Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)

The Minister says he is concerned about the amendments but he did not substantiate his concern, other than to say that it was akin to the earlier debate. I do not accept that. In some ways, this amendment restricts or qualifies the numbers involved by putting in place a procedure which would regulate the numbers seeking redress, in that it would be up to the board to assess them. The amendment must be taken in the context of the decisive and important debate we had earlier about inclusion. We are talking about a very small number and the fact that they would have to go through this system would make the number even smaller. I do not see anything of huge concern about it at all.

We have had the same argument reiterated that the pot of money is fixed and this would eat into it. However, by having such a mechanism it is not a free-for-all, it is a procedure that would in a certain sense control the numbers and cut across that. The whole purpose of the fund is to meet people's needs. They definitely have a need but because of various experiences in their lives they were excluded from seeking redress before now, or may have chosen not to do so owing to the horrendous experiences that other people had. I agree with the points being made by Deputy Seán Crowe that this will regulate matters. It is worthy in the sense that it is a half-way house and should be considered as a step towards more inclusion without provoking a free for all.

See this speech in context