Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on amendment No. 23 because it has been ruled out of order. Will the Minister take cognisance of the fact that the various groups must have proper representation? There should be no conflict of interest. Concerns have been raised about payments to members, that there might be a little clique which would be seen to work with the Department of Education and Science as opposed to other groups such as Irish SOCA which has taken to opposing the Department in some instances. The operation of the board and the selection of its members should be examined carefully and with great scrutiny.

I support amendment No. 26. As stated on Committee Stage and previously in the House regarding payments made by the redress board, rumours have emanated that the highest figure is X amount but we do not necessarily know the position. People are not allowed to indicate exactly what they were paid and why. If, as Deputy Enright stated, they could do so in some instances, they would feel more at peace. People already feel that the State has done them a great injustice. For them to consider that the settlement they have been awarded is paltry and that other people in similar situations are getting more money perpetuates that sense of injustice.

If people were able to talk about the amount they received and the category of their abuse without naming abusers, it could enhance the legislation. This returns to my point about trust in the Bill rather than the thrust of the Bill. One must have trust in legislation. Anything that promotes transparency is good. I support the amendment purely in the interests of survivors being able to express to other survivors how the process worked for them.

See this speech in context