Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to speak to this new legislation, the Child Care (Amendment) Bill 2015. I broadly welcome the debate, although not the Bill itself, as it does not go far enough. The bottom line is that it does not give a statutory right to the implementation of the aftercare plan. After all the talk, experience and damage done to young and vulnerable people, we need to be able to guarantee a proper aftercare service. These young people are at risk and need our total support. There can be no ifs or buts and it is the bottom line.

Before getting to the detail of the legislation, my view is that there should never be cuts to services for children and young adults, whether they are services for children with a disability or other vulnerable youths. This should always be a red line for all politicians, and not just those from the Government or leading Opposition parties. This Government must focus on the issue and get on with the job. There is no point in having a children's referendum and speaking about children's rights if we do not provide proper services to facilitate those rights.

The Bill does not introduce a statutory obligation to implement the aftercare plan or provide aftercare services. It contains a new explicit duty to have regard to the resources available to Tusla to implement the plan when making it. Organisations like Barnardos have commented on the legislation. Barnardos stated that "the Bill only guarantees a plan, not its implementation, which is a crucial difference, given the breadth of supports that care leavers require, such as accommodation, financial and practical life skills, health and education". Barnardos is very concerned that Tusla and other agencies identified in the young person's care plan are inappropriately resourced in meeting this additional demand. It is an important aspect of the legislation on which we should focus.

We are discussing children and dealing with young adults and their aftercare but we should also reflect on what is going on in the real world. There are currently 6,364 children in care and many of those have been allocated a social worker. Of those, 90% have a written care plan. Again, people ask the question of whether that comes through on the ground. Every year, between 450 and 500 young adults leave the care of the State and they must have an aftercare plan. Is that the reality on the ground? At the end of March 2015, a total of 1,783 young people of all ages were in receipt of aftercare support. Of those, 1,338 were aged between 18 and 20 and in full-time education or in receipt of aftercare support. We must be very careful in considering the figures as they relate to young and vulnerable people. Tusla has advised that 90% of young adults receiving aftercare service are in some form of stable accommodation, including the 45% who remain living with their former foster families.

This is an opportunity to commend and thank the magnificent work done by our foster families. When we speak about children in care, the wonderful work of foster families might be forgotten about all of a sudden. The vast majority of foster families do an excellent job in bringing stability to the lives of young, vulnerable adults and children when they are in crisis. Many of these youths and children come from crisis homes and are very severely damaged. Nothing is as difficult in life as being in a family position where the child is not loved or wanted, or where there are major problems like drug and alcohol abuse or sheer neglect. Imagine somebody who is four, five or six in that position when we think of the care that most children get from families in this State. I use this opportunity to commend the foster families, as they do a magnificent job. Of those in aftercare, 45% remain living with their foster families.

I have direct experience of this as my late mother and father were involved with foster care for many years. The joy that this brought to many young people was unbelievable. It is important to acknowledge these foster families, which do the State a great service. We should look after them, nurture them and develop them. Often, such families stop young adults and vulnerable people who are severely damaged and hurt from ending up with addictions or in Mountjoy. It is a reality, so these people must be protected.

I have heard much discussion about social workers. We need social workers as they form an important cog in developing services, although it is not the only element we need. Some people in this House seem to think that if a social worker is allocated to a youth, the job is done. The key element is a stable, happy and secure environment for the young person in question. This goes back to the idea of the foster families, which have the strength and ability to provide that. We need to resource and support them; we must also regulate them while providing that support. These young people and children need stability and if one speaks to them, they would say they need a bit of love, care and stability. With that, much work can be done in preventing other problems later in life. It is not trendy to say that in some elements of the Government but we must stand up for children and children's rights. We need to develop services before youths end up in aftercare. In fairness to the Minister, although we have our differences at times, I know he thinks about this and focuses on it in his portfolio.

I recently attended a meeting in Coolock when the issue of early intervention arose. There should be a commitment to such early intervention because if we offer key quality supports and programmes during the important phases of childhood, the results can be absolutely outstanding. I know many groups have come to the Minister and at the meeting I told them it was important to prove that such an approach works. There are wonderful people involved with the Northside Partnership like Mr. Noel Kelly who do a great job. Such people deal with facts rather than fairy tale economics or services. They want to provide services to prevent problems and early intervention is key.

We need to invest in childhood futures. The current spend on universal services in early intervention and delayed intervention should be realigned so resources go from crisis intervention to prevention and early intervention.

We need to get this message out to broader society. We need to deliver on the national policy framework for children and young people. The framework makes a number of important commitments to prevention and early intervention relating to child poverty, early years education, parents' supports, upskilling of professionals and rebalancing of resources. The whole Government needs to work together to deliver on these commitments. We also need to ensure that the support used works. The people on the ground have the research to prove prevention and early intervention improve the lives of children. We need to use this information and to build on it. We also need to ensure the best interests of our children are central to all Government and service decisions. Children were the most affected by the recession in Ireland. Now is the time to invest in them and to make building blocks of Ireland's recovery. The hard-nosed economic argument is that if we do this we will save, in that we could get in there and prevent these children ending up in worse situations, whether in prison or in violent or conflict situations, as we have seen even in recent days.

On placing a child in care, under the Child Care Act 1991 the Child and Family Agency has a statutory duty to promote the welfare of children who are not receiving adequate care and protection. In some cases parents are unable to cope due to illness or other problems, and they may agree to their children being taken into care. This is known as voluntary care. At present the majority of children in care are in voluntary care. That is something many people do not realise. Under the 1991 Act there are a number of procedures the agency can use when dealing with children who are at risk or who are in need of care. It may apply to the courts for a number of different orders which give the courts a range of powers including decisions about the kind of care needed and access to the children for parents and other relatives. These orders include emergency care orders, care orders, special care orders and supervision orders. These orders involve the child being taken into care. Children in the care of the State live in residential care and foster care. That is another important thing. They may also live in hostels or high support facilities. Children in residential care are largely placed in open residential centres run by either the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, or private and voluntary providers in communities across the country. That is what is happening on the ground. I emphasise the need for early intervention, because we need to get out there and support these children.

Research has shown that poor outcomes for children in care, including homelessness, addiction and in some cases death, are typically associated with young people who have, among other things, received little preparation for leaving care - that is something we need to focus on; been given little or no aftercare support; left care in an unplanned way; and had not been adequately consulted about arrangements for moving on from care. They are the issues. If the Government does not focus on those issues, we will end up with homelessness, addiction and, in some cases, death and horrific situations. The bottom line is that we have to focus on these issues when we are coming up with sensible solutions. Barnardos also comments:

...for some of those who have been raised in the State care system their journey can be characterised by multiple placements leading to subsequent feelings of low self-esteem, uncertainty and unpreparedness... They have to leave the care system once they turn 18 and are less likely to have a strong network of support. As a result, there is a necessity on the State, as the corporate parent, to prepare a young person for life after care, providing a range of supports including: financial, housing [and so on].

Multiple placements, it says, lead to "feelings of low self-esteem, uncertainty and unpreparedness". They are the three key terms.

This is also an opportunity to commend the work that is going on, particularly in our DEIS schools, our very disadvantaged schools. People often forget this. There are excellent programmes there that deal with issues, particularly in junior and senior infants. If one gets in early, one can deal with the problem of low self-esteem and work with those very young children. It could prevent them going down the road later in life of having a dysfunctional life or experiencing addiction problems. Hurt and damaged children can end up in very violent situations. We see it every single day in our courts. We see the horrific consequences of what has happened to their lives. If a child is abused or is in a very negative or violent situation, do not expect that child to be normal. Do not expect that child to go into class and have his homework done. That is the reality on the ground. Early intervention is key.

Digging further into the legislation, section 6 of the Bill inserts a new section 45A into the principal Act which deals with the assessment of need to be carried out prior to the provision or not of an aftercare plan. The new section provides that Tusla must carry out an assessment of the needs of an eligible child or adult and these assessments must be recorded in writing. I welcome that. Section 45A(3) states that this assessment must include, but is not limited to, the needs of the person in relation to education, financing and budgeting matters, training and employment, health and well-being, personal and social development, accommodation and family support. Section 6 is a strong section and I support it.

Section 7 inserts a new section 45B into the principal Act which deals with an aftercare plan for an eligible child who can be in Tusla’s care or not. There is an explicit obligation on Tusla to have due regard to its resources to implement the plan when drawing up an aftercare plan. Section 45B(4) states that Tusla may, rather than must, provide care to an eligible child or adult. There is no statutory obligation on Tusla to provide aftercare services. That is my little complaint in respect of this issue.

The issue of aftercare for young adults has been highlighted by a number of groups. There has been no comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of aftercare services and there is evidence that providing these services has long-term socioeconomic benefits, such as reduced homelessness, welfare dependency and criminality. The bottom line is, as many people believe, that if we get into a situation where we can deal with this and get in early, we can reduce homelessness, welfare dependency and criminality. In fact, it is an economic argument. Even if one has a heart of stone, it makes sense from a money point of view. Focus Ireland, for example, has stated that, "Provision of aftercare makes sound economic sense as this type of structured support and accommodation has been shown to help prevent people from becoming homeless and also getting sucked into difficulties, including addiction and crime". Again, that means less spending later on if we deal with this issue. That is sound economic sense, outside the question of the rights of the child. Just imagine if we could make a dent in preventing addiction or criminal problems. How many people would be alive today if we dealt with these issues? That is very important.

However, the Bill only guarantees a plan, not its implementation, which is a crucial difference. Given the breadth of supports that care-leavers require, such as accommodation, financial, practical life skills, health and education, I am very concerned that Tusla and other agencies identified in the young person’s care plan are inappropriately resourced to meet this additional demand. That is also a valid point. The absence of resources is the deal breaker on how successful this legislation will be and yet the long-term consequences of not supporting these vulnerable young people during this transition phase can be fatal, as we know from previous experiences. The facts stand up to serious analysis. Another point made very strongly by Barnardos, which I support, is that placing aftercare on a statutory basis would strengthen the political commitment to these children, ringfence funding for these services and ensure better outcomes for them, their families and wider society. That is where we need to come on board and put on the pressure. In broader political society, we need to support this kind of policy, which I am sure the Minister has to push every day of his life. Prior to the publication of the Bill, the Minister announced that funding of over €676 million would be provided in 2016.

This seems to be an increase of €38 million, and I welcome that. Some of the funding will be used to hire additional social workers, and I welcome that as well.

We must avoid inconsistency in the provision of aftercare services. There are some brilliant examples of good practice. There are some brilliant examples of foster families that would be a lesson to everybody in life.

There are many good support services in place at present, but there are gaps in the system and we need to focus on these gaps. As for the provision of aftercare services in Ireland, there are parts of it that are patchy, inconsistent and inadequate, and this leaves vulnerable young people exposed to the risks of which I spoke earlier, whether it be drug or alcohol addiction, prostitution or imprisonment.

It is important when we are planning for the future that children and vulnerable adults are at the centre of these plans. It might not necessarily be politically popular, but we need to ensure that these services and supports are put in place. Not only is it the right thing to do, and not only does it create a society that is built on social justice and equality, but it also builds a society that is sustainable and safe, which is something we need to focus on as well. If one ever meets children who are hurt or angry or come from very dysfunctional families - I met many of them in my previous day job - one can see the hurt in their eyes, and many years later, if one visits the prisons, looks into the cells and meets some of the prisoners, one will see the same hurt and anger in their eyes. My point is that if we get in early and provide support services, then, when they leave the aftercare services, we have to keep a close eye on them. As I stated earlier, there are more than 6,000 young people in care in Ireland at present. The anchor for this is the important provision of stable, committed and professional supports, but also the provision of a warm and happy home, as provided by many foster families.

See this speech in context