The handling of the Niall McElwee affair has identified how our child protection system is failing those it is meant to serve, writes Carl O'Brien
There were expressions of shock, calls for inquiries and anger that no one had been informed about the criminal conviction. Yet, to anyone working in child protection, it was no surprise the information had fallen through the cracks, exposing gaping flaws in our child protection system.
Niall McElwee, a childcare specialist, was convicted of attempted indecent assault in Amsterdam three years ago. Yet, the matter only came to attention 10 days ago, after it emerged he had resigned as director of the centre of child and youth care at the Athlone Institute of Technology.
A day later, it emerged that at least seven years previously, he was warned about using explicit pictures of sexually abused children during his lectures at Waterford Institute of Technology.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) has now launched an inquiry into what was known about McElwee's past and why nothing was done.
However, any child protection campaigner will be able to identify immediately very obvious gaps in our child protection system.
One of the most obvious is the lack of "soft information" used when vetting adults with access to children. This is material that is not substantive enough to allow a specific conviction to be made, but which indicates a concern over the suitability of a person to have access to children. The Ferns Report and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Child Protection have both recommended such changes.
However, the biggest obstacle to the use of soft information has been the constitutional guarantee of the right of a citizen to his or her good name. A successful referendum could, however, make relevant changes to allow the exchange of soft information.
Arguably, the Government doesn't even have to wait for a referendum, according to legal experts. It could set up a strictly controlled system that would allow for a person against whom allegations are made to challenge them if they feel they are not accurate or relevant. Such a system is likely to withstand any constitutional challenge, as it would allow a person a fair procedure to try to defend their good name.
In any case, Minister for Children Brendan Smith reiterated last week the Government's commitment to hold a referendum on children's rights within the lifetime of the Coalition that would remove any obstacles to the use of soft information.
As for the vetting system itself, it is full of holes. While Garda checks are available for new recruits in the education sector, youth work organisations and care homes for the elderly, this is done on a voluntary basis. Most sporting organisations who have coaching staff with access to children do not engage in any vetting. Some voluntary groups who have staff or volunteers with access to children are not subject to vetting either.
For example, the Chernobyl Children's Appeal - which takes in about 250 children a year - does not subject host families to vetting. Three weeks ago, a volunteer with the group was sentenced to 18 months in prison for having child pornography, including photographs and videos he had made of children from Belarus who stayed at his home.
Garda checks are only mandatory for Health Service Executive (HSE) staff or carers and justice department staff who have direct access to children (this excludes senior officials and board members). Groups such as the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (ISPCC) have been lobbying for years for mandatory vetting to be extended urgently to a wider number of groups.
The Government, however, insists it is making progress. It says, for example, that from this September, all staff in the child care sector - including those working in pre-schools and creches - will be subject to vetting for the first time. Further vetting will be rolled out as resources permit.
"The expansion will continue until vetting is provided for all personnel working in a full time, part-time and/or voluntary capacity with children or vulnerable adults," says the Minister for Children. "Phasing is necessary to prevent a sudden and unmanageable surge in vetting application numbers, which would likely lead to an administrative logjam, as has happened in other jurisdictions."
Another glaring hole in our child protection system is the lack of international protocols for the sharing of information between countries.
While the Government has started sharing information with the UK relating to sex offenders, no such systems are in place for other countries, even other EU member states.
Fergus Finlay, of children's charity Barnardos, says this is one of the most pressing issues that needs to be rectified. Sex offenders, he says, are using open European borders as a means to evade detection and prosecution. "The need for the exchange of quality, 'real time', accurate information between police forces has never been greater in a world of increasing international mobility," he says.
"We need to have these information exchange protocols and corresponding structures in place with other countries, backed-up with financial, technological and staff capacity here, to ensure this information is used in a meaningful way and children are protected.
"Organisations then have a responsibility to ensure that those whom they employ with responsibilities in the childcare and youth work areas are fully vetted as one key step to protect children. Leaving it to chance is not enough."
In the meantime, there is widespread criticism over whether the inquiry into the McElwee affair will uncover anything of worth.
Some campaigners are angry that the terms of reference do not explicitly cover his work in the Waterford Institute of Technology. Others say the flaws in the system are immediately obvious. The only thing missing, they argue, is the sustained political will to make Ireland a safer place for vulnerable children.
"Successive governments have failed to prioritise child protection and the promotion of children's rights," says an ISPCC spokesperson. "Unless these measures are introduced, children will continue to be left vulnerable within Irish society."