How best to secure the welfare of children in need of protection is a matter of concern both to society, and to Tusla, the Child and Family Agency. The agency's chief executive, Gordon Jeyes, is critical of many aspects of national child care provision services. Mr Jeyes is well placed to make his criticisms. He was appointed to the post 18 months ago, and therefore he speaks both from direct experience, and from an impressive professional background. He was also the UK's first Director of Children's Services. His outspoken comments should help to start a wider national debate on the adequacy of Childcare Act 1991, which Mr Jeyes contends now requires a fundamental review.
Tusla was established in January 2014 with responsibility for child protection, early intervention and family support. As its chief executive, he notes that the agency although under-resourced must nevertheless operate within its prescribed financial means. While Tusla has been constrained by an inadequate budget, as Mr Jeyes points out, those others on whom Tusla relies – judges, guardians ad litem (GALs), Hiqa, etc – do not “need to bother about money”. Judges appoint GALs to represent the interests of children in child care cases but, as Mr Jeyes says, GALs remain unregulated, are accountable to no one, and also generate huge legal costs – as most have their own legal representation in court. The result is that last year Tusla spend nearly as much (€7.5 million) on legal fees for GALs as on direct payment to them - some €9 million.
As Mr Jeyes observes, “extremely able counsel “ when employed, are “much more likely to be debating the law than the child”. This can result in a disparity of services, with more resources going to children in care following court orders, and those in voluntary care losing out in consequence. In his detailed critique of how aspects of the child care service are failing children in need, Tusla’s chief executive has also made a compelling case for a review of the Childcare Act 1991.