Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:

“recognises that:— many individuals suffered horrific abuse when, as children, they were placed in industrial schools and other residential settings;

— successive Governments have put strategies in place to support former residents, through the provision of services including counselling, educational supports, etc.;

— many former residents continue to have ongoing needs; and

— Caranua (the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board) is an independent statutory body, established for the purpose of utilising contributions totalling €110 million from religious congregations being made available to Caranua to enable it to meet the needs of former residents;acknowledges:— the work being undertaken by Caranua to support former residents;

— that, to date, some €60 million has been spent by Caranua on supports to former residents and that some 4,000 individuals have received such support;

— that Caranua has expended some £8 million on supports to former residents residing in the United Kingdom;

— that decisions of Caranua may be appealed to the independent appeals officer appointed under section 21 of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Act 2012;

— that the outcome of a consultative process, inviting submissions on the draft terms of reference for a review of eligibility to apply to Caranua, will be published shortly;

— that in 2016 Caranua, in response to calls to do so from former residents, expanded the range of approved services it could support, simplified the applications process and introduced personal limits; and

— that under the provisions of section 30(1) of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Act 2012, Caranua’s costs, including all administrative costs, are charged on the National Treasury Management Agency investment account into which funds contributed by religious congregations are placed;notes that:— the Government has recently noted the Minister for Education and Skills’ intention to appoint a new board for Caranua, and that letters of appointment will be issuing this week;

— the provisions of section 43 of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Act 2012, which relate to the funding of the proposed National Children’s Hospital, will only apply if the fund receives more funding over and above the €110 million which has been committed;

— to engage in negotiations between the Office of Public Works (OPW) and the Department of Education and Skills is not possible under current legislation; and

— the building previously occupied by Caranua and the building that will shortly be occupied by Caranua are not owned by the OPW, meaning that rent is payable and that Caranua, in accordance with its legislation, must meet these accommodation costs; andcalls on the Government to:— complete the review of eligibility in summer 2017;

— require that Caranua provides regular statistics to the Department of Education and Skills and the public on waiting times for processing and communicating decisions;

— request Caranua to provide a greater level of face to face engagement with survivors-applicants, particularly after the organisation moves into new office accommodation which will be more suitable for this activity;

— require Caranua to review the current customer charter, in consultation with survivors, ensuring that the principles of equity, consistency and transparency are at the heart of its activities; and

— endeavour to ensure that Caranua will have the full €110 million in funding made available to it at the earliest opportunity.”

I thank Deputies for raising this issue. I know it is an issue of continuing concern and that Deputy Clare Daly recently had a Bill before the House. There is no doubt the backdrop to how Caranua came to be established is the appalling experience of Irish citizens at the hands of residential institutions. The findings of the Ryan tribunal are chilling when one re-reads them in regard to some of the experiences, in particular the sexual abuse that was endemic in some institutions, as well as the physical and emotional abuse and the failures of the Department of Education itself. No one diminishes the hurt and damage that many people have experienced and which led to the establishment of Caranua.

That said, we have to recognise that Caranua was established by this House and the legislative framework under which it operates is one set by this House. I think it has been pursuing in good faith the efforts under that mandate to support people who had been made awards under the residential institutions procedures. That legislation obviously classified the areas within which services were to be provided, including mental health counselling, psychological support services, health and personal social services, educational services and housing support services. There is an obligation on Caranua to ensure that applications comply with the purposes for which the legislation was established and that it uses its resources in a fair way to try to accommodate all those who may yet apply to it. As Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan said, some people may still not have applied and it is important the resources are used in such a way that it meets all of those needs as best it can.

I am the first to recognise there have been many bad experiences among people who have gone to Caranua. When it was first established, there were a lot of teething problems given it was an organisation getting up and running. While Deputy Catherine Connolly said the number of applications, which was 2,500, should not have created problems, it did undoubtedly create problems as Caranua was trying to get itself established and get a team in place that could deal with those applications in an effective way. Nonetheless, while mistakes have been made, I think the board has continued to try to improve and it has tried to extend services. There is an appeals mechanism in place and being used and 165 appeals were received in 2016. That appeals mechanism has delivered good outcomes for some of those who made an appeal. There is also redress to the Ombudsman for those who are not satisfied with the treatment they received.

Like other Deputies, I have met some of the victims involved and I have heard the complaints that have been set out. In the process of deciding to have a review, we have had a response to the terms of reference and we will shortly initiate that review.

There are genuine concerns that need to be addressed. We need to move to having a stronger charter. The support available to people needs to be clearer and the procedures need to be the best that they can be. Eligibility should be extended if that is deemed appropriate. It is right to continually look at this organisation to ensure it steps up to good practice.

The Deputies portrayed Caranua as if it was trying to protect its money for some selfish reason, to prevent money becoming available and to put obstacles in the way of people. I do not think that represents what it was trying to do. There have been individual experiences and undoubtedly the Deputies have heard of individual experiences where people came away very dissatisfied. Deputies have acknowledged that some people may not have the ease of dealing with bureaucracy and as a result of their experience they feel they have been abused again by the way in which a bureaucracy deals.

Nonetheless we have established requirements on how money is spent and that has to be observed by any board that is dealing with public money. For example, one of the Deputies adverted to the requirement to use tax-registered providers. That is a pretty general provision to ensure that where we are expending public money, those who would be providing the service would meet certain minimum requirements in terms of compliance with tax rules and so on.

A number of Deputies raised the question of rent. Yesterday in the House I made the point that Caranua's board is independent and has to arrange its own accommodation and it must meet the costs for that accommodation from its own resources. That is in accordance with the legislation that was established.

I apologise to Deputy Connolly if I inadvertently did not refer to the fact that if it enters into a contract, it will need ministerial approval. That is the case. Many people felt it was unfair that the board would meet its expenses for accommodation from within its own resources but that is what the House provided for. That is how the board must conduct its affairs. It has to provide that resource; it is not a separate resource. That is under the legislation.

A number of Deputies spoke about clients who applied from the UK. While there may be issues in this regard, Caranua has published guidelines for former residents living in the UK. It has had meetings and outreach events in the UK. In 2016 it held an outreach event in Manchester and two meetings with Irish welfare organisations and survivor support groups there. I recognise, as Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan said, that some groups may not have been reached. If there are access points that we should bring to the attention of Caranua, I am sure it will pursue those opportunities. I will draw Caranua's attention to the debate that we have had here and some of the issues that have been raised. I think there is a genuine attempt to improve and respond to these needs.

We opened applications for a new board back in January. It was organised under the Public Appointments Service, PAS. This week I received Government approval for the final appointment. There were some delays. Some of those offered positions did not accept them initially even though they had applied and that caused a delay. I am now in a position to appoint a full board. It is a mixture of people with experience on the board and new applicants who went through the PAS process, as Deputies would expect.

Clearly the legislation places a cap on the money. Based on the exchanges, it is clear that people felt it was unfair of Caranua to put a cap on amounts paid out to individuals at a stage when people had continuing needs. However, at this stage more than €60 million has been expended and more than 4,000 people have been supported. That is from a total application number of 5,800. There is an expectation that considerably more applications may yet come and will fall to be met from the funds. Caranua is making an effort to ensure that people who apply later than others will not be disadvantaged in getting support. That requires the board to try to balance the needs of those who have come forward already and made applications to it and those who may not yet have come forward to make their applications. The review will need to be mindful of that.

I thank the Deputies. I acknowledge this is an issue of continuing concern and always will be. The Deputies' motion, however, is unduly negative in its tone. I accept there is need for improvement and I will be demanding such improvement from the organisation as it sets out its new strategic plan for the years ahead. That is what will undoubtedly emerge from the review. There have been bad experiences and mistakes have been made. We want this organisation to support people. It needs to be recognised that it is providing very valuable support to many people.

See this speech in context