Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I support the report of the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality in respect of wards of court. I congratulate the members and the Chairman, Deputy Ó Caoláin, on the job of work they have done in respect of the recommendations they have made. I listened very closely to the Minister's speech. If I was listening to this debate as a relative of a ward of court, I would ask myself if I had heard anything to give me some semblance of hope for the future in terms of the issues and recommendations that have been aired. The answer to that question is that the jury is still very much out in terms of seeking closure to many of the issues raised in the report.

The Minister contends, in respect of the advice of the Attorney General, that:

[T]he Office of the Attorney General has advised that the proposals on the audit of wards of court funds by the Comptroller and Auditor General is incompatible with the Constitution's architecture and is not consistent with Article 33.1. The advice is that wardship funds are not public funds [that is the key line in that sentence] but are subject to the control and supervision of the High Court. These are essential obstacles to enabling the Comptroller and Auditor General to take on responsibility for auditing such funds. The advice ... is also that legislating for Comptroller and Auditor General oversight of these funds could undermine the independence of the Judiciary and the administration of justice under Articles 34.1 and 35.2 of the Constitution.

In the absence of an alternative to that recommendation, I ask that the Government come forward with a set of proposals to ensure that this particular recommendation is addressed. If we take the advice of the Comptroller and Auditor General at face value, given that the Committee of Public Accounts has endorsed the position of Inclusion Ireland in respect of that recommendation, some sort of architecture, to use the Minister's word, should be put in place to ensure that the recommendation in respect of auditing is dealt with. This is germane to the issue at hand. There is a responsibility on the Government of the day to deal with this very point. The Joint Committee on Justice and Equality has made a set of recommendations, which are followed by a particular recommendation by the Committee of Public Accounts. If the advice of the Attorney General is contrary to those recommendations, something has to be put in place to meet the needs of the people who want to see transparency in respect of the auditing process. If people perceive that there is something wrong with the process, that is enough. The perception must be dealt with.

A key point is made by Inclusion Ireland. I acknowledge the work it and Justice for Wards have done on this. In an email I received today, Inclusion Ireland states that, with regard to the funds that are lost, the Committee on Justice and Equality asked for an independent review to take place, including those funds identified by Justice for Wards. The email further states that the review that took place by Mazars almost immediately after the report was published looked at 63 cases, but it is unclear whose cases were looked at and whether those cases were representative. That is why Inclusion Ireland is calling for a fully independent review. This is vital. It is a reasonable request and should be acceded to.

The qualitative relationship and the culture that exists around the relationship between relations, loved ones and the Courts Service is something that needs to be addressed. In the minds of loved ones and relatives, there is a serious lack of empathy and sympathy. That is how they perceive it and it has been the experience of some of the people who have interacted with the Courts Service. This needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. Inclusion Ireland speaks to this very issue. The report of the justice committee called for a review of the Courts Service's disposition towards and interaction with wards and their families. Inclusion Ireland has experience of engaging with the Office of the Wards of Court and supporting other people who have also been in contact. Communication is difficult with the office, according to Inclusion Ireland, which states that it has been aware of families who have had communication cut off completely when they queried matters, families who received no advance warning that their fund was about to run out, and a refusal to share documents, even with the person. Data protection is used as a block. On one occasion, Inclusion Ireland was supporting a woman who was a ward of court and the office refused to provide her with information about the court orders on the basis that she would not understand it. I do not question thebona fides of Inclusion Ireland as an advocacy organisation. I am taking at face value and accepting what it has stated to me in this email. Inclusion Ireland states that this is contrary to natural justice and a breach of public duty. Therefore, the second issue I want to see addressed is the nature of the relationship and the culture that exists. It is clear that there needs to be a paradigm shift in ensuring that people are treated with respect and that their dignity is recognised. It does not take funds or moneys to do that. All it takes is a change in behaviour and I do not think it is an unreasonable request.

I agree with the points made by other speakers. I have been involved in this for a reasonably short time and am not a member of the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality. However, I feel there is more work to be done. I have listened carefully to my colleagues on all sides of the House where they seek the repeal of the Lunacy Act 1871 as soon as possible and a review of all wards within three years. The Minister has gone some way on that, in fairness to him, but it needs to be expedited. The full commencement is also sought of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015, with a commitment of €9 million in the budget process. Again, from a financial point of view, the Minister has gone some way to making funds available for that. This is a non-partisan issue which could conceivably affect any of us at any time in our lives. It is important that we as an Oireachtas do everything we can to ensure that these issues are addressed. I daresay that there is more work to be done in respect of this issue. I commend the work of the committee. Work needs to be done on the guidelines requiring a consistent standard of assessment for wardship. There are issues in respect of the right to independent non-legal advocacy. People need advocates. There is the issue of the inaccessibility of court documents and the issue of the review of wards. One point that has also been made to me is that once a person is made a ward, there is no recognition that a ward may have capacity to make particular decisions himself or herself. The Minister also speaks to that point but we need to do more work on it.

The Labour Party is fully supportive of the recommendations of the report. We need to parse further the words of the Minister.

We need to have a further deliberation within the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice and Equality or in the House in respect of some of the legal issues that are outstanding. This has been a very useful opportunity to air these issues. I acknowledge the work done by the families, by the advocacy organisations and by the members of the justice committee, without whom we would not have this debate today. A good job of work has been done in raising the consciousness of the issue among the wider membership of the Dáil.

See this speech in context