carryover. We are working with people impacted by domestic violence all of the time. We are not making reports that are putting their well-being in a worse state. We are supporting people and we are working with them to make the changes that they want to see in their lives at the right time. It is very important that legislation values that intervention so that if somebody declines a legal intervention to prevent the risk from reoccurring, we are recognising they should, if they wish, have access to a service that will support them in managing how they cope with it, increasing their safety so they know that they can come back or engage and get the help that they need at the right time for them. A lot of people are experts in their own lives.

The final caveat is on mandatory reporting. It is that piece that some people do not have the ability to speak up for themselves and seek help for themselves. Our legislative measures have to recognise and respond to that. We should not be leaving people in situations where they would like to be helped but cannot access it due to lack of mandatory reporting. That is it.