2026-01-27

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." I am pleased to address the House on the Second Stage of the Child Care (Amendment) Bill. The publication of this Bill meets a commitment in the programme for Government 2025 – Securing Ireland’s Future to update the Child Care Act 1991. This is one of a set of Government commitments with a view to strengthening the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, and protecting children in the care system, which includes alternative care. I will set out the broader policy considerations that inform the development of this Bill before outlining the subject matter of the Bill itself and its main provisions. In its development and on its enactment, the Child Care Act 1991 was transformative legislation. It has provided a statutory framework for child welfare and for promoting the protection of children who are not receiving adequate care and protection and for the responsibilities of the State in that regard, which aim to improve outcomes for children in the care system. The 1991 Act deals with some of the most important issues that children in our society can face and the powers contained within it can, and do, change children’s lives for the better. Despite having served children well since 1991, it is widely acknowledged that the child protection and welfare landscape in Ireland has changed greatly since the Act's full commencement. The proposals being brought forward in the Bill have been informed by significant engagement and consultation with stakeholders to collect their views on the legislation. The general scheme of the Bill was examined as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny process in May 2023 by the then Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. The joint committee issued its report and recommendations in June 2023. Where matters raised can be addressed in legislation, we have tried to do that, whether by introducing enabling provisions such as those for inter-agency co-operation or by amending existing provisions, such as those related to different case orders, to ensure they remain as useful and fit for purpose as possible. The Bill provides for several key areas of reform as follows. First, it will promote inter-agency working to help children by establishing new structures to formalise co-operation and co-ordination on child protection at local and national levels between Government Departments, the key State agencies and the Child and Family Agency to allow them to fulfil their mandates under the 1991 Act. Second, the Bill will better protect children from harm through new measures it contains to help children at risk of harm. Third, it will improve stability for children. The Bill will introduce changes aimed at creating stable, long-term care arrangements for children. These include changes to parental consent to voluntary care arrangements and address drift through regular reviews and to court orders that may be made in respect of alternative care for children. Finally, it sets out principles based on children’s rights to guide decision-making for the Child and Family Agency and others to have regard to in carrying out their functions under the Act to better align with the UN Convention on the Rights of Children. It is my intention, as soon as possible, to bring forward amendments to the Bill to enhance the power and status of the national review panel and place it on a statutory footing. The panel conducts reviews of child deaths and serious incidents. It produces reports with recommendations to improve the quality of services provided to children and families. I now turn to the main provisions of the Bill. The Bill is set out in four Parts. I will provide a section-by-section summary. Part 1 provides for preliminary and general matters. Section 1 is a standard section providing for the Short Title, commencement and collective citation. Section 2 provides the definition of key terms used in the Bill. Section 3 provides for the repeal of section 7 of the 1991 Act that provided from childcare advisory committees, which are no longer in operation, and the repeal of section 8, which is replaced by new reporting arrangements introduced in the Child and Family Agency Act 2013 by section 29 of this Bill. Part 2 provides for amendment of the 1991 Act to enhance the protection of children. Section 4 provides for the amendment or insertion of definitions in section 2(1) of the 1991 Act which covers definitions more generally. The definition of "child" is amended to remove the exclusion for minors who are, or may have been, married and definitions are given of terms employed in the establishment and operation of an implementation and inter-agency committee and in the introduction of a duty to co-operate on certain bodies. Consequential to section 4, technical amendments are made in sections 19 and 26 to reposition definitions of "special categories of personal data" and "recognised school" to section 2(1) of the 1991 Act. Section 5 provides for establishing the power of the Child and Family Agency to prepare and publish guidelines to provide practical guidance on the performance of any aspects of its functions under section 3 of the 1991 Act. If requested by the Minister, the agency must prepare such guidelines. This will enable good practice such as the procedure used by the agency to substantiate an allegation of child abuse to be set out on a statutory footing. Section 6 amends provisions regarding the giving and withdrawal of consent of the child’s parent or guardian to a voluntary care arrangement placing a child in the care of the Child and Family Agency and for reviews every six months. Transitional arrangements ensure that these new conditions will apply to arrangements in place when this provision comes into effect. Sections 7 to 9, inclusive, provide for amendment to section 5 and insertion of new sections 5A and 5B into the 1991 Act. Section 7 amends section 5 providing for the Child and Family Agency to take steps provide suitable accommodation for child who is estranged from, or otherwise out of, the family home where the threshold is take the child into care is not met but the child has no other accommodation they may reasonably occupy. It also provides for regular reviews of the provision of such accommodation and supporting the reunification of the child with their family. Section 8 establishes a regulation-making power for the Minister to set regulations concerning the accommodation to be provided under section 5. In making regulations, other Ministers may be consulted, where appropriate. Section 9 provides for the insertion of a new section 5A to replace the existing obligation on the Child and Family Agency under section 4(4) of the 1991 Act to make efforts towards reunification of a child taken into care because they are lost or abandoned. Section 10 provides for the insertion of sections 6A to 6H into the 1991 Act to provide for the establishment, operation and reporting arrangements of an inter-agency and implementation committee to promote inter-agency co-operation and national co-ordination on child protection matters. The committee must have regard to the principle that the best interest of the child is the primary consideration to guide its work. The membership includes nominees from seven Government Departments, the Child and Family Agency, An Garda Síochána and the Health Service Executive, with the option for the Minister to appoint additional members from outside bodies. Section 11 provides for the insertion of sections 11A and 11E into the 1991 Act. Section 11A introduces principles to guide the Child and Family Agency in the performance of its obligations under the Child Care Act 1991 and section 8(1) of the Child and Family Agency Act 2013 and include the best interests of the child as the agency’s paramount consideration in carrying out these functions. Sections 11B to 11E introduce a duty to co-operate on all Government Departments, the agency and key State agencies and partners, including the Health Service Executive, An Garda Síochána, local authorities and others. The duty applies to these bodies in the performance of their existing functions when those functions are performed in the planning and delivery of services to, and activities for, children and their families or young adults for whom the Child and Family Agency has prepared an after-care plan. Co-operation includes the sharing of information to an extent that is in accordance with the law and necessary and proportionate for that purpose. Section 12 provides for amendment of section 12 of the 1991 Act, which provides for the powers of a garda to take a child to safety in an emergency and then deliver the child to the custody of the Child and Family Agency. The child may be delivered directly to the agency or to suitable accommodation under the direction of the agency where the child is deemed to be in the custody of the agency. Amendment is also made to increase from three days to three working days the time by which an emergency care order is made in respect of the child during which the child remains in the custody of the agency. Where the removal of the child occurs during a holiday or weekend this change enables sufficient time to arrange for a court sitting or to attain a hearing in the next court sitting. Section 13 provides for amendment of section 13 of the 1991 Act to allow the court discretion to put in place an emergency care order for up to eight days or, where the court is satisfied that the period of time is necessary in the circumstances of the case, for up to 15 days. Section 14 provides for amendment of section 17 of the Act concerning the making of interim care orders during which a child is placed in care while their circumstances continue to be assessed with a view to returning the child home or, where that is not in the child's best interests, application is made for a full care order. Changes are also made to the permitted duration of an interim care order, the circumstances and periods for which that order may be extended up to a cumulative total of 18 months. An application for a subsequent interim care order may be granted where the court is satisfied that the Child and Family Agency is making progress towards resolving the situation for the child. Where the court is satisfied that an interim care order is not necessary or appropriate, it has the option to put a supervision order in place. Transitional provisions are included for interim care orders in place when these changes are commenced. Section 15 provides for amendment of section 19 of the 1991 Act concerning supervision orders to ensure the agency may visit the child at any location including their home or school and speak the child without the parent or guardian present. It also provides for reviews within six months of supervision orders. Section 16 provides for amendment of section 20 of the 1991 Act. This provision allows a judge to adjourn certain family law proceedings where they consider it may be appropriate for a care order or supervision order to be made in respect of a child concerned in the proceedings and direct the Child and Family Agency to undertake an investigation of the child's circumstances. The amendment is intended to facilitate that investigation by providing that the agency shall be given all relevant documentation necessary to undertake the investigation. Section 17 provides for amendments to section 25 of the 1991 Act which concerns the powers of the court to join a child as the party to childcare proceedings. The amendment lowers the threshold from one of necessity in the interest of the child to consideration of whether it is in the best interests of the child. Section 18 provides for the introduction of a new section 25A in the 1991 Act to specify a cohort of bodies which may be requested to provide assistance to the court in childcare proceedings. Should the court make such a request, the body must attend. The body concerned may be asked to give evidence or provide the court with assistance. This applies to a children's detention school, all Government Departments, An Garda Síochána, the Health Service Executive and all local authorities. The amendment aligns with the provisions of the new duty to co-operate and is intended to be of use to the court in dealing with cases where the child may require support or services within the purview of bodies. Section 20 provides for amendment of section 32 of the 1991 Act to ensure Ireland is fully aligned with its obligations under Article 18 subsection 3 of directive 2011/93 EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. The amendment concerns the presumption and determination of age in applications for court orders under the 1991 Act in respect of victims or possible victims of relevant offences. Section 21 provides for amendment of section 35D(3) of the 1991 Act as inserted by the Child Care (Amendment) Act 2022. This Act will commence in tandem with the development of the guardian ad litem national service. Section 21 provides that the Minister when considering arranging for the provision of legal advice or representation, a guardian ad litem may now also consider whether a solicitor has been appointed to represent the child in proceedings and if separate representation is necessary. Section 22 provides for a minor technical amendment to section 37 of the 1991 Act, consequential to the changes to voluntary care arrangements set out in section 6 of the Bill. Sections 23 to 25, inclusive, make significant changes to the rules under which a foster carer or relative having care of a child is eligible to apply for like control over the child as they as if they were the child's parent, exercised on behalf the Child and Family Agency. Section 23 amends section 43A of the 1991 Act to reduce the time, for which the child must be in the care of the foster carer or relative under a voluntary care arrangement or care order before the application can be made from five years to three years. It also clarifies that the application for such enhanced rights for a foster parent or relative may only be made in respect of a child who is currently in care or under a care order. This reflects the revisions to voluntary care arrangements brought forward in section 6 of the Bill. Section 24 provides for technical changes to section 43B of the 1991 Act which provides for the variation, discharge or cessation of orders made under section 43A to reflect and accommodate changes to eligibility and to the definition of child. Section 25 is a technical transitional provision. It provides that the changes introduced for sections 23 and 24 shall not affect existing orders for enhanced rights granted to foster parents or relatives under section 43A of the 1991 Act before sections 23 and 24 came into operation and those existing orders will remain in force. Part 3 provides for miscellaneous amendments of the 1991 Act. Section 27 provides for the insertion of subsections into section 69 of the 1991 Act to provide that the Minister may issue guidelines to the agency concerning the performance of its functions under the Act; that the agency must have regard to any such guidelines; and that any such guidelines the Minister chooses to issue are published. Part 4 provides for amendment of other Acts. Section 28 provides for the amendment of the First Schedule to the National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012 to allow for the vetting of the emergency contact person of an early years service provider. It will also allow for the vetting of household members aged 16 and over who live in the premises where a childminding service is being provided. The final provision at section 29 provides for amendments to the Child and Family Agency Act 2013, completing the amendments to the 1991 Act set out in Part 2. In paragraph (a) the definition of a child in the 2013 Act is also amended to remove the exclusion for minors who are or may have been married. Paragraph B inserts a new subsection 2(a) into section 8 to require the agency to prepare and publish general information on its role and responsibilities regarding childcare proceedings. Paragraph C provides for new reporting obligations of the Child and Family Agency. Section 46 will require it to produce an annual service performance and activity report. This report replaces the report currently produced under section 8 of the 1991 Act which would be repealed by section 3 of the Bill. Section 46B will oblige the agency every three years to produce a thematic report on topical topics to be chosen by the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality in consultation with the Minister for Education and Youth. This will enable a focus on a topic of interest, particular service or other functions of the agency. Paragraph D amends section 47 of the 2013 Act to clarify that directions to the agency from the Minister or the Minister for Education and Youth cannot apply to individual cases. I thank all the stakeholders who have contributed to the development of the Bill. I am pleased to have had the opportunity to outline its provisions and I look forward to hearing Deputies' views on the contents. I commend the Bill to the House.

I am very glad to have the opportunity to speak to this Bill this evening and I welcome many aspects of it. I hope the many amendments to the Act as outlined will be positive and that they will provide greater supports for children who need them when they need those supports. I hope there will also be greater oversight of child protection, particularly in relation to the interagency committee. All of us have a responsibility when it comes to child protection and all of us have to play our part. The recent report into special care was clear that all agencies and not just Tusla need to be involved. There is a job of work within this legislation to build public trust again in Tusla because I think public trust has broken down. I look forward to seeing the Minister's amendments in relation to the National Review Panel. We saw the recent report in relation to Kyran Durnin. I really would like to see timeframes in place for recommendations particularly when the recommendations are for Tusla, An Garda Síochána and the Data Protection Commissioner. The recommendations that come from the National Review Panel are on really serious cases and I would like to see timeframes. In the short time I have to speak on the Bill this evening, I want to focus on section 21, the provision of legal advice and legal representation to a guardian ad litem who is appointed to a child in childcare proceedings. This is an issue I have raised with the Minister previously. As we all know, at the moment GALs have the right to legal representation and typically they are in the courtroom on behalf of the child with legal representation. Typically, Tusla is also there with legal representation and perhaps the parents are there with legal representation. I am really concerned for the development of the new service. GALs with 20, 25 or 30 years' experience and particularly the Independent Guardian Ad Litem Agency, TIGALA, the organisation that represents the vast majority of practising GALs in the State have raised issue after issue about this service, not for the fun of it. GALs have huge experience and care about what they do. They always have the child's interests at heart and they are not being listened to in relation to the issues they are raising. I believe all those issues to be genuine. Legal representation is just one issue they have raised. How can it be in a court of law that a GAL without guaranteed legal representation and acting on behalf of a child would be in such a vulnerable position when Tusla and the parent may have two sets of legal representation? The GAL is the voice of the child but has no legal representation unless the Minister of the day decides otherwise. How does that give the child a voice? How is that acting in the best interests of the child? It is the exact opposite and leaves them in a very vulnerable situation. I am really concerned about that amendment. Section 21 adds an extra consideration for the Minister in terms of making a decision to allow legal representation in a case where a child has his or her own legal representation, which is extremely rare. In the briefing note to our committee from the Department, the first line states the national service is being established to ensure children's voices are heard and their best interests are independently presented by an appointed GAL in childcare proceedings. It goes on to say the best interests of the child are paramount. If the GAL whose sole responsibility is to be the voice for the child is standing with no legal representation against up to two sets of legal representation in a courtroom, that is not in the best interests of that child. That is diminishing the child's voice. GALs are crying out in relation to this issue. AGALI has looked to meet the Minister and I asked her last November to meet it. I impress upon her that we are coming with genuine concerns. I ask her to pause the new national service, meet with AGALI and listen to its concerns. It has a wealth of experience. The Minister would not set up a new An Garda Síochána tomorrow without listening to, engaging with and meeting the gardaí. It makes no sense and I cannot fathom why it is being done. The other issue they have raised persistently relates to independence. Tusla and the new national service will come under the Minister's Department. GALs, who are supposed to be independent, will be in a court advocating for a child who is in the care of Tusla. This places limitations on them and the position it puts them in is not independent. Questions have been raised by AGALI and by GALs with decades of experience and have not been answered. I appeal to the Minister to sit down and meet them. If she meets them, sits down and listens to them and decides to proceed, then in some respects that is fair enough, if she has heard them out. I ask her to please meet and engage with them.

The Bill before us makes a number of important changes agus is maith an rud go bhfuil sé sin ag tarlú. Táimid ag caint sa Bhille seo ar pháistí atá i ndeacracht, go leor acu páistí atá gan dídean, agus an dóigh atá Tusla ag caitheamh leo. Mar atá ráite ag mo chomhghleacaí, an Teachta Kerrane, tá píosaí den reachtaíocht seo a chaithfí moill a chur orthu, go háirithe mír 21 mar a luaigh sí, ach tá rudaí eile fosta. Rinne an coiste scrúdú air seo agus rinne siad moltaí nach bhfuil le feiceáil sa Bhille. I welcome the Bill. It makes a series of important changes, including the guiding principles for Tusla. My colleague, Deputy Kerrane, outlined in the brief time available to her a number of issues that need to be addressed in the Bill. Our party will engage extensively on this as the Bill passes through the different Stages. This Bill deals with children who are very vulnerable and who need the support of the State and the apparatus of the State. I raise the issue of other vulnerable children in my county and elsewhere who also depend on support from the State through childcare. I have raised this numerous times and it would be wrong for me not to raise it again when we are talking about legislation to support and protect vulnerable children. Vulnerable children are asked to go into childcare settings in my county with defective blocks. In some cases, they have been ordered to stop attending the facilities because it is dangerous to the children, yet there is still nothing from the Minister's Department - absolutely zero, zilch - on what will happen to those community childcare facilities. I am talking about buildings in my county - three in particular that are public. There are others that may not have gone public yet. Those three house over 300 children. The buildings they are asked to attend every single day are crumbling. Those children know the cracks in the walls mean the buildings are crumbling. Does the Minister know what that does to the psychology of a child? We have talked to parents. The children are coming home worried the building could fall in. This is wrong. Different groups have invited the Minister to meet with them. As of yet, I do not understand there has been a positive result from that. I appeal to her again to meet with the groups and engage with this very serious issue. We need a process within the Department to see these buildings demolished and rebuilt so every child, regardless of their circumstances, can be in a place that is safe and sound and can have the support of the early educators that they deserve.

We clearly have a crisis when we are talking about children who are in real danger, particularly regarding Tusla. While legislation is clearly needed and there is work to be done on that, a big issue which does not ever seem to be addressed is in regard to resourcing. We speak to people in Tusla and the workload and number of files involved are practically impossible to properly deal with. That is one of the reasons so many situations have come to light where vulnerable children have been left in dangerous places and ended up in very tragic circumstances. That is only a part of it. There are children in situations where the tragedy may not come to light until later in life when they approach the Garda or someone else and talk about things that happened in their home or in the circumstances they were in and the agencies that were there to look after them but did not have the resources to deal with it. That is a real problem. Foster care is another element of this. Very often these children are put into foster care. Sometimes it is family foster care. There is an issue with proper oversight to ensure that is done properly. That needs to be examined. Many children are in dangerous situations. Those situations are usually within their own families but we also have children coming into the country alone from other jurisdictions. I do not think there is anything in this legislation to deal with that phenomenon and sort it out. Clearly, there needs to be additional resourcing as well as additional legislation. Without the level of social work resources and social workers that we need, there will be more and more of these situations as we move into the future. I am aware of and deal with a number of situations in my constituency. Some are people in homes where there are serious mental health problems, addiction problems, etc. The children suffer, number one, and they are the ones who have to be looked after. I have come across situations where reports were put in to Tusla and Tusla made a very brief visit and was gone, saying everything was okay. There will be problems coming down the road if the resources are not in place for Tusla to follow up on a number of occasions and make visits at random and in depth. We cannot allow more of these things to happen in the future.

Beimid ag tacú leis an mBille cé go mbeimid ag iarraidh roinnt leasuithe a dhéanamh chuige. Anything that improves the functioning of our care system is to be welcomed, although it is very likely we will table amendments. I echo the call made by Deputy Kerrane on engaging with guardians ad litem and their representative organisation. They do a crucial job. A decade ago we had a referendum the purpose of which was to put the child's voice at the heart of things. The guardian ad litem is central to that. I echo the point made on Tusla and the confidence in it that has been lost. There are some really committed social workers out there. I would not want their job for the world. It is incredibly challenging. People are exposed to huge amounts of trauma, challenging circumstances and significant workloads. Unfortunately, at an organisational level, too many children have been failed - failed catastrophically, in many instances. There is a lack of confidence. That needs to be rebuilt. Some of that, I hope, is in terms of the procedure here. Some of it is organisational and some of it is culture. A lot of these children are some of the most vulnerable in our society. An optimistic view of it is that if we can get this whole area right, the impact it will have on our wider society is enormous. Unfortunately, the sad reality at the minute is that children or adults who have been in care are far more likely to need additional educational support, special educational support, mental health supports and to have needs potentially into the criminal justice system. Those children are born the same as any other child but unfortunately the reality is that too often they do not get the support they need. However, if we can get it right in terms of giving them the support they need, the impacts right across all those sectors could be enormous. It is all about early intervention. I will make two final points in relation to this. First, we still seem to have a significant issue with unallocated cases. Too many children who are at risk or who have experienced very difficult circumstances do not have a social worker allocated to their case; certainly no one who can give it the time it requires. That urgently needs to be addressed. The second point is in relation to the office of the Ombudsman for Children and ensuring its eyes can reach everywhere - every location and every centre - a child needs it to reach. That includes IPAS centres and other emergency forms of accommodation. This point was in our proposals in relation to immigration. The system needs to work and decisions need to be made efficiently but we have to make sure every person has decent, humane conditions and that includes children in particular.

I welcome that Tusla is to be assigned guiding principles, particularly in relation to the best interests of the child as a paramount consideration as well as the duty to co-operate between relevant bodies and the establishment of the implementation and the interagency committee. They would seem to be sensible proposals. At this point, people rightly expect more from the Government. While we are 30 years on from the primary legislation, we are nearly three years on from the pre-legislative scrutiny report of the Oireachtas committee's consideration of this legislation. It is disappointing that a number of concerns and recommendations of the committee still remain unaddressed. My fear is that it is broadly representative of the lethargic pace at which the Department brings proposals from announcement to implementation. If we take the Garda vetting as an example, this Bill includes related provisions, which I welcome. However, only a fortnight ago, the media was reporting that Tusla had taken over responsibility for Garda vetting applications and issues around registration persist. Some 17 crèches have had registration issues, which, we were told, were mainly due to Garda vetting. In one instance, a crèche operator was told she could keep her crèche open but staffed by others because she had to submit documents already provided. Another woman faced vetting issues, again, not of her own making, who was already in possession of two separate vetting certificates and was told she could not open her crèche. It is another example of childcare policy that is simply not working as it is needed. This is at a time when people struggle to access a crèche and if they can, are left to struggle to pay among the highest childcare costs in Europe. The Tánaiste promised, before the election, an action plan on capping childcare costs at €10 per day within 100 days of Government. Last Friday was 365 days but no plan is yet in sight. It does not seem like much of an action plan to me. Children in Ireland deserve better, especially those for whom the State has an additional responsibility. My appeal to the Minister is also in relation to the price-cap promise and it is to understand and appreciate that Irish families and children require the Government to be more capable of bringing ideas to the table. These need to be not just announcements; they need to come to fruition.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this amendment Bill. It is clear that State protection of children is in serious need of change. There have been too many cases recently that have highlighted Ireland's lack of regard for the rights of children. The HIQA report published in November, in particular, laid bare the alarming failures of basic child protection. There are, of course, so many social workers and social care workers who are overstretched and under huge pressure in so many parts of the State. Clearly, there are serious personnel gaps in these critical services, and the most vulnerable children are suffering as a result. This is wholly unacceptable. We really need to make sure children and families know their social workers so that trust can be build up with them. However, many of the findings in that report paint a very bleak and concerning reality of our child protection services. In some cases, it took over six months before referrals to social workers were reviewed, meaning that immediate safeguarding action could not be undertaken and children being allocated to workers who had no child protection or welfare training, or experience. This must be addressed by this new legislation being brought forward. It is also essential the Government brings together stakeholders on the reform of the legislation. The Association for Guardian ad litem Ireland, a group representing advocates for children in child court proceedings, says the Minister has refused to meet with its representatives, having reduced their numbers by a third. These are court-appointed individuals to represent children in legal proceedings. They are meant to be the independent voice of the child but this new legislation could lead to the children's guardians ad litem no longer being independent. The association says this will dilute children's rights and protections and that the Department seems to be unaware of the consequences this may have. The association also says it has not been involved in the shaping of the services for children in any meaningful way and that its main concerns have not been addressed. I ask the Minister to consider these concerns that have been brought forward very capably by our spokesperson on children, Deputy Kerrane, and ensure any reform of the current legislation is robust and includes all stakeholders who have experience in this field. It is essential for the future protection of all the children of the nation. Caithfimid aire a thabhairt do pháistí.

I welcome the Minister to this House and the opportunity to discuss the Child Care (Amendment) Bill 2025. I am very conscious that the main aim of this wide-ranging piece of legislation is to promote the welfare of children who may not receive adequate care and protection. No one in this House could ever disagree with that aim. As the Minister said herself in her opening remarks, this Act has been amended a number of times and it extends over a number of key areas like childcare, foster care, residential care and child protection. I wish to address a number of these areas in the time available to me. The Minister mentioned in her opening remarks about stakeholder engagement. However, I, too, share the concerns Deputy Kerrane and other members of Sinn Féin have raised about GALs in this country. It is very worrying that they are writing to us all about the lack of consultation in the preparation of this new service. It would seem the experience that these GALs have had over a long period - 15 years plus - is not being taken into consideration in the development of such an important new service. It is being said that one of the most important aspects of a child being in court is that they have representation. Surely, we should be listening to those who have that experience over the last period of time and those years. Again, I support the calls that the Minister would meet with the GALs' representative association in the quickest possible time, and listen to their concerns. Most importantly, we should listen to their experience of the day-to-day work they do on behalf of so many children while protecting them in this country. The other area on which I wish to concentrate is the State's provision of residential capacity and the privatisation of residential care of vulnerable children, particularly those who are in special emergency arrangements. The State's provision of residential capacity is continuing to decline. In 2020, the number of Tusla centres was at 127. This is currently only at 114 according to the latest figures, and does not include Tusla special-care centres. The special care centre bed capacity has actually decreased from 17 in 2020 to 16 in 2025. During the same period, privately provided bed capacity has increased from 321 in 2020 to 342 beds. More worrying are the figures relating to special emergency arrangements, SEAs. These are largely unregulated and private providers and do not meet the care needs of vulnerable young people. The facilities themselves are, in the main, not fit for purpose as they can range in accommodation type from hotel rooms to apartments. This point has also been made recently by the Ombudsman for Children. The latest figures available to me show the Government paid 31 private providers for special emergency arrangements from 2021 to 2024. One provider received nearly €41 million from the State over this period, including more than €17.5 million in one year alone. The next provider on the list received nearly €24 million during this time frame. So far, the State has nearly €200 million to these private providers, from 2021 to October 2024. Can the Minister explain why the Government seems to be privatising and outsourcing the care of vulnerable young people? As I mentioned previously, the Ombudsman for Children has also commented on the SEAs, stating they do not meet the needs of the most vulnerable children in this country. I am concerned about these facilities, following reporting from The Journal that these young people are facing criminal charges due to damages in some of these facilities. These actions will only further traumatise a young person who is already in a very vulnerable state. Fixing a broken window or door should not be a private provider's main concern. It should be addressing the young person's immediate care needs. The privatising of the care of vulnerable young people is a growing concern. I would welcome a further debate on this issue in this House. We should be facilitating the development of more public residential care beds to ensure that we can accommodate all children when they are in a crisis. Further investment is then needed in the requirement for more foster carers, which I have mentioned before in this House. Nearly €200 million paid to private providers could have been used to set up nearly 150 new residential centres, accommodating nearly 600 young people. That would reduce the need to rely so heavily on private care, as the Government is doing at the moment. On childcare, I want to raise the issue of the continual deficiencies in the early years education and school age childcare system. We have one of the lowest spends in the world on childcare, while parents are spending a second mortgage on childcare fees, as has already been stated here tonight. It is a system that is not working. It does not work for parents, it does not work children and it does not work for the sector. The crisis in the early years sector is having a knock-on effect on working families. Many families coming to me about childcare costs are saying that one parent is looking at leaving work entirely. As we all know, this has the most impact on women and their employment. They are reducing their hours and giving up their careers because the Government has not got to grips with the crisis in this sector. The Government needs to have the ambition to invest in a publicly funded system of early education. UNICEF has suggested 1% of GNI. This would equate to nearly €3 billion of investment in Ireland. We are currently a laggard in this regard and only invest about 0.4%. The other issue is in relation to the Minister's announcement about the public childcare models of early education that she will bring forward as a pilot scheme this year. She stated that her Department is investing €135 million to fit out or acquire childcare facilities. I firstly recommend that the Government ensures these new facilities are located in key areas of need, where there is a real lack of childcare facilities in the area. I have highlighted previously to the Minister that in my own county of Kildare, in Kilcullen town for example, many working families are struggling to find childcare due to the shortage of places. These are the areas where the Government must invest first. Likewise, my colleague from Donabate, Councillor Corina Johnson, highlights that Fingal ranks among the highest for childcare costs in the country. She asks that the Government use publicly owned lands across Fingal to build publicly owned facilities that are community-led and not for profit. I also highlight that overall, the State-led approach, while welcome, is very much light on detail on issues like staffing. What are the plans for the recruitment of educators? Will they be paid at the current rates or higher? Will they be employed by the State or in whose community? These are key questions that we hope the Minister will answer in the very short-term. We should already have a national childcare agency. I have highlighted before that more than €350,000 has been spent on an agency and we still cannot see whether it actually exists. I also highlight the hypocrisy of the Government investing in State-led childcare facilities when it continues to profit from the current crisis. I have previously highlighted that the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund has invested in an equity firm which made a €10.5 million investment in a private, for-profit provider. I also ask the Minister to make a commitment to the House to divest from such equity firms. There is already a shortage of workers. Without adequately addressing the ongoing workforce challenges, the Government will risk further deepening the recruitment and retention crisis in the sector. I ask the Minister to address that, as I have asked previously in this House. I will finish on one final point about child protection, one on which there should be no negotiation. We have all been deeply disappointed by rhetoric from some Government Ministers regarding social media companies and the use of AI, comments which parent will find very disappointing. Quite clearly, the use of social media and AI is proving to be a risk to the health and well-being of our young people. This is something on which I am sure everybody in this House can agree. We must put the protection and welfare of Ireland's young people before the profits of profit-driven billionaires. There is no negotiation. There is no discussion. We must always put young people first. I look forward to working on this, listening and dealing with the Minister's amendments as she brings them forward on the various Stages of this Bill. As I said, we will co-operate and ask questions in every way possible.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Child Care (Amendment) Bill before the House today. This is very important and timely legislation. I commend my colleague the Minister, Deputy Norma Foley, for her work in bringing it forward. Her commitment to strengthening the child welfare and protection system has ensured this Bill reflects the realities of modern practice and the needs of children and families in Ireland today. This Bill is a significant revision of the Child Care Act 1991, which has been a key feature of our legislative framework in the child protection area for more than 30 years. A lot has changed since then, as the Minister knows. We now have a better understanding of our children's needs. Families are different and have different circumstances today. There are changing demands on our services and this Bill ensures our legal framework remains fit for purpose. A very important part of this Bill is the introduction of a statutory duty to co-operate between several State agencies and bodies, including Government Departments and Tusla. This substantial reform reflects the reality that child protection is the responsibility of everyone, whether it is in healthcare, education, justice or community supports. This duty will help ensure everyone works together more proactively. The clear statutory basis for information sharing between agencies is so important. Effective and timely information sharing is essential for robust safeguarding. This Bill provides the clarity needed to support that co-operation. There are many other parts of this Bill that are very welcome but I particularly welcome the important improvements this Bill brings to foster carers. Foster families play a vital role for children who cannot live at home. They provide stability and compassion during what can be a very challenging time for a child. It affects every member of the family and open and clear communication between all State agencies and families is so important. It is important that all members of the family feel included and are confident. The contribution of foster carers is huge and it is also important that we continue to strengthen the supports that are available to them. The Bill reduces the time after which foster carers can apply for enhanced parental rights, from five years to three years, where an established and enduring relationship with the child exists. This is a child-centred reform. It will help foster carers when they have to make decisions on everyday matters, such as school tours or doctor's appointments, without unnecessary administration that can be so frustrating for foster parents. Most important, it supports greater stability for children who have formed secure attachment in foster placements. While these changes are significant, we must also acknowledge that foster carers continue to face considerable pressures. They have a demanding role - emotionally, practically and financially. I know this is not in the Minister's remit and I know she will be working with the Minister, Deputy Dara Calleary, but we should always be looking for extra supports for foster carers in order to ensure the financial supports, such as the foster carer's allowance, are fit for purpose. It is important that we continue to ensure that everyone who wants to do this work can do it. Such work is invaluable. The role is invaluable, and we need these people in our society because we just cannot understate the impact of their work and the effect they have on our children. I again commend the Minister, Deputy Foley, on her leadership in bringing this legislation forward. It will ring-fence the main principle that the best interests of the child must guide every decision we make and acknowledges the critical role played by foster carers and supporters. We appreciate their work.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill and to place on record the very real pressures facing families and childcare providers across County Kerry. While affordability is often discussed, the fundamental issue for many families is access. Quite simply, childcare places are not available. Parents contact my office daily to say that they are on multiple waiting lists and that there are no places coming up. This is having a serious knock-on effect. Parents cannot either return to work or increase their hours. They are under significant financial strain as a result. This is not an abstract policy issue. It is affecting household incomes, workforce participation and family well-being. We have top-class childcare facilities across the county of Kerry, as the Minister is well aware. We have them in Killarney, Rathmore, Cahersiveen, Dingle, Castleisland and Kenmare to mention just a few. However, the issue they all have income is the lack of places. A major reason for this is the shortage of staff. I want to highlight correspondence I received from Scamps and Scholars in Killorglin, one of the largest childcare centres in Kerry, which has been operating successfully for over 25 years. I was a member of the board of management there for quite a number of years. I know first-hand the tremendous work carried out by the staff and board of management. Despite their experience and commitment, they find themselves in a critical situation. They are struggling to recruit and retain staff. There are only 12 full-time educators. The remainder of the staff are work part-time. This has directly resulted in long waiting lists and huge frustration for parents and for staff and management, not because demand is not there but because the staff simply are not. At the heart of the problem are pay and conditions. Early years educators play a vital role in children's development and in supporting working families, yet their work continues to be undervalued. The starting rate of pay in many settings is the minimum wage of €13.65 per hour, while the current living wage is €14.75. The gap between the two matters, particularly in the context of the rising cost of living. Skilled and dedicated staff are leaving the sector in growing numbers, often moving to special needs assistant roles or other areas where their qualifications and experience are better recognised and rewarded. The introduction of an employment regulation order has been a step forward in recognising qualifications, but experience must also be valued. Years of experience and service, professional commitment and expertise need to be reflected properly in pay structures if we want to retain staff. If we fail to act, the consequences are clear, namely fewer staff, fewer childcare places, longer waiting lists, greater pressure on families and reduced workforce participation, particularly for women. This is not sustainable. Childcare providers are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for real sustainable investment, fair play and professional recognition for the people who educate and care for our youngest children. Families are asking for certainty such that when they plan to return to work, childcare places will actually be available. This Bill must be about more than intentions. It must deliver practical solutions on the ground, supporting providers to recruit and retain staff, valuing experience as well as qualifications and ensuring childcare places are available in every community, not just on paper but in reality. I urge the Minister to continue listening to those on the ground, such as providers like Scamps and Scholars, educators across County Kerry and the parents who are struggling every day to balance work and family life. If we get this right, we strengthen families, support children and protect the future of early years education in this country. I thank the Minister for her work in this area.

This Bill represents the most significant reform of childcare since the of the Child Care Act 1991 came into force more than three decades ago. I very much welcome the opportunity to speak on it. Child welfare practice, interagency working and our understanding of children's rights have profoundly changed since 1991. I am very glad that the law is going to reflect that reality. This Bill comes in the aftermath of a long and detailed review process that began in 2017 and that involved extensive consultation with Tusla, commissioned research, stakeholder submissions and pre-legislative scrutiny. It is important to acknowledge the depth of work that has gone into building consensus for reform. When enacted, this Bill will strengthen the legal framework that underpins the State's care and protection system. At its core, the Bill will improve how the State protects children from harm, supports families earlier and ensures that decisions are taken in line with the best interests and the voice of the child. It modernises care workers and care arrangements, embeds children's rights principles and enhances co-operation between the agencies responsible for supporting vulnerable children and their families. Organisations such as the Children's Rights Alliance have recognised that the Bill responds to long-standing concerns about the principal Act, particularly around care proceedings, voluntary care and the need for stronger and clearer provisions in supervision orders. The inclusion of timeframes for infant care orders is an important step in promoting stability for children. In particular, I want to welcome the establishment of an implementation and interagency committee. Many of the failures identified in the various reviews did not arise on foot of a lack of legislation. Rather, they came about as a result of poor communication, unclear responsibilities and inconsistent follow through across agencies. Co-operation between Departments, Tusla and other bodies is absolutely essential. The introduction of a legal duty on relevant bodies to co-operate with Tusla is a significant and overdue measure and it will help to close the gap that too often leaves children waiting while these agencies pass responsibility from one to another. The new guiding principles, which require that children's rights inform decision-making, bring domestic law into closer alignment with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ensuring that the children's views are heard early in the process leads to better and more stable outcomes both for children in care and for those on the edge of care. I am sure the Minister will agree that stability matters and that children already coping with trauma can be further harmed by changes in placement, long delays in decision-making or fragmented service provision. By improving care planning, clarifying duties and powers and embedding co-operation, this Bill has the potential to deliver more predictable and supportive pathways for children and their families. I very much very welcome the Minister's announcement last December that she will be introducing an amendment to place the national review panel on a statutory footing. A statutory child death review mechanism is a key programme for Government commitment. It is essential that we have that there because as we all know, a child's death is one of the greatest tragedies anyone can experience. While the Bill contains many welcome reforms, there are matters that will require further consideration on Committee Stage. Stakeholders have highlighted ongoing concerns relating to separated children and the aftercare supports available to them. We must ensure that no child is left behind. I encourage the Minister to speak to guardians ad litem. We need to ensure that they are properly and appropriately legally advised.

As the Minister knows, childcare costs are completely out of control. Many people are paying the equivalent of a second mortgage. Shockingly, nearly 1,000 childcare providers have closed their doors over the past six years. That is incredible. The Federation of Early Childhood Providers stated that childcare facilities are closing because of rising costs and the lack of funding from the Government. Childcare costs in County Wicklow average more than €11,000 per year per child. In Wexford, they are more than €9,000 per year per child. Now, we are talking about as many as 40,000 children on waiting lists for childcare across the State. Shockingly, the Government’s increase in core funding was a paltry 5 cent per child, which is tiny. In Gorey, Erika's Fairy Wood crèche has only seen a 7% increase in early childcare and education, ECCE, capitation in the past 16 years. The ECCE only covers for 15 hours per week, but service providers cannot claim for welfare for the 14 weeks they are closed. The administration and box-ticking bureaucracy that is strangling so many groups across Ireland is forcing childcare staff, in effect, to become unpaid admins for the Government, Pobal and Tusla. Erika offered her business to the Department as part of its plan to nationalise childcare. Unfortunately, the Minister's office declined the offer. Sadly, Erika's really great crèche in Gorey will be forced to close in June, after 19 years looking after children. Government policy is destroying our childcare sector. A local man who came to my office told me that most of his wages goes towards the €1,400 per month charge for childcare, while his wife's income goes towards their mortgage of €1,600 per month. In view of the high cost of living on top of these charges, how are families supposed to cope? Many of them are fighting through traffic gridlock and floods to get to Dublin today, having dropped their children off at childcare. How are they supposed to survive?

Deputy Kerrane spoke about the absolute necessity that the Minister meet with AGALI. We are talking about the role of guardians ad litem as the voice of children. Deputy Kerrane made the points in that regard clearly and saliently. The Minister needs to engage with those at the coalface doing this work. We have heard much about Tusla and, as Deputy Kerrane said, there is much we welcome in this legislation. We want the guidelines to be the best they can be in ensuring child welfare. We are all aware of recent issues, including the cases of Kyran Durnin, Daniel Aruebose, Vadym Davydenko, Oisín Reddin and the really brutal assault on a ten-year-old girl. Other harrowing cases have been highlighted by the Child Law Project. I accept that the Minister is, in dealing with Tusla, often dealing with its failures. We need to ensure we have a system that is fit for purpose, which it is not at the moment. I welcome a considerable amount of the interaction we have had with Tusla. When its representatives appeared before the children's committee last Thursday, they spoke about their new model and structure and that they are now better at assessing and dealing with cases and ensuring their organisation is more fit for purpose in its operations. However, we are looking at the possibility of having 300 too few social workers and at least 100 too few social care workers. That tells me we do not have a system that is fit for purpose.

Thank you, Deputy. I call Deputy Farrelly.

I have spoken previously about the necessity of early interventions and the fact we are also short 500 foster carers. I absolutely commend those involved in foster care.

At some point, Deputy Ó Murchú might make a new year's resolution to finish his contributions on time.

Before discussing the merits of the Bill, I take this opportunity, the first since her announcement last week, to applaud the Minister and her officials for embarking on what appears to be quite an exciting venture in regard to a public model of childcare. I reiterate the opportunity they have in respect of the very effective work the joint Oireachtas committee, of which I am a member, is doing. In the very short time we have had so far, we have shown we can work together constructively to offer a very informed critique. We would love to have an opportunity to delve into the details of what the scheme will look like. I understand the Minister will appear before the committee in early February. I hope it can be made a priority at that meeting to talk specifically about last week's announcement. Today, we are debating something of crucial importance that strikes to the very heart of what drove many of us here to be public representatives in the first place. Without the provision of services to fully implement any law, such a law is intrinsically powerless. While I truly applaud those involved in getting the Bill to this point, acknowledging particularly the previous joint Oireachtas committee and its work during pre-legislative scrutiny, I ask us all to be cognisant of the need to make legislative provisions for children's safety, welfare and protection that can be comprehensively implemented. The Minister will agree that being a child in this country should always be a time of exploration, fun, creativity and developing a sense of one's identity. However, it is inherently a time of great vulnerability for some. A child's physical and emotional sense of safety should be of paramount importance at all times. The decision to remove a child from home and place him or her in care should only ever occur if and when the agencies empowered by the State have truly exhausted every alternative. The shameful irony of today's debate is that, all too often, it is social policy, as determined by Government ideology, that plunges children, young people and their families into the poverty, homelessness and the very chaos and concern that gave rise to the 100,000 referrals to Tusla last year. I support the sentiments expressed by Deputies Kerrane, Wall and Ó Murchú regarding AGALI. We have all spoken at length about this with the Minister in the short duration of the Thirty-fourth Dáil. We cannot speak about children and care without mentioning the role of court-appointed guardians ad litem. I highlight once again the potential ramifications of bringing them under the management and supervision of Tusla. Guardians ad litem are proud of their independence and many will point to that very principle as being a crucial tenet of their role in supporting and advocating for children and young people. The proposed change that is due to take place this year raises many questions relating to the ongoing independence of guardians ad litem if they are under the management of Tusla. Having spoken to them, I emphasise just how concerned many of them are about the change. They have not been consulted or engaged with, which is all they are asking for at this point. They want an opportunity to meet and engage with the Minister and to offer their lived experience as to what these potential changes will look like. Section 5 of the Bill makes specific reference to accommodation for homeless children. Homelessness and, specifically, growing levels of child and youth homelessness are, again, the result of the State's acceptance of child homelessness as a norm in our society. The Bill could go much further to acknowledge the real problem that the vast majority of children and young people who experience homelessness do so alongside their parents. There is limited mention of this in the Bill. Section 6 outlines the establishment of the childcare implementation and inter-agency committee. I applaud the Minister for the inclusion of this very important legislative provision to ensure the rights and protections of children are considered in policy. However, it would benefit greatly from the co-establishment of regional forums to feed through their experiences locally. Is it proposed that nominating bodies will be compelled to share non-personal information? The proposed section 11D, to be inserted in the principal Act by section 11 of the Bill, contains the words "may share". We are getting into the minutiae here but the Minister can expect amendments in this regard from the Social Democrats on Committee Stage. Regarding section 11A(2), to be inserted in the principal Act, I welcome the intent to value children and young people's participation in decisions being made about and for them. This is a complex area but I really welcome the inclusion of this provision. The section could be strengthened by providing clarity regarding the references to "where the child is capable of forming his or her own views" and that "due weight shall be given to the views of the child, having regard to the child's age and maturity and the particular circumstances of the child". As currently drafted, this provision is arguably quite vague and could leave it open to some scrutiny. It will not be easy to provide clarity in this regard but the matter deserves further consideration. We have all spoken over the past year or so about the very concerning and tragic loss of life of many children in Ireland. I welcome the Minister's intention to put forward amendments to the Bill to place the national review panel on a statutory footing. While this move is long overdue, I commend her on her intention to act on it. The latest Child Law Project report, which was published in January, has noted the increasing concerns expressed by the Judiciary regarding failings in the care and health systems. The director of the Child Law Project, Dr. Carol Coulter, highlighted a shortage of social workers and referred to "cases where judges considered the plight of those in unsuitable placements and where placements had broken down,". We all know is there is an acute shortage of special care beds in this State. These are unregulated, non-registered settings that are at times staffed by private security or agency workers who lack social care or trauma-informed practice training, and they are relied upon by Tusla. When we think of care, special care and State-provided care, we can see that what I have outlined is not care. There is an opportunity with this Bill to regulate these settings. I implore the Minister and her colleagues to do so. Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child specifically states that all actions concerning children should have the best interests of the child as the primary consideration. Security companies providing care is never going to be in the best interests of any child. The report goes on to highlight a trend of children with additional needs entering the care system because of a lack of community support. Dr. Coulter said, "The fact that children are taken into care because their parents cannot cope underlines the need for a whole-of-government approach to dealing with disability". This type of contribution cannot be ignored. It is proposed to amend section 69 of the principal Act to give the Minister powers to issue guidelines to Tusla regarding its performance and functions. I look forward to all of us discussing the detail of this on Committee Stage. As the Minister can probably see by now, we all have quite an amount to say about the Bill and about child protection more generally. Every question or critique is intended as a constructive, respectful contribution with regard to a child’s right to safety and development. I again take the opportunity to congratulate the Minister and her colleagues on taking this Bill to Second Stage. I emphasise our support to the Minister and her officials in progressing legislation that will have a multigenerational impact. However, this is also why I remain somewhat concerned, not just about what is included but because without the required ability, competencies and resources to enact any legislation in full, such legislation is destined to fail the most vulnerable children in our society.

As the Minister knows, our paths crossed when she was Minister for Education and I was working with the school completion programme. I worked with children and young people over a couple of decades, lots of whom have gone into care. As we all know, children and young people who go into care do so for a variety of reasons. Unfortunately, the resources to prevent young people from going into care are not always there. We need an increase in family support workers, youth workers, social workers and public health nurses. It starts with there not being enough public health nurses, especially in my constituency of Dublin South Central. That leads to knock-on effects such as young people missing milestones and maybe indicators that things may not be right being missed. We need to do everything possible to make sure a child does not need to go into care by ensuring their caregivers – their parents – are supported to do everything to make sure they stay there, provided it remains safe. That is why the early identification and prevention are of utmost importance. As education spokesperson, it would be remiss of me to not mention the detrimental effect being in care has or may have on a child who is in care. In January of last year, the CSO indicated that 7% of school-age children in care repeat at least one year in primary or post-primary school and 29% of young people in care leave school early. That proportion for young people who are not in care is 8%, so that is a whopping number of young people in care who do not complete the leaving certificate or equivalent. The number of placements a child may have in care also affects the education outcomes for them. If there is only one placement, early school leaving stands at about 20%. If there is more than one placement, it rises to 38%. It increases each time because the environment for the child is more unstable. I have worked with children who have moved from school to school because of placements. How are they supposed to be able to progress? We really need at all times to be preventing it, though I am aware that does not always work out. We cannot prevent every child from going into care, unfortunately. In my remaining time, I wish to look at the care needs of young people in Ireland, particularly their emotional and psychological needs. Over the time I worked with young people I have found these needs are often not the top priority. The priority is giving them somewhere to sleep, bringing them to different things and telling them about things. It is a very functional relationship. However, being in loco parentis means you are replacing who is not there. In such circumstances, where is the emotional and psychological support that comes from with being a human being? We all need to be nurtured, we all need to be loved and we all need to feel we are part of a family and a community, but children in care often do not feel that. They particularly do not feel it when they are coming towards the age of 18 and are going to be moving into aftercare, which can be a harsh and cruel place where there is a lack of love. It is a scary time for them. Many us here may be parents. The 18-year-olds we have need us as much at that age as they when they were 14 or even younger. They have different needs. They are entering into a time of independence, and things can be uncertain. There is rapid growth in their development from their social lives, things they might be learning and their jobs, and they need us. That is the same for children who are in care but they do not get that often, especially if they are in residential care because there is shift work and people are on and off. This is the challenge. How do we make sure we care for the children who are in care, especially those who are going into aftercare? In youth work, young people are seen as individuals up to the age of 24 or 25. That is true not only in Ireland but also in other countries. When it comes to our aftercare system, that is a very vulnerable time for children. We need to ensure that young people are cared for and helped to transition into adulthood in the way that would happen if they were at home. I commend anybody who works with children in care, be they foster carers, those who work in residential care or those who help families to have meetings, if it is possible to have meetings. It is hard and it is heartbreaking, but we have to do better. We have to do the best we can to make sure that those young people are loved, nourished and cared for. The word "care" extends not just to the family but also to us, as a society, when those young people are taken away from their families, whether temporarily or permanently, and placed in care.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an mBille seo. Agus mé ag féachaint ar Theideal an Bhille agus na rudaí atá sé chun a dhéanamh, déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Aire as teideal Gaeilge an choiste nua a úsáid, is é sin, an coiste forfheidhmithe agus idirghníomhaireachta um chúram leanaí. Is mór an rud é go bhfuilimid ag úsáid na bhfocal agus na dtéarmaí Gaeilge sin. Ag an am céanna, ní dóigh liom go bhfuil gach éinne chun an teideal sin a úsáid gach lá. Sílim go mbeidh deacracht ag roinnt daoine an teideal sin a úsáid. B’fhéidir go ndéanfar giorrúchán ar an ainm sin ach is breá é a fheiceáil i dTeideal Fada an Bhille. It is wonderful to see the use of the Irish title for the committee that is proposed, but I see it being shortened by people in daily use. I suspect that it will be referred to either as "the coiste" or by an acronym. I welcome the Bill. It is hugely important. This is an area of legislation that has not been updated for some time and that requires updating. The care of children or specific childcare measures are hugely important. I am sorry to say that we are all aware of many instances where the State has failed to deliver in that space. As such, any effort the Government makes to update the legislation in this area to ensure that there is proper care provision in place for children who need it is absolutely welcome. Something I always say when we deal with legislation of this sort is that there are a mass of amendments to the principal Act. In this case, the principal Act is the 1991 Act. I understand that the latter is the basis of childcare in Ireland today. However, having a Bill that is a mass of statements such as "section 5 of the principal Act is amended in the following ways" makes it difficult for people to read. One of the things I always say about amendment Acts is that it would be much better to pass a consolidated Bill, restating the bits of the principal Act we want to keep and restating the sections proposed to be amended by the amending legislation. That said, it is worthy of acknowledgement that section 7 does that by the substitution of section 5 of the 1991 Act. It can be seen in the restatement of the new section 5, which will be the law after this Bill passes, that it is much easier to read. Therefore, if we can do it in this one section, where it is proposed to replace section 5 of the 1991 Act with the new section to be substituted, that is, section 7 of the Bill, we can do it elsewhere. I wanted to acknowledge that the draftsman and the Department have done that, even though it has not been done in other places in the Bill. I refer to the table of contents, where almost every section in Part 2 is simply an amendment. For example, "Amendment of section 3 of the Principal Act" is section 4 of the Bill. I am a lawyer. Even as a lawyer reading that I have no idea what it means until I go to see what section 3 of the principal Act says. It is an important principle, in the context of drafting and making drafting accessible to people, that they are not required to sit down with three, four, five or more Acts. The worst area for this is road traffic legislation. People must sit down with several Acts to ascertain what the law is. That is more of a drafting point than anything else. I have listened to the debate today and there is definitely work to be done. The Bill identifies areas where there are problems that need to be resolved. I note sections 7 and 8 of the 1991 Act about the committees are being repealed. I understand why that is happening and I welcome that a coiste is being set up to replace those institutions and ensure we can deliver the childcare provisions required. The reference to the Child and Family Agency brings me back to the fact that "Tusla", as it is commonly called, is just a brand name being pushed by a marketing person in the Child and Family Agency. Rather than creating clarity, it is creating confusion. If I may, I will say a few words about Tusla. It does enormously important work. Very often it does great work. It provides lifelines for families and children who need it. It provides counselling, social protection and social care for those people. It intervenes when no other arm of the State is willing to do so. It provides succour, guidance, advice and support to those families and children. That is massively important and I acknowledge the work it does. Many of the individuals who work in Tusla - the social workers, the people who are fighting the ground war with problems that families and children are facing - deserve our acknowledgement and praise. Tusla, as an institution or entity, however, has significant problems. I am not criticising it wholesale, but there are value-for-money issues in Tusla. Significant sums of money can be dispensed on services that do not need to be spent. Sometimes, because it is a behemoth, much like the HSE, it begins to act as such and it would be much better if it were leaner and willing to respond to the needs of the people it purports to serve. We see in this Bill the power it creates for regulations to be made by the Minister relating to homeless children. That is exactly the kind of area where we should be legislating to empower the Government to act in exigent circumstances. Members of this House who have dealt with constituents who come to their offices with issues that are appalling and frightening and that they would never want anyone they know or represent to deal with know it is Tulsa we turn to answer those questions and respond to those problems. I welcome the Minister having the power to intervene directly by making regulations in a more reactive or flexible way. One of the difficulties with primary legislation is that to change it we all have to come here and to the Seanad and vote to do so. I welcome that section 8 provides for the right of the Minister to make regulations about accommodation for homeless children. That is one way the State is being empowered to react with a swiftness and flexibility that are not available if the power is set out in primary legislation only. The idea that it is in a regulation and that Ministers can change it as demands arise and situations change is important and welcome from the point of view of how the Bill, and the Act as it will become, will operate. Similarly, I welcome the provisions set down in section 9 about lost or abandoned children. We often talk about cherishing all children of the nation. It is a phrase that goes right back to the beginning of our statehood and the formation of the State. It is not just a slogan or phrase; it is something by which we must live and there are any number of examples we are all aware of where we have not managed to cherish all children of this nation equally. We need to do everything we can to ensure they can be cherished. This Bill is a step in that direction. It is not a panacea and there is still a lot of work to do. The Minister is aware of that. However, if this Bill can bring us further down that road and address some of the lacunae identified by people who work in this sector and who are served by the sector, that is a good thing. On that basis, I welcome the Bill and look forward to its passage.

I had not intended to speak. I thought I would be speaking on Thursday. I welcome the legislation but while the Minister is here, I remind her of the commitment given to provide childcare, which is far from being delivered. It is true to say that this State lets children down. The poverty figures prove this. The number of children in enduring and consistent poverty is still rising and that is down to Government policy. It is very good to talk about child protection and about reform and enhancing the role of the State in child protection, but the statistics tell us this is simply not a priority for the Government. I urge the Minister to try to put children at the centre of Government policy, specifically issues of child welfare and neglect and children living in consistent and enduring poverty. Those children need and deserve to have a champion at the Cabinet table. They need someone to speak up for them. They do not often have a voice. Their parents are struggling to get to the end of the week or the end of the day and very often they do not have the capacity to advocate, so it falls to politicians and the Minister as the lead on this. The buck stops with her. When the number of children in poverty in this State is rising at the rate it is, it is fair to say that children are not a priority for the Government. They should be. As my colleagues outlined, we welcome the legislation and the chance to have a discussion about children and their needs. Often when we discuss children's needs here, it is under the heading of unmet needs. It is rare we have a chance to discuss anything else. That says where the issues are. The statistics also do not lie; they give the full picture of what happens behind closed doors for many children. We hear from parents who skip meals to ensure their children can be fed. We hear they delay paying bills and put themselves into debt just to ensure their children can get the basics, and very often the State is found wanting. The statistics on child poverty show that it is increasing at an alarming rate. They tell a tale of how children are treated. It is evident at every age and stage of a child's life. It can be seen right through from childbirth. The much vaunted and long promised €200 per week childcare vanished like snow off a ditch the minute the election posters were taken down. I fear, as the Government has stopped talking about it, that we are even further away from that commitment that was given. Time and again, we see children slide down the Government's agenda. As I said, I hope the Minister will be - I know she should be - the person who champions the cause of children in poverty and is their voice at the Cabinet table because they do not seem to have much of a voice within the Government.