Dáil debates
Thursday, 16 February 2017
Topical Issue Debate
Education Welfare Service Provision
6:20 pm
Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Minister, Deputy Zappone, for re-arranging her schedule to facilitate this discussion. The Minister will be aware that a decision has been taken to withdraw counselling grants to primary schools in particular. I received a letter from a principal of one of the schools in my constituency, some of the content of which I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister. The opening paragraph states that he has received correspondence from Tusla informing him that the counselling grants scheme is to be closed. It continues as follows:
I wish to object most strenuously to this development and to request that this decision be revoked. The Counselling grant enabled us [the school] to provide support to some of the most vulnerable children in our school, helping them through the considerable distress they are enduring and to deal with trauma in their lives. This support is now to be withdrawn without consideration for those benefiting from Counselling or without the offer of any alternative. This is regressive and will directly impact on those who could most benefit from support.
In the interests of vulnerable children, I urge that this decision be rescinded and that the Counselling Grant be immediately restored.
Neither I nor anybody else could make a stronger case than the person who is dealing with this issue at the coalface, who knows the state of minds of these children, their backgrounds and all of the social deprivation issues that they endure.
I am aware that Tusla has indicated that money will be redirected through some other programme but that is not enough to convince the person who is dealing with this issue at the coalface. If I have learned anything from my time as a public representative it is that it is important to speak to the people on the ground, those who are affected by decisions that are taken here and in Departments and State agencies. Often what looks good on paper or sounds good in theory in practice does not work. I put it to the Minister that the statement of the school principal is a clear indication that the theory behind the reallocation of this funding is not in the best interests of the children and, therefore, it will not have a positive outcome for the children we all seek to assist and protect to the greatest extent possible.
Will the Minister consider reinstating the grant, recognising the role that principals play? The service provided is a tried and trusted practice at this stage. In the past special needs assistant allocations were based on quotas and school numbers and so on. It became blatantly obvious at a later stage that the input of the school principal was most important in that regard and we moved towards that. It seems to me that the decision is being taken to withdraw this grant, remove the principal from the mix and move to a paper-based assessment or at a remove from the coalface. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider this decision and to give whatever direction is required to Tusla to reinstate these grants and to put the school principal back in the centre in terms of the allocation of the assistance to these vulnerable children.
Katherine Zappone (Dublin South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Deputy for his question and for the opportunity to clarify my position. I am concerned about the impact of the decision to close the school counselling grants scheme. Like the Deputy, I have met school principals in my constituency on this matter. They have communicated very clearly the importance of these grants for the welfare of the children in their schools, using language and expression similar to that used by the principal from whom the Deputy received correspondence. I am meeting Tusla early next week to examine this matter further.
First, I would like to outline the rationale I have received from Tusla for closing the scheme. I have been advised by Tusla education and welfare service, EWS, that the grant scheme which was originally established in 1994 by the then Department of Social Welfare was to provide counselling support for children affected by bereavement or loss. This scheme was closed in 2011 while under the remit of the then Family Support Agency due to budget cuts and no new applicants have been accepted since this time. Only those grantees in 2011 receiving funding continued to do so. The scheme came under the remit of Tusla in 2014. This counselling grants scheme is for a total of €245,900 annually and currently there are only 64 grantees nationwide benefiting from it. With more than 4,000 schools in Ireland, 64 grantees means less than 2% of schools were in receipt of support from this scheme while it remained closed to all other schools. The necessity for bereavement and loss counselling still exists in schools throughout the country. Tusla was of the view that it was unfair and unethical to continue providing support to a small number of areas while excluding all other schools from the scheme. Thus, the decision was made to cease the scheme in its current format. Following on from this decision Tusla EWS informed grantees in January 2016, and as part of the 2016-2017 grant application process reconfirmed, that the scheme would not operate for 2017-2018. The EWS wrote again to confirm this in January 2017. In this context it is important to note that each school completion programme can utilise up to €5,000 of their funding for counselling.
To ensure continued counselling support to children, Tusla provides child counselling through the agency’s family support services funding. In 2016, funding solely for child counselling was increased under this scheme to €680,000. In particular, child counselling funding to approximately 70 family resource centres throughout Ireland was increased to €242,000. The agency is the main funder of Barnardos children’s bereavement service which works to support children and families coping with death. This includes a bereavement telephone helpline and a highly skilled therapeutic service that supports children, particularly in relation to complicated grief and traumatic loss. The funding was increased by €20,000 in 2016, with total funding to the service now €154,600.
The agency is also committed to the funding of Rainbows Ireland which provides group based support to children dealing with loss following parental separation-divorce or a death. The Rainbows programme is delivered in more than 250 schools and community-based centres throughout the country. Funding in 2016 was increased by €15,000 to €250,000 annually. I know that Tusla is keen to ensure counselling services are available to all children who need them. I intend to seek reassurances from it that this decision does not have an unforeseen and unintended impact.
Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome that the Minister is aware of the problem and that she recognises the potential impact on the children affected. I also welcome her indication that she intends to discuss the matter with Tusla. However, what I would like, although I accept it may not be possible, is an assurance from the Minister that she will do all in her power to have the grant reinstated. I understand the necessity for fairness and equity but as in the case of any budget item, schools that have become dependent on that grant are not in a position to draw resources from other areas. I am sure there are schools that have made their own provisions through fund-raising and other activities or are able to raise funds to provide third party support. However, generally speaking the schools that will be affected by this decision are schools serving disadvantaged areas where their capacity to fund-raise is limited.
Although the programme started in 1994, 23 years ago, the nature and complexity of the challenges facing children from disturbed backgrounds have changed significantly. Bereavement and loss may have been the action items that needed addressing at that time, but now there is a proliferation of drugs and various complexities associated with the make-up of families. Very significant issues evolve and change. The need for counselling has increased rather than decreased. I refer to the multifaceted and complex circumstances in which children find themselves. For that reason, I do not buy Tusla's notion that in order to be equitable and fair, it is better to take from those who have rather than giving to all. While I understand this somewhat perverse or reverse logic, I do not accept it, nor should the Minister or House. I appeal to the Minister to reiterate in her discussions with Tusla the importance of supporting those who have become dependent on the funding and who expected it.
6:30 pm
Katherine Zappone (Dublin South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would be very much helped if the Deputy forwarded me the email he received from the principal in question. The Deputy spoke eloquently about recognising the role of principals. It is very important that that perspective be part of the mix.
I would like to assure the Deputy that the grant will be reinstated given my background, approach and conversations in my constituency. The Deputy might give me a little time in that regard, although I do not believe I can say anything until I have actually spoken to Tusla and explored this matter with it. In light of the Deputy's question, for which I am grateful, I have reflected on what the grant is for. One can hear in the response that it was originally and largely for supporting children in counselling on foot of bereavement, trauma and loss. I will be asking in my conversation with Tusla whether this history is fully understood. Perhaps some of the confusion or questions principals are asking may be coming from the fact that it is perceived that the grant has become part of a school completion programme. Why not because it is in the education welfare services of Tusla, implying it is especially for children living in contexts of disadvantage and all that can mean? A principal to whom I spoke referred to children experiencing hunger, trauma, addiction, self-harm and the potential to take their life by suicide, or, effectively the stress of living below the poverty line. The question arises as to whether there are other counselling services in the area that they can access. There are not in my constituency.
Should the grants be available to all schools? On this question, I take the Deputy's point. It depends on what they are for. I know that schools in my constituency actually spend more than the counselling moneys they receive on counselling services. That provides some evidence and a perspective that I will bring to my conversations with Tusla.