Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his opening remarks on this important legislation. The Bill is topical, given today's announcement on the forthcoming referendum, which I will discuss later.

Fianna Fáil broadly supports this Bill, as it is a necessary measure towards clarifying and consolidating the vetting process. However, steps to secure children's safety must be backed up by sufficient resources and encompass a wider range of front line involvement with children than has been initially covered by the Bill. Childminders, including nannies in the home, are not covered by the legislation despite the critical role they play in children's lives. This is a missed opportunity in terms of child protection and should be addressed by the Government. We will seek to ensure that it is addressed through amendments. I will discuss this matter in a few moments.

It is right that the vetting system be placed on a statutory basis. This follows on from the work of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children in 2008 and the working group on Garda vetting in 2004 as well as the broader public concerns that have been articulated in the context of the many horrific reports that have been put into the public domain, for example, the Ryan and Murphy reports among others. The Bill makes vetting mandatory for the employees and volunteers of organisations covered by the legislation that work with children and vulnerable adults. However, this provision is not applied to organisations that are not mentioned in the Bill.

That is also an issue that must be revisited as the Bill passes through the Oireachtas.

There is the point of extending the remit of relevant information to be covered in the vetting process, encompassing "soft" or specified information. This is a new departure and we will have to tease out the elements. It essentially covers information that does not lead to a criminal prosecution, and a range of organisations, from the Garda to the Teaching Council, are involved in collating the information. The action would broaden the range of information used in assessing an individual to create a more accurate profile of the person.

The primary difficulties in the Bill include a failure to encompass childminders or people who mind children either in their own home or the home of an employer as a mandatory vetting area. It is estimated that this leaves up to 75,000 children across the country in an unregulated area. This is a glaring gap that must be addressed in this Bill and the forthcoming Children First legislation. As I have already mentioned, providing sufficient resources for the provision of child protection and training, as well as the vetting bureau, must be a priority for the Government if the changes introduced are to have a meaningful and positive impact on child safety.

The introduction of Children First legislation and the national vetting bureau Bill was a perfect opportunity to bring about some form of regulation in the childminding sector. However, the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has decided not to include childminders in the list of organisations or on a list of designated professionals in the heads of the Children First Bill or this national vetting bureau Bill. The Government must commit to including childminders in this legislation and the upcoming Children First legislation. We recognise that this will require the introduction of regulation to the childminding sector and would include compulsory registration of all childminders to the HSE. However, only those who register and are vetted should be allowed to operate, and we intend to bring forward amendments on Committee Stage of both Bills to ensure the inclusion of these provisions.

We recognise that regulation of the childminding sector should be introduced on a phased basis, and it should be accompanied by a public information campaign. It is critical in trying to introduce regulation for the childminding sector that we do not push people further into the black economy. This is an area in which the black economy tends to thrive from time to time, and there should be a focus on the issue. The Government's policy must always be to ensure that children are fully protected, whether they are cared for by somebody employed in the home or in attending crèches, playschools or childminders.

We commend the work in prioritising protection and bringing about extensive debate on child protection issues at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children over the past year. In the absence of proper funding, such discussions may be only window dressing. For example, we know there is still a glaring need for the recruitment of social care workers, and there is a deficit in meeting the commitment for such badly required personnel. We also know there is currently no funding for child protection training for the early education and child care sector. Early Childhood Ireland's annual member survey encompassed the frustrations of services in trying to access Children First training for staff, and according to that survey, less than half of facilities, or 48% of them, have a staff member with current Children First training. This highlights an urgent need for more accessible training in the area.

The expansion of the information envisaged by this Bill will inevitably place a strain on the resources of the vetting bureau. If the remit of the bureau is expanded to encompass critical areas like childminders, the position will be compounded. It is vital that sufficient resources are committed to the vetting process to ensure it is undertaken rigorously, adhering to strict privacy laws and completed within reasonable waiting times. Likewise, adequate access to training procedures for staff must be provided by the Department if the changes are to have a positive impact on child protection rather than acting as window dressing.

The legislation is broadly welcome as anything that enhances child safety and protection of vulnerable people should be. Nevertheless, there are a number of issues that should be placed on record as being of public concern. There is a lack of a unified and universal vetting process. No matter how the Bill concludes, there must be a resulting unified system around the country. The system has been operating to different standards and norms in different sectors and parts of the country. This can be broken down into three categories: sectors where not all staff are required to be vetted; those who should have been vetted but have not; and the sectors with people already in employment when vetting procedures started and where the people are not vetted as a result.

The Minister alluded to the fact that there may be up to 100,000 people in positions in various organisations who have never been vetted. Unfortunately, such people would have to be vetted in order to achieve child safety, and that will be a major undertaking. There is also the issue of foster carers. The HSE has publicly indicated that up to 12.5% of foster carers are still in the process of being vetted, which is extremely serious. HIQA has indicated that vetting is a major concern in up to 43% of centres involved in investigations of vetting. We must delve further into what HIQA has reported in this regard. There must be clarity on whether the Bill can apply retrospectively, particularly as it would apply to people in public service roles or jobs within the civil and public service.

There is also an issue regarding section 3, which deals with exemptions under the Bill. The Bill provides for exemptions from vetting for relevant worker activities undertaken in the course of a family relationship. The relevant phrase is "giving assistance on an occasional basis and for no commercial consideration at school, sports or community events or activities, other than where such assistance includes coaching, training, mentoring, teaching and counselling of children and vulnerable persons". We must tease out the term "giving assistance" a little more. If a person is giving assistance to an organisation giving a service or providing an activity for young and vulnerable people, what would it entail? Would it include a person giving voluntary assistance to an organisation by working as a janitor? That person might work in a swimming pool with communal changing areas and be present in showers or service areas.

Such a person is not included and neither are those working on a pro bono basis such as maintenance staff. It is difficult to get it right and to achieve a definition that will be all-encompassing. The general term "giving assistance" needs to be fleshed out a little more.

With regard to vetting for child protection it is also important to remember that while one is primarily protecting children and vulnerable people one is also providing protection for the person coming into contact and dealing with them on a day-to-day or irregular basis. Unfortunately, we have had official reports of abuse and neglect of children, and situations occur - rare as they are - whereby people find themselves the subject of malicious reports. More and more people will be subject to the screening process and this vetting will provide protection for them should such a case arise.

I agree with the comments on the Garda vetting unit in Thurles. I have contacted it on many occasions and it was very amenable and helpful to me as a public representative, as I am sure it is to others. Establishing the unit on a statutory basis is a compliment to the staff and will give them more structure and status which is right. It must be funded better.

We will table a number of amendments to the Bill on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context