Ciarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)

I thank Deputies for their contributions over the past two hours. Thankfully, the debate was conducted in the correct spirit and was devoid of some of the naked political grandstanding that has set the tone for much of the debate in the House in recent weeks. I will address some of the points raised by Members on both sides of the House. Deputies Seán Crowe and Brendan Smith sought assurance that the Government is satisfied that the work of the board is nearing completion and that potential applicants have had an opportunity to apply for any redress to which they feel they are entitled. I assure both Deputies, and all Deputies who have raised this issue, that this is very much the case. The board has approximately 500 applications on hand to be finalised and a further 560 late applications to be considered. To date, the board has processed applications from more than 14,600 cases.

The board was established in 2002 and a very extensive advertising campaign, costing almost €1 million, was undertaken by the board at the time. In 2005, another extensive advertising campaign was undertaken to notify all concerned of the closing date, as it was at the time. The publication of the Ryan report in May 2009 afforded another opportunity to raise awareness of the scheme. The recent publication of the Cloyne report will further serve to jog the memories of some of those who were the subject of horrific abuse in the past.

Eight years after the establishment of the board, the Government is satisfied that it is time to start winding down the redress board. I am sure many of those who suffered this horrific abuse would seek to have all possible closure on the terrible memories they carry with them on a daily basis. The very act of winding down the redress board will, perhaps, help them to put the past behind them, move on, pick up the pieces of their lives and achieve whatever they can in the very difficult circumstances in which they live.

Deputy Smith raised the possibility of allowing exceptional cases to be admitted after the closing date. It is important to recognise that the original closing date was December 2005. At that point, we were moving into the phase where only exceptional cases would be considered. Since then, we have been dealing with what could be described as exceptional cases. While some Deputies are concerned that potential applicants are not aware of the right to compensation the Government believes that every reasonable effort has been made to raise awareness and that it is time to commence winding down the redress board.

The measures I outlined earlier as to raising public awareness are the minimum one would hope to set in train. I am confident that the redress board, through the strong linkages it has built up with support groups for sufferers in Ireland and with diaspora support groups globally, will be able to go beyond the formal advertising process I laid out earlier and raise significant awareness about the impending closing date. Deputy Smith raised the necessity to ensure that all channels are used to make potential applicants aware of the closing date. I assure him that all available channels will be used. The Deputy suggested some very helpful measures in which we might engage. There is a large international Irish community network which we can access. A number of legal firms have been closely involved in the redress process. They are also being advised of the closing date and will be encouraged to spread the news as widely as possible.

Deputy Smith raised the question of the records of the board. Subsection 28(7) of the 2002 Act provides that the board shall, prior to the making of an order to dissolve the board, determine the disposal of the documents concerning applications made to it. Similarly, the decisions on the commission's records are a matter for the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. The legislation envisages that the commission will be making as complete a record as is practicable of the proceedings of the commission. This House has noted the desirability that, in so far as possible, all documentation received by the commission be preserved for posterity and not destroyed. Both the redress board and the commission are maintaining all their documentation. My colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, is anxious to retain the records of the bodies to the greatest degree possible and is liaising with the bodies in this regard.

Several Deputies raised the matter of the Bethany Home, while Deputy Clare Daly raised the wider general issue of mother and baby homes. When the redress scheme was introduced it was intended to address a particular circumstance, namely abuse in residential care. It was not intended to be a panacea for every single injustice visited on our children in the past. The scheme covers industrial schools, reformatory schools, orphanages, children's homes and special schools in which children were placed and resident and in respect of which a public body had a regulatory or inspection function. As noted by the Minister at the time, the scheme was to deal with the abuse of children while the State was acting to a significant degree in loco parentis, where children had been removed by the State from their parents and placed out of their protection. The scheme does not include mother and baby homes, hostels and other settings.

As Deputies will be aware, there was a range of demands for the scheme to be extended to include specific institutions and categories of institutions, following the publication of the Ryan report. The previous Government considered the matter and decided against any extension. This decision has meant the exclusion of a range of institutions which could have been considered for inclusion.

The Minister for Education and Skills recently met the Bethany survivors' group and reviewed the matter. He confirmed that the religious ethos of an institution was not a criterion for inclusion in the scheme and while the majority of institutions were managed by religious congregations others were managed by State bodies, voluntary bodies and management committees or pursuant to trusts. The perception that the redress scheme addressed only Catholic institutions is simply not true. The Minister has concluded that there is no basis to review the decision on the Bethany Home. The Minister has been proactive in meeting the Bethany survivors group. He met them on 24 May last. The group presented extensive research undertaken on their behalf. The group perceive that the exclusion of the Bethany Home from the redress scheme was on religious grounds. The Minister has confirmed that the religious ethos of an institution was not a criterion for inclusion within the scheme. The research undertaken revealed that the Bethany Home was certified by the Minister for Justice in 1945 as a place of detention under the Children's Act 1908. In this regard, the Department of Justice and Equality has advised that while it has not received any allegations of abuse from any female committed to the home it would be happy to deal with any such case on an individual basis.

Deputies also raised the question of those women and girls who were housed, for want of a better word, in Magdalen laundries. As Deputies are aware, the Government believes it is essential to fully establish the true facts and circumstances relating to the laundries. The interdepartmental committee chaired by Senator Martin McAleese is tasked with clarifying the State's interaction with the laundries. This is a necessary first step and I welcome the congregations' statement that they are willing to bring clarity, understanding, healing and justice in the interests of the women involved.

Deputy Donohoe raised the confidentiality aspect of the original Residential Institutions Redress Act. This confidentiality clause does not prevent former residents from recounting details of their experiences while resident in scheduled institutions. It prevents them from disclosing the fact that they received an award from the board in respect of their experiences while so resident. This is in recognition of the fact that the board operated an ex gratia scheme with no finding of fault. The threshold of proof was lower and the range of matters requiring proof was narrower. Applicants had to prove their identity, their residence in an institution during childhood, that they were injured while so resident and that the injury was consistent with the alleged abuse.

One of the goals of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was to provide those abused with an opportunity to recount their stories, which was a very important part of the healing process.

I commend all those whose testimony is reflected in the commissioner's report.

I referred earlier to an important element of the closure of this particularly horrendous episode in our nation's history. The Ryan report recommended the erection of a memorial to victims of institutional abuse inscribed with the words of an apology given by the then Taoiseach in May 1999 as a permanent and fitting public acknowledgement of their experiences. The committee appointed to oversee the memorial in October 2009 has consulted widely and the Minister has agreed to its proposal to advance the erection of the memorial to the competition stage. The committee will seek expressions of interest from those interested in designing and erecting such a memorial.

See this speech in context