Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The litany of failures outlined within the Devine and Resilience Ireland reports speak for themselves and shame us all. In spite of significant concerns for Grace's safety, time and again opportunities to intervene in her care were missed or ignored. The Devine report identifies instances in 1996, 2004, 2008 and 2009 where action could and should have been taken. The State's failure to act is inexcusable and indefensible. Let us not fall into the trap of thinking that this is a historic litany of events; it is not, and it brings us almost right up to the present day. What is more, there is no reason to have confidence that things have changed in any way and it is quite possible that other children are left in the unsafe conditions that Grace was left in. We know our social work services are severely under-funded, we know social workers are severely stressed and under-resourced and we know that there are many hundreds of children on social work waiting lists, children who are suspected of having been sexually abused, physically abused or neglected, yet the State seems to tolerate that further scandal.

The shortcomings are further compounded by a disturbing culture of negligence which runs through the State's interaction with Grace. In particular, the Devine report cites failings in records management, the recording of discussions and basic case management. In the absence of the sort of documentary evidence which should have resulted from these meetings, a commission of investigation may be the only way to get to the truth of those inexplicable actions. There are major questions about the deliberate destruction of files and criminal investigations should follow on that. We have, yet again, more examples of the shocking treatment of whistleblowers by official Ireland.

Beyond the actions of those involved directly in Grace's case, the response from the HSE to both the Devine and Resilience Ireland reports is deeply concerning. There are still many aspects of its subsequent actions which give rise to grave concerns and which have yet to be adequately explained. Only last Sunday, the HSE's head of disability operations simply could not explain why it sought to avoid bringing Grace's case before a judge during the wardship proceedings, why it would not share her health records - despite requests from the individual who was subsequently made her committee of the person - and why it waited three years to notify the Garda about the Devine report. We need answers to those questions now. Before entering into a lengthy investigation on the events of recent years, we need to know what is happening within State bodies now.

Last Tuesday I asked the Taoiseach three simple questions, namely, why did the HSE not disclose to Tusla the names of the people involved in key decisions in Grace's case, did the Minister for Health direct the HSE to hand over this information to Tusla and are the people who were involved in decisions concerning the care of Grace still involved in child protection services? The Taoiseach claimed he could not answer those questions and he stated that answering those questions would require a commission of investigation. Yet, within a matter of hours, the HSE confirmed to RTE that five of its current employees are involved in the Grace case while a spokesperson for Tusla confirmed that six of its current staff are referred to in the reports. However, they declined to comment on whether any of these people are currently dealing with children or are in a child protection role. We need to know that, and we need to know it tonight. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, to give us a guarantee that none of those people associated with the Grace case is currently involved with any child protection services. I do not know how six people working in Tusla can be doing work that does not involve child protection services. We need answers on that.

Beyond the scope of the commission of investigation, we need clarity on what is happening currently. Can the Government inform the House as to what internal investigations are currently taking place within State agencies? Are disciplinary actions being taken? I asked if there is a current sexual offences investigation and a current reckless endangerment investigation. Incredibly, the Taoiseach admitted that he had not asked the Minister for Justice and Equality - he suggested the Minister would know the answer to those questions but he had not asked. They are basic questions we need to know the answer to now. I ask the Minister of State not to do what the Taoiseach was doing in hiding behind a commission of investigation.

What changes, if any, have been made within the organisations involved so we can have some level of confidence this is not happening right now to someone else? Establishing commissions such as this is often all too necessary but their role is specific and limited. They do nothing to prevent the sort of behaviour they are investigating from taking place as we speak. The existence of the commission cannot be used to distract from addressing the identified failings within our State bodies. It has its role as a commission but it is no substitute for action. That is why I say we need answers to those questions now in respect of the HSE, Tusla and the Garda. The Ministers in Cabinet have access to those replies and they should be providing them for us.

I want to raise the issue we spoke about earlier, namely, the fact we were not, in my view, given adequate notice of the opportunity to put in amendments. In addition, I have to say that I asked that specific question of the person providing the briefing for me at 3 p.m. today and I was told that it is a fait accompliand there is no opportunity to amend it. That is not satisfactory by any means. It is not enough just to brush that aside. It is not acceptable and, as I said, it will inevitably lead to this House dividing on an issue such as this. If the Minister of State had taken a little time, if he had consulted prior to drawing up the terms of reference, we would not have this difficulty. Equally, I would say to the Minister of State that if he had taken the trouble to read in detail the Dignam report, which is an official report based on two other official reports, he could not but have accepted the case that this commission must go beyond simply dealing with the handling of the Grace case.

The Dignam report states:

- The facts surrounding the care received by all persons placed at the said foster placement, including whether any of them suffered abuse during the placement and, if so, whether the HSE or the SEHB [South Eastern Health Board] knew of same or ought to have known of same.

- The facts surrounding any decisions made by the HSE or service providers in relation to each and every service user’s use of the foster placement or respite placement.

- Whether the HSE should have known of another person’s continued use of this placement between November, 2009 and April, 2010 and, if not, how it was that they were not aware of it.

The Minister of State has been told by a professional consultant who has been employed by Government that there are serious grounds for concern in regard to the handling of those other cases and it is only by examining those other cases in the context of this commission that we can find out whether or not there are serious systemic problems within the HSE and Tusla. All the evidence would indicate that there are and that early action needs to be taken.

8 o’clock

It is not acceptable for the Minister of State to come up with the excuse that there is the potential to do that under the terms of reference. The terms of reference simply state the commission may specify the scope of any further investigation, not undertake any further investigation. The Minister of State has been warned by his own commission's report on this. He has been warned that there is a high likelihood of serious systemic problems within our child welfare services. Tonight he is choosing to ignore that and not to follow it.

See this speech in context