Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the committee I welcome from the Department of Education, Ms Aoife Conduit, assistant secretary, Mr. Brian Power, principal officer, and Mr. Hugh Geoghegan, assistant principal officer. The officials are present as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the education (supports for survivors of residential institutional abuse) Bill 2023. The format of the meeting will be that I will invite Ms Conduit to make a brief opening statement. This will be followed by questions from members of the committee. Each member will have a specific slot for questions and a response form the officials. As the officials are probably aware, the committee will publish the opening statement on its website following today's meeting.

Before we begin, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Officials are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed by the Chair to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I invite Ms Conduit to make her opening statement.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

I thank members for the invitation to address the committee as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny process for the general scheme of the education (supports for survivors of residential institutional abuse) Bill 2023. I am an assistant secretary in the Department of Education with responsibility for a number of areas, including the State’s response to residential institutional abuse. I am joined by Mr. Brian Power, principal officer, and Mr. Hugh Geoghegan, assistant principal officer, both of whom are from the Department’s residential institutions redress unit.

The Minister for Education, Deputy Foley, and the Department as a whole, are very conscious of the enormous trauma which has been experienced by survivors of abuse in residential institutions. The response to this issue has, to date, involved expenditure of approximately €1.5 billion, including redress payments and other supports for survivors, through the Residential Institutions Redress Board, the Education Finance Board and the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board, more commonly referred to as Caranua.

As the committee will be aware, on 27 June last, the Government approved proposals brought forward by the Minister for Education for the provision of a package of supports and services for survivors of abuse in residential institutions, comprised of a number of elements relating to health, education, advocacy and trauma-informed practice. This marks a new phase of the State providing ongoing supports to survivors and builds on the already significant response to this issue.

The Department has been engaged in a structured process of consultation with survivors and survivor groups over a number of years. The development of the new package of supports was informed by consideration of the reports of the survivor-led consultative forum, along with other relevant reports and submissions, in particular, the Facing the Future Together report of 2020 which resulted from a conference with One in Four, Caranua, Right of Place and Barnardos, among others. These reports provide a clear insight into the areas where survivors feel that supports are required into the future. The balanced and proportionate package of supports approved by the Government will address many of the key concerns identified.

The Government also approved the dissolution of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board, or Caranua, which was established in 2013 under the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Act 2012. Caranua’s specific purpose was to disburse funding supports to survivors in areas such as health, housing and education from a ring-fenced fund of €110 million, plus interest of €1.38 million, which was provided by the relevant congregations following the publication of the final report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, also known as the Ryan report, in 2009. As the funding available to it was finite in nature and could not, under the 2012 Act, be supplemented by Exchequer funding, Caranua began winding down its operations in 2018 and effectively closed in March 2021.

The general scheme has two main purposes, namely, to enable the provision of supports to survivors, particularly those supports relating to health and education, and to provide for the dissolution of Caranua. I will briefly outline for the committee how the general scheme addresses these issues. More detailed information on the general scheme can be found in the briefing document and commentary note which were previously provided to the committee.

With regard to health supports, the general scheme makes provision for an enhanced range of health services to former residents, on the same basis as those provided to survivors of the Magdalen laundries and which are to be provided to former residents of mother and baby and county home institutions. This package of supports is commonly referred to as an enhanced medical card and will allow survivors to access GP services, drugs, medicines, home nursing and home helps, dental, ophthalmic and aural services, counselling, chiropody, podiatry and physiotherapy. In recognition of the fact that approximately one third of survivors of abuse in residential institutions now live outside of the State, the Bill also provides for the making of a once-off health support payment of €3,000 to survivors who are resident abroad, in lieu of the enhanced medical card, to support their health needs. This is the same approach as that taken in the Mother and Baby Institutions Payment Scheme Act 2023.

In addition, the general scheme includes the amendment of the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Act 2009 to ensure that payments made by the Residential Institutions Redress Board, which made awards of redress to approximately 16,000 survivors of abuse in residential institutions, are no longer taken into account when making financial assessments under the fair deal scheme.

In terms of education supports, the Department will establish a new administrative scheme involving the payment of cash grants ranging from €500 to €2,000 to survivors who are engaging in further and higher education. This scheme will also ensure that survivors are no longer required to pay the student contribution charge where this would otherwise apply. While the establishment of this scheme does not in itself require a legislative basis, the general scheme provides a legal basis for the processing of certain data to confirm applicants’ eligibility for both the health and education supports.

As I noted, the Government also approved initiatives relating to advocacy and trauma-informed practice. Although these do not require a legislative basis and are therefore not reflected in the general scheme, they represent critical elements of the overall package, so I will briefly outline what is intended. Regarding advocacy, the consultative forum’s report highlighted the challenges that survivors face in navigating access to public services. The Department is engaging with an independent, professional advocacy organisation, Sage Advocacy, which has a strong track record in empowerment advocacy, to establish a specific advocacy service for survivors of abuse in residential institutions which will be resourced by a dedicated team and ring-fenced funding. This service will assist survivors in engaging with and accessing mainstream public services. Discussions with Sage Advocacy are at a very advanced stage and work is under way to ensure the service can begin to support survivors as soon as possible.

In relation to trauma-informed practice, the extent to which survivors continue to live with the trauma of the past has also been highlighted and the need for all service providers to receive training in trauma-informed practice has been identified. For this reason, the Department will arrange for the development of a training course and related training materials to be disseminated to service providers across the civil and public service.

Returning to the general scheme, it also contains a number of relatively standard provisions relating to the formal dissolution of Caranua, including those providing for a dissolution day to be appointed by the Minister, for the transfer of Caranua’s assets and liabilities and for the preparation of its final accounts and final annual report. With regard to any funding remaining to Caranua upon its dissolution, the general scheme provides that any such funding shall be utilised by the Minister for purposes benefiting former residents of the residential institutions. However, it should be noted that Caranua currently has very limited funding remaining.

I also draw the committee’s attention to the provisions relating to the transfer and processing of data. Upon its dissolution, Caranua’s records and data will transfer to the Department and the general scheme provides that these will only be processed for the specific purposes set out in the legislation, such as the preparation of Caranua’s final accounts and annual report and to assist in confirming survivors’ eligibility for supports or services. It is important to note that the records held by Caranua do not include detailed testimony or accounts of survivors’ experiences of abuse in residential institutions of the type held by the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse or the Residential Institutions Redress Board. The records relate solely to Caranua’s role of disbursing funding supports to survivors, including day-to-day administrative records and records relating to applications made by survivors.

These data and records will continue to be subject to both GDPR and freedom of information, and survivors will be entitled to exercise their GDPR and freedom of information rights, including seeking a copy of their data. The general scheme also provides for the transfer to the Department of certain data held by the RIRB, which is required to enable the Department to confirm applicants' eligibility for the supports and services being provided to survivors.

The Department has engaged closely with the Office of the Attorney General in relation to the transfer and processing of both sets of data, and will continue to engage with counsel during the drafting of the Bill. Appropriate and suitable safeguards will be put in place, in consultation with the Data Protection Commission, DPC, where necessary, to ensure the data are held confidentially and in compliance with all data protection requirements. The development of the general scheme was informed by a detailed formal consultation process with the DPC, in accordance with Article 36(4) of the GDPR, which did not identify any issues of concern.

It is important to note that while the supports I have outlined are particular to survivors of institutions which came under the residential institutions redress scheme, the State recognises and acknowledges the legacy of trauma related to a range of institutions, including industrial schools, reformatories, mother and baby homes, Magdalen laundries and related institutions. The Department continues to engage closely with colleagues from across the Government to progress relevant initiatives such as ensuring appropriate arrangements for the safeguarding of relevant records, as well as memorialisation, in the context of the development of the new national centre for research and remembrance. I thank members again for their time. We will be happy to address any questions they may have.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Conduit for her opening statement. The first speaker is Deputy Clarke.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the officials for their time and for coming in. It is very much appreciated. They are probably aware that yesterday, the committee met with representatives of a number of survivor groups, including Fréa, which operates in the UK, Right of Place Second Chance, the Christine Buckley Centre and One in Four. I want to put to the officials some of the queries and concerns that they raised with the committee yesterday, one of which to my mind seems like a very real issue and something the Department should be aware of. Mr. Patrick Rodgers referenced the potential impact of receiving a lump sum payment on those living in the UK and asked how that would affect their eligibility to state payments there. He suggested that a solution could be found, or a mechanism for making that payment could be introduced, whereby the survivor would benefit from the payment as opposed to having their rental support or pension payments, which are means-tested, stopped because this could be deemed to be earned income. That is a very important issue. It is something the Department should take on board. We want people to be able to engage in this process. We do not want to be putting up invisible barriers. If they see this as something that is going to have a negative impact on their financial situation or as something that will be of no benefit to them, the obvious result will be that they simply will not apply. To my mind, that further compounds the trauma that they experienced as younger people.

Another issue that was brought up at the committee yesterday was the lack of reference to supports for those who may be seeking justice through the courts system. It was mentioned by one of the witnesses. I believe Ms Maeve Lewis from One in Four brought it up. It is something they would like to see referenced in the Bill.

The other issue that was spoken about at quite some length was the enhanced medical card. While the enhanced medical card will certainly give people an entitlement to access the service, given the waiting lists and the pressure that is on the health service it does not actually equate to treatment. That is a very serious concern for those we engaged with yesterday. Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne said that the age profile of the people they work with is between 50 and 80. Certain medical conditions come with age. She pointed out that individuals could be paying €30 for a blood test or €35 to a practice that is not covered by a medical card. As a result of that, they make not be taking the best course of action when it comes to managing their own health.

I thank Ms Conduit for her opening statement. She referenced the role that could potentially be played by Sage Advocacy. One of the issues that the representatives of the survivor groups mentioned yesterday was the need for that point of contact and the equivalent of a one-stop shop to help survivors to navigate their way through the system. How does the Department view the role of Sage Advocacy? Is it just a service that people will be able to contact to be directed to the relevant Department, or will the organisation have lobbying powers? Will it be able to contact the Department on survivors' behalf, or will it just be providing information to the survivors? That is an important point to tie down.

I have a final question. I ask the witnesses to give us a brief update on the national centre for research and remembrance.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

We understand the point that is being made about impact of the payment on those living in the UK. Obviously, people do not want our State giving with one hand and another state taking away with the other. That is something we are aware of and something we have been engaging with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth on, because the same issue may arise with the mother and baby home payment scheme. We are going to work with the Department to contact our counterparts in the UK Department for Work and Pensions to talk through with them what can be done to make sure it is addressed. It is something that is already on our radar. We certainly will be progressing it as the Bill goes through.

On the question of the enhanced medical card, we are trying to ensure equity of treatment is provided. Particularly with the mother and baby homes, the enhanced medical card does provide for additional services. I understand the Deputy's point about blood tests and all of that. The card does not cover absolutely everything. That is something that will have to be addressed in respect of the wider services covered by the medical card and the enhanced medical card. It may cause difficulties if we were to isolate particular services or whatever in this legislation that would be different from those being provided for the mother and baby home residents.

On the role of Sage Advocacy, I would say that it is not going to be just an information dissemination service. We are engaging with Sage Advocacy and it is currently recruiting. It will provide a regionally based service that will provide a face-to-face or one-to-one contact point for survivors. It has not completely fleshed out everything that the service will entail. That is something we are working with it on at the moment. By the end of the year, we intend to bring our survivors' consultative forum together to explain to them exactly how it will work and to disseminate that more widely.

The point made by One in Four about seeking justice in the courts system has been made before. There are difficulties with the State, through one Government Department, supporting civil or criminal actions. I am not sure it is possible to address that in this particular Bill, but we are certainly engaging with One in Four as we go forward. It has been very supportive in our consultation with the organisation on what is appropriate for survivors and what can be done.

The work on the national centre for research and remembrance is well under way. I am on the steering group. As the Deputy is aware, a memo for Government was issued during the summer, outlining the five-year plan. The centre will be on the site of the former Magdalen laundry on Seán MacDermott Street. It is important to say that a national and State approach is being taken. The National Museum of Ireland is very heavily involved, along with the National Archives of Ireland. From the Department's perspective, we are interested in two things, one of which is memorialisation. We want this to be a site of conscience for the State, for all those who suffered in these institutions. It will also be a very important national archive where the records and testimonies of survivors remain safe for posterity. We are working very closely with the National Archives of Ireland and with the legislative subgroup to determine what might be needed in terms of legislation to bring that forward for the national centre.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a clarifying question around the educational supports, which are a really important part of any package that is offered. Given the age profile, especially of the survivor groups who were here yesterday, to what extent do the officials actually see those supports being taken up? They spoke of their clients being in the age range of 50 to 80 years. Has any indication been given to the Department of what exactly it is people are intending to use that education support grant for? Also, is it capped at €2,000?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

It is capped at €2,000 in a year. It would depend on the type of programme a person intends to do. There was the education finance board in 2006. It gave out a lot of money at that point as people were younger and maybe pursuing different kinds of programmes. There was some demand from Caranua for education supports, though it was not the bulk, by any means. I think the bulk went on health and housing adaptations. In our consultative forum there was a good bit of interest. People are still, despite being in those older age categories, interested in self-development and in doing programmes. There was certainly interest among some of the survivors on the forum in availing of those programmes, so I suppose-----

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is why I was asking. Is there any degree of formality around the type of course a person could undertake?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

We are being very broad.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Good.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

It would need to be recognised. We will also consider applications from survivors in the UK or elsewhere if they are doing a recognised programme and want to avail of it as well. We will try to make it as easy to access as possible. We are not interested in a big, bureaucratic exercise, like getting grants from Student Universal Support Ireland, SUSI, or any of that. We certainly do not intend it to displace any of the supports already available for people in accessing education. There are plenty of those, as the Deputy will be aware. This is an additional cash payment to help people with some expenses they may incur. As I said, we are going to be making it as simple and efficient as possible to apply for that.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

With the Chair's indulgence, I will ask a final question.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go ahead.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The opening statement references the expenditure of approximately €1.5 billion to date. What has the total contribution of the congregations been?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

It has been €245 million in total. I assume that is the €127 million - the indemnity - along with the €110 million and some additional for the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund. That does not include the property.

Mr. Hugh Geoghegan:

No. There are the properties then as well.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

And the properties as well, yes.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That figure is excluding the property.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

That cannot be including the property.

Mr. Hugh Geoghegan:

The €245 million includes €125 million under the 2002 indemnity agreement and then the remaining amount, about €120 million, is under the 2009 round. About €111 million of that is cash and then there are a number of properties that transferred under that round as well to the Department of Education, the HSE and a number of councils. There are a small number of transfers remaining that are progressing. There is one more cash contribution due as well, once a site is disposed of. That is in progress at the moment as well.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do the officials have an estimate of the value of that cash contribution?

Mr. Hugh Geoghegan:

"No" is the short answer. It will be a low six-figure sum for that site. It is a rural property in County Tipperary that was in use in the school building project, so now that project is over the congregation can dispose of it. I think it is about 6 acres. That is in train at the moment, so we expect that shortly.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the officials.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the officials for coming before the committee. I will not be keeping them long. Ms Conduit raising the issue with the UK situation and head 5 and how persons in the UK who receive a payment under head 5 may lose some of that because of the pension or social welfare rules there. Have there been any previous examples where our Department of Social Protection or the officials' Department have engaged with corresponding UK departments on an issue like this?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

No. As I said, it is arising in the case of the mother and baby homes, but I think contact has not yet been made. We intend to try to take a co-ordinated approach from the State to the authorities over there.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. It was brought to our attention yesterday that the rules - I think it may be a statutory instrument in the UK - certainly disregard any income a person receives if that person has been the subject of historical institutional child abuse in the UK and received money to that effect. I would have thought there would be some form of sympathetic response from the UK in any event. Does Ms Conduit think the communication is going to go from her Department or from the Department of Social Protection to the Department for Work and Pensions in the UK?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

We will have to discuss it. We have contacts from our interdepartmental group with the Department of Social Protection. We will talk to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth about what would be the most effective way of going about that.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the role Sage Advocacy is going to play, it appears there is not going to be any specific statutory provision dealing with a professional advocacy group. Is that correct?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

That is right, yes. We are going to establish on an administrative basis.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. Will it have responsibility for identifying people in the UK as well or is that going to be given to some other body?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

What does the Deputy mean by "identifying people"?

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

People will obviously have been identified as having been in institutions, but what does Ms Conduit see the role of Sage Advocacy as being? Is it assisting people with the process or is it making people generally aware it is there for them?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

I think it is to support them. It is called empowerment advocacy. A lot of the feedback we got from the reports, from our own consultation forum and more broadly is about how difficult it can be to navigate. As we know, some of the survivors may find some of the inevitable red tape and bureaucracy around accessing supports difficult.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

Sage Advocacy is used to working with vulnerable people, older people and people with a disability. Its job is to help them to navigate that insofar as it can. It is not an advocate in the sense of lobbying on government policy or any of those matters. It is a separate thing.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know what Ms Conduit means. It is about facilitating people in going through the bureaucracy of the State. Presumably, Sage Advocacy will be able to assist people even if they are the UK.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

If it can. If it is possible for it to do that, it will.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All right. As a final point, in head 12, I think, the records of the dissolved body now come under the ownership and responsibility of the Minister. Do they go to the National Archives or what happens to them?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

They become departmental records. As such, they will be subject to the National Archives Act and the provisions within that.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thus, in years to come people will be able to do research on them or access them.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

Yes. As I said in the opening statement, they are very dissimilar to the records held by the other redress bodies in that they really are a lot of administrative records in terms of dispersing grants. There is no testimony, stories or evidence of any kind in them.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay, so they probably will not be of that much academic interest.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

Probably not.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a few questions. I was taken by the witnesses we had in yesterday. As a former Minister of State, I know about negotiations going backwards and forwards. What I got from the meeting was the impact these institutions had on the survivors, and not only on the survivors but on the wider families as well. I am not sure whether Deputy Clarke will agree and Deputy O'Callaghan is gone, but my sense is what they wanted was that people from the Departments would speak to them in a way that they could understand and that did not go over their heads. That is something they want from the Department in the engagement with it going forward on this legislation. In fairness, they had not got a whole lot of asks.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, they were very reasonable.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought they were very reasonable. I am not sure whether the officials were watching the proceedings. One of the issues I got from the survivors, which Deputy Clarke spoke about, was the pension provisions being made available to survivors, especially those living in the UK. It is a big issue for them. At yesterday's meeting, it was proposed by Fréa that in the UK and the North a resolution may be required in the form of amending legislation by the UK Department for Work and Pensions.

Has the Department of Education engaged with that department in the UK so survivors living in the UK get the same entitlement as survivors living here? Some of the provisions survivors in Ireland get cannot be availed of in the UK with a GP medical card or whatever the story is. Everything humanly possible should be done to make sure those living in the UK get as much as possible. Does Ms Conduit understand the question I am asking?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

To clarify, is the Chair asking about the €3,000 payment-----

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

-----that it would not be offset against any entitlement they have?

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, against any of the entitlements they are already receiving in the UK.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

It is our intention to engage with the Department for Work and Pensions in that respect. The same issue is arising with the mother and babies payment scheme. It is of general concern across government. We will be pursuing that.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Another issue that came across yesterday involves a number of Departments. Does the Department of Education propose to establish a high-level interdepartmental group to ensure all measures in the Bill are enacted in a collaborative way between Departments and the agencies?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

We had an interdepartmental group with all the relevant Departments on it in terms of drawing up these proposals and the Bill. We will certainly have to have a bilateral working group with the Department of Health and the HSE on the implementation of the stuff around the medical card, eligibility and all of that. We will work closely, as we do anyway, with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth on the national centre for research and remembrance, NCRR, and other aspects of the package of proposals. We are used to working across government in these areas and will continue to do so. It was clear to us in developing these packages how dependent and interdependent we are on other Departments and agencies. In its implementation, we will work closely with them.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

With a group such as we are talking about, I know Ms Conduit cannot answer today but it would be reassuring for everybody if a senior civil servant - an assistant secretary - was leading that from the Department of Education and from other Departments as well. That would reassure survivors that the Department of Education and other Departments are taking this very seriously.

It was proposed by the Christine Buckley Centre that a health amendment card, designated for survivors of institutional abuse, Magdalen laundries and mother and baby homes, be established. Could that be done?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

The enhanced medical card has already been provided to Magdalen survivors and is being provided to mother and baby homes survivors.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

From memory, the contributor from yesterday mentioned by the Cathaoirleach pointed to another scheme introduced many years ago for survivors of, I think, a blood disorder to get a medical card.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

That was the hepatitis C, I would say.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, I am working from memory.

Ms Aoife Conduit:

That is a very particular one linked to the serious health disorders that arose from the contaminated blood they were given. That is a separate one and has been treated separately to the ones for survivors of the institutions.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Witnesses were talking yesterday about survivors who did not apply under the redress scheme. There were various reasons for that. Will there be an opportunity for people who did not apply to apply?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

We cannot reopen the redress scheme. It has been closed since 2011. What I would say is there will not be an eligibility list for the Sage Advocacy service. If somebody rings up and says they were resident in an institution, the service will help them. It is the same with the national counselling service the HSE put in place for former residents of institutions. We do not envisage an eligibility process or application process for people who did not apply under the redress scheme. It was open for the best part of a decade. A Government decision was taken in 2011 to close it at that point.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Sage Advocacy have a communications role in reaching out to survivors to ensure they are aware of all the services offered? For people living overseas, will the embassies be used?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

Yes, and we have been doing that. We have reached out through the embassies. They do a lot of supports with the groups in the UK, in particular. When we were bringing the proposals to Government, we disseminated information through the embassies and various organisations in the UK. On the Cathaoirleach’s point about making it as accessible as possible, we did an exercise talking to the National Adult Literacy Agency to make sure we were not too legalistic and it was clearly understood by people what they would be entitled to. We will continue with that approach.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the counselling services that will be available to survivors be open to children of survivors or just specifically survivors? Children are often affected by what the parent has been through. Has a decision been made on that? Can it be considered?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

That is an existing service. It is run by the HSE. I do not know how it determines it but it was put in place initially for all people who had been resident in those State institutions, including mother and baby homes. I can clarify that and come back to the committee.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. An issue came through yesterday. Those organisations have done fantastic work. They were saying yesterday that some of them are run on a financial shoestring. I am not sure which organisation said it had to move from premises to premises.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Christine Buckley Centre.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It could not afford the rent. It was in the city centre and then moved to Dundrum or someplace way outside the city centre. It gets its income from the HSE or the Department of Health. This is why I am talking about an interdepartmental group. I do not expect the Department of Education, which has a totally different remit, to pay the rent for some of these organisations but they feel they are continuously fighting and an interdepartmental group might solve many of their issues. They feel they are going from one organisation, Department or agency to another. It frustrates them. An interdepartmental agency led by senior people from each Department would assist and go a long way to solving some problems they have.

I am just looking at the notes from yesterday. Does Deputy Clarke have anything else to say?

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do the officials have anything to add before we conclude?

Ms Aoife Conduit:

No. I thank the Cathaoirleach again for the opportunity to come before the committee. We look forward to working with members as the Bill progresses through the various Stages.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the officials for coming in and being of assistance to the committee. We will make recommendations coming from that and we will have those soon.