Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 10, between lines 4 and 5, to insert the following:

"(8) (a) The Board shall make provision for the setting up of an assessment panel consisting of four members of the Board, including the participation of the Chairperson, to examine applications to the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund, made by residents of former scheduled institutions who did not make an application under the Act of 2002 or who will have had a court determination made in an action arising out of their residency within a scheduled institution.

(b) The above assessment panel shall have the power to recommend to the Board the inclusion of former residents of scheduled institutions who qualify under section 7(1) of the Act of 2002, to make awards in accordance with this Act which are fair and reasonable having regard to the unique circumstances of each applicant.".

This amendment was linked to the earlier debate on eligibility. It arose from discussions on Committee Stage with the Minister. Given that the redress doard is closed, he was asked how he would deal with it. As bureaucracy was mentioned, this is one way of deal with the matter. The Minister referred earlier to the review in two years time and perhaps this could be helpful in that regard. If he does not consider it helpful, I presume he will vote it down. The amendment refers to the function of the board, four of whose members with the chairman, will be empowered to make an assessment.

One of the reasons given for not widening the eligibility criteria was that there were concerns that people who unsuccessfully applied through the redress scheme could re-apply for assistance from the statutory fund. However, the wording of the amendment clearly states that the panel will only examine applications from people who have not applied to the redress board. Anyone else who was turned down after applying to the board would therefore be ineligible.

The amendment is an attempt to deal with the fact that we voted down the widening of eligibility. I presume the Minister will say it is null and void but this is where the amendments arose from.

See this speech in context