Colm Burke (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for bringing this matter before us today. It is interesting how we have allowed systems to be put in place without proper procedures for making sure that the levels of care and supervision for those in care were sufficient. It is sad that we now have to set up a commission of investigation into a matter that was dragging on over such a long period of time. The Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 sets out the extensive powers of the Oireachtas in setting up a commission like this. The Minister of State has outlined very clearly how the commission is to proceed, as well as its role and powers. It is important that the commission looks at the role of public authorities in the context of the care of individuals with a disability in this foster home. What was their role and how did they implement their responsibilities?

The report of Mr. Conor Dignam, which was published in November 2015, made recommendations on the drafting of detailed terms of reference for the commission of investigation. The terms of reference have been further strengthened by the intervention of a number of different parties and by the Minister of State himself, which I welcome. It is important that sufficient power is given to the commission to go down every avenue related to this issue.

Grace was in the foster home from 1989 to 2009. She was removed in 2009 and is now in a proper facility which is providing an appropriate level of care to her. It is unfortunate that it was 20 years before she was afforded a proper level of care.It is also sad in the sense that she was in foster care from 1989, which is a long time. Some 47 service users resided with this foster family at some point. Although, in many cases it was for either one or two weeks, nonetheless 47 people is a large number. The foster home was set up initially for respite, in the sense that people stayed there for a holiday period. There is no evidence from what I have seen that it was set up as a longer-term facility or that the foster family was approved for long-term care of any individual. The question arises as to how people who agreed to provide a service of one or two weeks' care for people with a disability ended up having someone in their care for over 20 years. There is no documentation showing that they had been approved for that type of care.

This leads us to the issue of monitoring. It is so important for every service that there is a monitoring mechanism in place. Someone may present a report about how a patient or resident is progressing. However, it is also important that there are checks that can be carried out. HIQA has carried out over 2,700 inspections up to January 2017. This is welcome. Checks are needed in every facility. It links to the whole issue of the Tuam facility, which we debated earlier today. Where there are no checks or monitoring, people are able to adopt the procedures that suit them rather than those that would suit the people for whom they are caring. It is important that we establish the entire background of the Waterford case. We must establish how someone was left in such a facility, when serious concerns had been raised quite a while before she was eventually moved in 2009. Furthermore, although it might be argued and might have been approved that she stay there until the age of 18, when she reached 18 no suitable facility was made available for her. It is important that we look at all of these issues to make sure that a situation like this never arises again.