HSE has ‘limited powers’ to deal with abuse outside family

CLEAR differences exist between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE over the powers of the health authorities to investigate allegations of child abuse outside the family, according to the commission.

It acknowledged the role of the health authorities was limited in its inquiry into the diocese of Cloyne because it was only notified about two cases between 1996 and 2008.

It was only informed of one case by the diocese itself in 1996.

The commission said the health authorities had dealt properly with both cases by bringing the risks involved to the attention of the children’s parents, unlike the reaction of the HSE to allegations investigated in the Archdiocese of Dublin.

It agreed with the view of the HSE that it has limited powers to deal with allegations of abuse of children outside the family, as well as the retrospective reports made by adults of abuse when they were children.

The commission expressed concern that a number of bodies — including the Catholic Church — might rely on the HSE to deal with alleged child sex abusers when the HSE in reality does not have powers to effectively do so.

“The Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE have different views on the powers available to the HSE in extra-familial cases,” the commission said. “This difference has been apparent since 2005 and no action has been taken to address it.”

The minister for children’s office refused to provide the commission with advice by the Attorney General that the Child Care Act 1991 meant the HSE had sufficient powers to deal with cases of abuse outside the family home.

It also strongly rejected the suggestion that there is an absence of clarity between it and the HSE over their respective roles in dealing with child protection.

The HSE disagreed with the commission’s view that there was an absence of clear responsibility at national level within the HSE for child protection issues.

The commission also said there remained a problem with the handling of “soft information” by the health authorities in the absence of legislation. It recognised that there are particular difficulties dealing with soft information and the credence to be given to it.

The commission noted that it was obvious that people had great concern about a priest’s behaviour in a number of cases investigated in the diocese of Cloyne — which could be classified as soft information — before any allegation of child sexual abuse was made.

The commission observed that the state had so far failed to legislate for the collection of soft information, despite a number of repeated commitments to do so.

It also said an investigation carried out by Ian Elliott of the Church’s National Board for Safeguarding Children into the diocese of Cloyne into a specific case was more robust than a similar one conducted by the HSE which only dealt with the failure to report the allegations to it.