James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

We covered this earlier and I do not propose to accept either part of this amendment. It has been ruled out of order in any event as it would involve a charge on the Exchequer, which is not allowed under the rules of the House. The amendment seeks to provide Tusla with the ability to extend - at its discretion - the duration of aftercare support to a young person who has attained the age of 23 years by up to one year. It also seeks to establish an appeals mechanism through which a young person in receipt of aftercare would be entitled to submit an appeal to request an extension of their aftercare support and resources for up to a year.

The current provision in the Bill takes account of the fact that most young people complete third level education in their early 20s. It also has regard to possible delays in commencing third level education for young care leavers. It is considered, therefore, that the existing provision gives ample flexibility to assist young people leaving care in the pursuit of their educational goals.

Additionally, to accept this amendment would place an undue focus on those care leavers who are in education. Consequently it could reduce the focus on those who are not in education and who may be in need of other supports. Furthermore the amendment would extend the period over which an eligible young person would receive support while in full-time education, which would carry additional costs for the agency. On the establishment of an appeals mechanism, currently under Part 9 of the Child and Family Agency Act 2013, a person may make a complaint in respect of a service by the agency. Moreover the Child Care (Amendment) Bill before us, under section 9, provides that Tusla shall conduct a review of the operation of an aftercare plan on request by a young person or someone acting on their behalf where there has been a significant change in the circumstances of the young person; or where the assistance being provided under the aftercare plan does not meet the need identified; or where additional support requirements for the young person have arisen. Such reviews are to be conducted within three months of receipt of a request. They may subsequently result in alterations to an aftercare plan, having due regard to the resources available to the agency to implement the updated plan. To amend the Bill to insert an additional appeals mechanism would amount to a duplication of resources and I cannot accept the proposed amendment.

The aftercare plan provided for in the Bill is a huge improvement and movement forward. In respect of Senator Mooney's contention that this is a change, the 1991 Act - I do not have the note in front of me and am speaking from memory - referred to there being an entitlement. However, the operational policy was always that it ceased at 23. The Bill under discussion today provides that, where the circumstances dictate, the agency has the authority to prolong support for somebody in a longer course in college, or if someone lost a year, if there was an illness or other extenuating circumstances. I think it is a fair and appropriate approach to take.