Ms Kate Duggan:

I am the interim chief executive officer in Tusla. I thank the Chair and committee members for the invitation to attend to discuss the pre-legislative scrutiny of the child care (amendment) Bill 2023. I am joined by my colleague, Mr. Cormac Quinlan, assistant national director of practice reform. I am joined online by my colleagues, Ms Pamela Benson, head of legal services, and Ms Fiona McDonnell, national service director, children’s services regulation. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important legislation with many other key stakeholders in this area.

The Child Care Act 1991 has supported regional health boards, the Health Service Executive, and Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, on its establishment in 2014 to support and promote the development, welfare and protection of children and families. Its strength in promoting the welfare of children and placing their interests as paramount in all matters has been a critical cornerstone of the child protection and welfare system in Ireland.

There are many proposed changes in this Bill that we welcome, including: the guiding principles; the increased focus on children’s rights; the changes which relate to care orders; the clarity on section 3; and the enhanced enforcement powers of the early years Inspectorate and its ability to share information with parents.

I will address specific observations in the following key areas: child protection and alternative care; interagency working; and children's services regulation. I will also reference areas which will need further discussion and, indeed, may need to be addressed by further legislation in different areas.

On child protection and alternative care, we welcome the changes to voluntary care which will support joint work with parents when they require us to assist them in the care of their children. This will be done while recognising the need to ensure that the rights of children and parent are protected and that such arrangements are time-limited and subject to review.

The extension periods associated with the different types of care orders will provide for the court's consideration of facilitating greater time to develop care and support plans for children. It will also provide the necessary time to support parents and their family network to address concern of possible harm, increase the need for future safety and, importantly, support children to successfully return home. The further enhancements to supervision orders and the increased clarity for section 20 reports will support the court to facilitate greater assistance for other State bodies in the context of care or special care proceedings.

The reorientation of section 3 out of the 1991 Act and into Children First is a welcome provision, as it clearly sets out the right to assess reports, other than mandated reports. The reorientation will also strengthen Tusla’s position in promoting the welfare of the child while setting out in more detail the process for those parties affected by the assessment.

We very much welcome the requirement for Tusla to publish general information on our role and responsibilities regarding care proceedings, and to provide an information booklet to parents. We also welcome the amendment of section 25 as it strengthens the voice of the child in care proceedings, recognising that some children should actively participate in the care proceedings in their best interests.

In respect of emergency care orders, we would have welcomed the introduction of a once-off emergency care order for a period of 15 days, which could then proceed to an interim care order.

There are other key areas of necessary discussion and reform to complement this Bill, and support a more effective child protection and welfare system. These include the regulation of the guardian ad litem, GAL, service and the comprehensive governance and oversight this would bring, the proposed reform of the family law court and the effective support and implementation of a new Government policy framework.

We believe that there is greater consideration needed to potentially widen the support to young people in aftercare up to the age of 25. Also, given the emergence of work within the international context, Tusla's legislative role and remit in how we care for separated children who seek international protection or unaccompanied minors needs greater consideration within Ireland's core child care legislation.

On interagency working, in recent years the demand for our services, and the more complex needs of the children, young people and families who require our services has significantly increased. Many reports by a range of stakeholders, including HIQA, the national review panel, the Ombudsman for Children, the Child Care Law Reporting Project, and our own internal reports have identified the need for greater and more effective collaboration in meeting children's needs, which often cross a variety of services.

While there is often good collaboration, and the development of protocols have improved joint planning and shared governance, sometimes the needs of children and young people can be so complex as to require greater and active collaboration from a range of specialist services across a range of agencies. In situations such as these, the powers used proportionally, and only in the child's best interests, will ensure that the State can maximise all efforts to meet those children's needs. However, further engagement is required on this proposed duty to co-operate, and how Tusla can ensure that children's rights and best interests are protected when co-operation is absent or not forthcoming.

On children's services regulation, we welcome the proposed new early years powers that will enable Tusla's early years inspectorate to have a more proportionate intervention where it identifies concerns and significant risk to children. These measures will ultimately increase our ability to protect children, and empower parents, who will now be advised where there are significant concerns found on inspection.

This will support engagement with their provider and inform their decisions. These changes require increased responsiveness from providers where high risk is identified and from any service that operates without registration. We will support the Department's plans in the regulation of childminders and believe that the phased introduction of these regulations, and the transitional period of three years will be helpful in supporting childminders towards a pathway to registration.

Regarding our residential registration and inspection functions for the non-statutory sector, there is an intention to move these functions from the agency to HIQA. In the interim, we would welcome consideration of additional powers being expanded under Part VIII of the Child Care Act 1991. This would permit third party organisations to provide residential care interventions with children on behalf of the State without having to first meet the registration requirement currently prescribed under sections 59 and 60. Instead the provider would have to retrospectively register once operational. This would expand the number of providers that could provide appropriate care intervention with young people at risk of having no placement available to them during a crisis and mitigate against further risk of homelessness in some instances.

Overall, there are many positive proposed changes, some of which I have outlined here. There are also some areas that will require further discussion and solutions. Ultimately, however, this represents another positive step forward in how we support children and families in Ireland today.

I will conclude by thanking the committee for giving us the opportunity to be part of this important conversation. We are happy to elaborate further on any of the points raised and answer any questions members may have.