Recently, I was shocked to see a bizarre advertisement on the issue of consent, funded by the Department of justice. The advertisement featured an elderly couple greeting their grandchildren with a hug at a family event and suggests that they, the grandparents, should have sought consent first. This is totally wrong in how it demonises elderly grandparents and in the shocking waste of taxpayers' money. Consent is very important when it comes to sexual relations between people. However, equating these types of relationships, with a granny giving a hug to a grandchild is completely inaccurate. It is wrong to conflate these two issues of sexual violence, on the one hand, and affection exchanged by a grandmother to a grandchild, on the other. Why is the State asking grannies to second-guess themselves when it comes to hugging their grandchildren? Why is the State planting a seed in a child's mind that it is somehow dangerous to receive a hug from their grandmother?

Grandparents do a tremendous job in this country. They have raised one generation and, in many cases, they are helping with childcare for the next generation. Why is the State in this space at all? This is family relationships. It is not a criminal issue either, and it represents an incredible overreach by the State into the private lives of our citizens. It is not sinister for a grandparent to greet their grandchild with a hug at a family event. During the Covid years, we saw how grandparents were deprived of contact with their grandchildren. We know from Alone and many other organisations that loneliness has such a tremendously damaging impact on grandparents, the elderly and senior citizens. It is bad for mental and bad physical health. How much taxpayers' money did the Government spend on this advertisement? Will the Government apologise to grandparents? The Government needs to get its priorities right when it comes to spending. Spending in relation to sexual violence and gender-based violence is very important but it is clearly being mismanaged in this regard.

When it comes to priorities, a few days ago The Irish Times led with a story about Tusla having no special-care place for a 14-year-old girl. This girl has a learning disability. She travelled across a county, was brought to a house, was continuously fuelled with drugs and was repeatedly raped. Of the 26 special-care places, 11 of them remain closed as a result of staffing shortages. That is a priority. When will the Minister get her priorities straight?

I want to be very clear that this is not a Government campaign and that is not the view of Government. It is not the view of the Minister for justice, who made his view very clear this morning. The Government does not support that advertisement or that campaign.

There is a broader question around consent, which is important, and that is highlighted and targeted. As the Deputy said, it is important that we are having a consent conversation. That is partly why the SPHE programme in schools has been updated to have broader conversations than we had previously about consent and what is appropriate and what is not. That does not extend to this advertisements or to grandparents in any way. Grandparents are an incredibly important part of family life and every child's life. The advertisement was inappropriate and demeaning to grandparents. It has been removed by the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, following the Minister for justice's engagement with officials. It goes without saying that having loving grandparents in somebody's life is an incredibly positive thing and is not something to be campaigned against. It does not represent the views of Government in any sense.

If we set aside that advertisement on that basis, it is still important that there is a broad body of work, which I know the House agrees with, around domestic, sexual, and gender violence more broadly. That work is being led by Cuan and it is important that it continues. It is also important that we clearly distinguish this video, which was an error and does not represent the views of Government, from that different body of work that is being carried out.

I acknowledge what the Deputy said in relation to Tusla. Special care is a very difficult working environment. It is an incredibly important part of our response to protecting the most vulnerable children in the State. Difficulties recruiting and retaining staff have been the main limiting factors on the number of beds that are currently open in the different available units. As a consequence, a new special-care worker grade was introduced in January 2025. This offers an improved salary scale, with 20% higher pay at the top of scale compared with the other Tusla social-care worker grade. That is in addition to recruitment initiatives for special care, including Tusla's new children's residential services training college. The reason for that is due to the particularly sensitive, difficult, and important work that is necessary to support some of Ireland's most vulnerable children. Of course, it is important that we discuss this here, and the Deputy is correct to highlight it. The response of the Government is to try to recruit and retain more people and for them to be recompensed appropriately for doing that most special and particularly difficult work.

This Government funded the advertisement campaign. This is taxpayers' money spent by this Government. The utter contempt the Government has shown to older people and grandparents is unacceptable. It is a Government-funded campaign, and the advertisement suggested that when it comes to sexual abuse and violence in this country, we need to be looking at and investigating our grandparents. How much did the advertisement cost? Will the Government apologise to grandparents?

When it comes to the issue of Tusla, it is in contempt of court in relation to the lack of care for vulnerable people. This is happening in real-time. This is not a past scandal. It is happening today. There are 13 children missing from State care for more than six months. That is still happening.

Meanwhile the Government is presiding over spending on the most ridiculous advert, which is trying to demonise grandparents.

I thank the Deputy. I reiterate that this is not a Government campaign. There was no question of it being sanctioned by the Government. The Government has service level agreements with many different entities to deliver services on their behalf and this ad was funded without consultation with anyone in government. I want to be absolutely clear that no person in government viewed or sanctioned this ad.

What about quality control?

This is not representative of the views of the Government.

There are no checks on taxpayers' money.

Please allow the Minister.

It is not representative of the views of the Government. We have service level agreements with a range of different entities across the health, justice and housing systems that deliver services on behalf of the Government. That does not mean we have oversight of every single thing they do. I am saying clearly that the ad has been withdrawn and does not represent the views of the Government. That is crucial.