Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I welcome those in the Visitors Gallery who are intently involved and affected by this Bill, which I support fully and commend. I wish to make some general points about the history that has led us to this point. The reason we are here is that the Irish State since its foundation outsourced to the Catholic Church the care and education of all people and directly turned its back on the neglect and sexual, physical and emotional abuse that was taking place in these institutions. In 2009, we had the original Ryan report, which was a limited report. That the rule that there would be no prosecutions was written into the Ryan report in 2009 is an absolute outrage. It is bad enough that there has been no criminal investigation of those who ran these institutions and inflicted such cruelty and abuse on, in this case, thousands of children but in my opinion a further crime was committed when the redress scheme was set up. The redress scheme itself was an outrage.

The Minister stated that 15,000 people were anticipated to receive redress under the Caranua scheme and €110 million was committed by the institutions. On my calculations, breaking it down, this means that the Catholic Church was to pay €7,333 for each of those 15,000 people. That is an absolute outrage. People's lives were impaired. We all know and have met people whose lives and children's lives have been impacted by what happened. Then we discover from a recent article that not only has the Catholic Church not paid the €110 million in full after so many years but it also has not turned over the promised 61 properties, as only 48 properties have been given over to the State. These properties would be very useful during our housing crisis. They could earn money meaning people could possibly be compensated in the way that they deserve. Will the Minister comment on that observation because he did not say much in his introduction?

I looked at Caranua's website, which states that it wants to make a real difference to the lives of survivors of institutional abuse and it lists health, housing and educational needs. The whole thing is patronising and disgraceful. What business is it of ours or the Government's how people who were abused and get compensation spend their money? If they want to go to Las Vegas and blow it all on a night out, that is their business. It is none of our business. That we would tell people what to spend their money on and ask them for receipts is unbelievable. Will the Minister explain why the State considered this approach fit? I know this involved the previous Fianna Fáil Government as well and does not just relate to the last Government. It involves Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. In essence, this involves the two big parties. Why was there any stipulation? If people are entitled to compensation, they are entitled to it. What they do with it after that is no concern of ours. The Minister in his introduction spoke of how the money is meant to be spent. People were damaged and abused. We should not be asking them how they will spend the money.

The Bill makes a serious attempt to correct the mistakes and limitations in the terms. It seeks to broaden the number of people who can receive payments, including payments for funeral expenses. It is quite incredible to discover that a person can only do up his or her house and cannot actually buy one and then that the survivor's age would be taken into account. On the timely processing of applications, many survivors of abuse are complaining about the length of time the process, including appeals, takes. The Bill also seeks to address the issue relating to survivors' children. It is incredible that the Government would set its face against this proposal. In reality, all compensation should be paid directly to anyone who was in an institution. However, they are emotionally and physically scarred and many of them have gone on to develop serious alcohol or addiction problems and some have not been able to work fully. It is obvious that this would have impacted on their children. It only makes sense that it would affect the next generation and they should be entitled to spend the compensation in any way they see fit.

The Government's approach to the women and men who were impacted by what happened in these institutions follows a pattern. Several years ago we all saw the Taoiseach shed a tear in this House for those in the Magdalen laundries and we were told those tears were genuine. When we consider the way those in the Visitors Gallery have had to go cap in hand for every single piece of compensation to which they are entitled by right, it seems the Taoiseach had crocodile tears for those who survived the Magdalen laundries. This also links in with the survivors of the mother and baby institutions and the survivors of symphysiotomy, who have been demonised and trivialised in the most recent report.

While the Minister has only recently been appointed to the Department of Education and Skills, I wish to mention a couple of the institutions involved. When one examines and scrolls down through the religious organisations that have been listed, one counts several hundred of them. I could not believe it.

The list reads like a who's who of the organisations that run Catholic schools. Just half a mile away from my house and next door to the school my daughter should be able to attend when she finishes primary school next year, the Le Chéile Trust has been appointed patron of Tyrrelstown secondary school. Incidentally, Tyrrelstown is the most ethnically diverse area in the country. In the first instance, why is Le Chéile, an amalgam of the religious congregations which abused people, allowed to continue to educate children and why has it been given control of secondary schools in the past three years?

In the past six months, in other words under the Minister's watch, the Christian Brothers, one of the congregations whose members abused people, was given control of the secondary school in Castleknock. Why are these organisations being rewarded and allowed to educate children as if nothing happened? Most of the congregations have not made contributions to the redress scheme, yet they are being allowed to carry on regardless. Given the diversity of the areas concerned, it is clear that schools in these locations should be multi-denominational and non-denominational in nature. Nobody asked for a Catholic school. The congregations should not be allowed to continue to have a role in education given their failure to contribute to the redress scheme. I ask the Minister to respond.

I fully support the proposed scheme and the Minister should agree to implement it. It is incredible that the Fianna Fáil Party proposes to amend and water down the legislation given that it is responsible for the poor redress scheme that allowed the Catholic Church off the hook. I commend the Bill.

See this speech in context