Dáil debates

Wednesday, 3 December 2014

12:20 pm

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Deputy quoted from the letter, but the State is not looking the other way. Actually, in response to claims made in the House by many Deputies, the State has responded by asking a justice of the court to look at the nature and scale of what was involved and set out a scheme to allow for prompt payment, depending on the nature and scale of the procedure women had to go through, while keeping the right and entitlement of every individual to have her case taken to court. Justice is determined by the courts on some occasions. I recently met Louise O'Keeffe who had her case taken to the High Court and the Supreme Court and who eventually, after 16 years, had had a determination made by the European court. The rights and entitlements of the women who went through the symphysiotomy procedure are not infringed by the scheme set out by the justice.

It is their opportunity, right and option to apply and have a prompt payment made to them relating to the scale of the procedure they went through. I do not know what purpose would be served by the extension of the waiver for three years if they do not lose their right to take their case to court if they wish. They know about the scheme and have voted on it in some cases. Two groups accepted it and a majority of the other one does not, which is its right, but the scale of payments are there and they do not lose their right or entitlement to have their case taken to court if they wish. I hope that they make a determination personally as to whether to apply under the scheme or take a longer and more adversarial route to court.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.