Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach, but my question is in the present tense and not the past tense. Why did the Taoiseach ignore the call from survivors for the Statute of Limitations to be lifted? The Taoiseach cannot patronise these women and say he does not want to put them through a long court procedure if this is what they want to do. Why provide only a minimalist financial package? A question asked by the chairperson of the UN Human Rights Committee suggests there may be a question over the legality of the State's plan for redress. The UN Human Rights Committee rapporteur asked whether the scheme is compatible with the State's obligations under international human rights treaties. There is also the huge issue that these symphysiotomy operations were involuntary. This question is also being asked. There is a lack of judicial review and an absence of individual assessment and the fact that those who apply for the redress scheme will have to give up their legal rights. They are told they can have this redress scheme but they must give up their legal rights. What is most important is that while some women may go for the redress scheme, which is their entitlement, the vast majority have stated they do not want it, that they want acknowledgement of their ill-treatment and proper compensation commensurate with the trauma they have suffered. These issues are not being raised just by me. Deputies have raised these issues for some time. Is it not time for the Government to reflect and rethink its approach on this issue? It is time for the Taoiseach to meet the survivors to put together a comprehensive approach which meets the needs of all the victims of symphysiotomy. I know the Minister for Health has met them.

See this speech in context