120. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality if she will include additional institutions to the mother and baby institutions payment scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28696/26]
Sentiment score: 0.01
I want to ask the Minister about the landmark High Court ruling made in February of this year. It specifically examined two institutions, Temple Hill and St. Joseph's, that are excluded from the mother and baby institutions payment scheme. The judge at that time directed the Minister to consider adding these institutions to the scheme and I would like to seek an update on that direction please.
Sentiment score: 0.13
The Minister will no doubt acknowledge the ruling of the court and the views and comments made, most especially by Judge Alexander Owens about the exclusion of the institutions, particularly of Temple Hill and St. Joseph's, because they were the cases brought before him by survivors of both institutions. I have raised the case of Michael Grant in this Chamber and in committee many times. He spent the first year of his life in Temple Hill. He was a healthy child and his mother paid rent for him to remain there for the first year of his life before he was fostered. Temple Hill appears to have been identified as a hospital. I do not know of any hospital in the State where you pay rent to keep a child. I think that is an omission and that is the ruling and the finding of the judge who considered both Temple Hill and St. Joseph's so carefully. The Minister mentioned a shelter for children. That is exactly what Temple Hill was for Michael Grant. Will the Minister give me any information about the direction she has been given?
Sentiment score: 0.06
I acknowledge a review is coming up. I understand the review is quite niche but I hope the Minister might be able to confirm that the review towards the end of this year will look at the institutions. The special advocate who has been put in place to do a job has been clear in seeking the urgent expansion of this scheme. Having met Michael Grant and his daughter Rachel, my genuine fear is that he may not live to see such an expansion to institutions like Temple Hill. There are other survivors in that situation as well. We need to do right by them. Will the upcoming review look at institutions that are excluded and will it look at exclusions to the scheme as is?
Sentiment score: 0.21
122. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality if she is aware of serious concerns raised in relation to the new national service for guardians ad litem; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28697/26]
Sentiment score: -0.02
If anyone wondered about the value of guardians ad litem, they only had to watch the "RTÉ Investigates" programme last night. We saw and heard from guardians ad litem who are powerful voices for the children that they look after, speak for and very much support through what can be a very challenging State care system. We also heard from Judge Dermot Simms, who I had in here last month for a briefing along with GALs to speak to the very serious concerns they have and he has for the national service. On a number of occasions the guardians ad litem have to, for want of a better term, go up against Tusla in a courtroom to speak for and advocate for a child. I cannot fathom how we can retain the independence of GALs as they go up against Tusla while both are under the one Minister and the one Department. That is where the question mark is over independence. The Minister will know of the issue I have raised many times in terms of the legal representation. I cannot understand how that cannot be maintained in terms of guaranteed legal representation.
Sentiment score: 0.23
When I hosted AGALI and Judge Dermot Simms last month I asked them to share one example case with me at that briefing. They spoke about two children under the age of 16 who were received into care for the first time and placed in a special emergency arrangement, SEA, which we saw much of in last night's programme. This was the first time they were placed into care and there was nothing else available. Tusla reported on the SEA over several months and they noted the staff were engaging positively with the children every day, that the children were comfortable and settled and that the placement was being overseen by an allocated Tusla SEA supervisor. When the guardian ad litem met with the children directly, the parents, the school and with Tusla and the SEA staff, they uncovered that the children were not being offered breakfast under the SEA. They were in school early enough to avail of the breakfast club but they were not actually enrolled in any breakfast club. The reported positive engagement was an hourly safety and well-being check of the children in their bedrooms. There was no attempt at connection. These were children who were found to be caring for themselves. Finally, the supervisor had visited the placement and was recorded as having met the children, met the staff and completed a risk assessment in one 21-minute visit. Now more than ever we need the guardians ad litem to have their independence and we need that legal protection retained.
Sentiment score: 0.28