My question today relates to child protection and the ongoing inadequacies in that area. We cannot reassure ourselves that children are protected. The Taoiseach will be aware that the national review panel report was published yesterday following a leak. Co-incidentally, on the same day, a report from HIQA confirmed ongoing inadequacies in child protection. The summary report is dated December 2018. I understand it was completed at the end of November. Why did it take so long to publish it and why did it have to be leaked?

The report acknowledges the grave and heinous sexual abuse perpetrated on the three children while they were in the care of the State. It refers to serious errors of judgment, flawed assessment and decision-making and lack of management oversight. The report found that sufficient evidence existed at the time to indicate that the children should be moved. The measures taken by the social work department were deficient, to say the least. There is a whole list of deficiencies, including a safety plan that was put in place but really not implemented, and rarely referred to in subsequent meetings. My time is limited so I will not go on. Has the Taoiseach read the report and what will he do about it?

On the terms of reference of that report, I have serious concerns as to how this was done from day one. The final disclosure was in 2011. The national review panel got its referral in April 2016. It is now May 2019. There was a slight delay, it would appear, because somebody somewhere asked it to delay it. The times are not given, nor who asked for it. On top of that, there was no publication date. Yesterday, I raised it with the Minister, Deputy Zappone, who told me it was always going to be yesterday. Significantly, over the course of a year, in a series of questions asking when this would be published, I got no indication that it would be yesterday.

I refer to the most grave and heinous abuse. The response from Tusla, I have to say, was not reassuring when it referred to a point in time because that point in time is ongoing.

The report from HIQA was co-incidentally published on the same day. It looked at six national standards and assessed the operation of foster homes in three counties under those headings. Four were non-compliant and one was "major non-compliant" in relation to child protection and issues in relation to safety plans were ongoing. A number of other issues were identified, plus an absence of staff and a number of children who do not have a social worker. Could the Taoiseach tell me, without jargon and without a reply from whoever writes the speeches, in the first instance, what is his response to that summary report? Can he confirm what actions the Government will take and explain how this report did not come back to a Minister, given the serious nature of this, and to the Dáil for discussion so that we all could take comfort from the reassurance that children are protected?

The report of the national review panel was published yesterday. I have not had a chance to read it yet but I have it and I will certainly read it before the end of the week. These terrible, tragic and appalling events which befell these young women are almost unspeakable and hard for us to even think about or speak about as human beings. They are events, though, that occurred in 2007 and the period before that, and much has happened when it comes to child protection since then. Child protection was not much of a priority for previous Governments. In fairness to my predecessor, Deputy Enda Kenny, he made it a priority by establishing a dedicated Department of Children and Youth Affairs and by taking Tusla out of the HSE and establishing it as a stand-alone agency when it was something of an afterthought in previous times.

Since then, much has been done. Tusla was established as a stand-alone agency separate from the HSE and a Department of Children and Youth Affairs was carved out of the Department of Health and given full Cabinet status. We have had a children's rights referendum and we have acted on that, with meaningful legislation and mandatory reporting brought in not too long ago so that people have to report child abuse when it occurs. That was not the case in the past. When it comes to foster care, and at the heart of this is a foster care case, there were only three social workers looking after the children in foster care in that region at the time. Since then resources have been increased fivefold, by 500%. There are now 15 social workers working with foster care families in that region, making sure that everyone in foster care is assigned to a social worker. Much progress has been made on child protection in recent years, spearheaded by the Minister, Deputy Zappone, and the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and the former Minister, now MEP Frances Fitzgerald, before that, but there is always more that needs to be done and we acknowledge that. That is why the recommendations of this report will be taken seriously and will be responded to.

I am not one bit reassured by the Taoiseach's answer. It was not a point in time. It did not finish in 2007. It took until 2011 for a second child, who had been regularly raped, to come forward. The first child's allegation was deemed credible and the second child's allegation was deemed credible.

I know the Taoiseach is a busy man. Yesterday's report from HIQA in relation to Sligo, Leitrim and west Cavan confirmed that there are ongoing issues in relation to child protection. Perhaps somebody could read the report for the Taoiseach and point out the facts, including that the safety plan issue is still a problem and the allocation of social workers is still a problem.

On the review itself, the system - the social workers and management - failed to comply with their statutory obligations at the time. They have failed to comply with their statutory obligations on a repeated basis. Nobody has considered talking to the children who were in that family before these courageous children came forward and made their complaints. Did it occur to anyone to consider the children who were there previously to see if they were subjected to the same abuse?

On the terms of reference, has it occurred to the Government to ask how could a report of this significance take so long? How could a referral be made in April 2016 and how is it that we are talking about it in May 2019 as a result of a leak to RTÉ? RTÉ deserves "congratulations" from us, if that is an appropriate word. It was RTÉ's programme that led to a referral in the first place, not Tusla.

Finally, the Taoiseach might look at Charleton and other HIQA reports which state that Tusla is incapable of holding a mirror up for reflection. Charleton also pointed out that criminal prosecution should never be used as an excuse when there is a failure in child protection.

I am advised that the reviewers concluded that it was unlikely that the abuse could have been uncovered prior to the disclosures. Once the abuse was disclosed in 2007, there was sufficient evidence for the long-term foster children to have been removed from the family. This did not happen. It should have happened and the report calls out some poor decision-making in that regard. No abuse was found to have occurred after 2007. However, the reviewers highlighted that the safety plan was not effective and the main weaknesses related to the flaws in the management of the case. The complexity and seriousness of the credible allegation should have generated a high level co-ordinated and persistent response and the report refers to the prevalence of groupthink as a factor. The report is clear that social workers in the area were committed and often went above and beyond their brief to provide support.

The recommendations of the report are being closely examined and a number are already being implemented.

Changes have been made since 2007. Indeed, these events happened seven years before Tusla was established. I outlined in my previous reply what has happened since then.

It is important to be mindful, and I ask the House to pay attention to this, that a number of the young people involved in this case may still be extremely vulnerable. The past hurt and current well-being of all young women are a real concern. While one of the young people in this case has chosen to waive her anonymity, the others have not. There is legal protection of witnesses in such cases and it is understood that this remains in place as regards the other women involved. The summary report is understood not to compromise this legally protected anonymity. We need to ensure that none of us does that.