Michael Finucane (Fine Gael)

I listened with great interest to the previous speaker because he brought a human dimension to the debate. I remember growing up in Foynes, which was ten miles from Glin where there was an industrial school. When I was young in the early 1950s, industrial schools obviously presented themselves as a terrible prospect because I remember that parents of young school-going children who misbehaved always threatened to send those children to the industrial school. "We will send you to Glin," was a statement at the time. There was fear as early as the 1950s.

Like Senator Moylan, I remember young people taking up employment with local farmers after leaving the industrial school. I remember socialising with one such person who was extremely friendly. Last summer, a museum was set up in Glin in an old Church of Ireland building and it contains memorabilia from the area and much memorabilia from the industrial school, including photographs. It brought a lump to my throat to enter the museum because it brought back memories of the days when the industrial school was in operation.

I accept it was correct for the Taoiseach to apologise on behalf of the State for the abuse that took place. In many ways, the apology would have been influenced by reports on television and in books about the era in question, an era which many would want to forget.

The issue of compensation does not involve a vendetta regarding money because even if victims received €80,000 or €100,000 in compensation, it would not compensate for the abuse they suffered and for the loss of their childhood. Money is not the factor. For many of those concerned, the main issue is that they are getting a chance to express what took place when they were young and that there is somebody to listen. This is probably the most important factor because with listening will come the healing process.

It is understandable that those on the Government side would congratulate Deputy Woods for the initiative he took as Minister, and all his officials. One has to realise that while the Opposition would like to see a consensus evolving in politics, it is important for it to look vigilantly at what is being done. I spent a year as Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts and worked very closely with the Comptroller and Auditor General. He is one of the most principled people I have ever worked with. He is totally apolitical and is forensic in his analysis of different aspects of State spending. There has been much focus recently on his report, especially regarding excesses in Government spending. Much attention has been paid to his research in this area and his estimate that compensation may cost up to €1 billion. It may cost that much – I believe it has been described as a guesstimate. This term is unfair because the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General does not go through a guesstimate-type process. One Minister criticised the Comptroller and Auditor General for entering the area of policy. One has to respect that we have an independent person producing this kind of analysis. In many cases, the Comptroller and Auditor General cannot defend himself, by virtue of his position, against those who may make political taunts or attack him in a hostile way.