Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies who have passionately supported the motion. The Minister suggested this was an unduly negative motion. My reaction is to point out that is a continuation of the terrible attitude that has always in applied in this country. It is a patronising attitude that immediately seeks to isolate the group or person who have highlighted complaints. I have endeavoured, as have my colleagues, to make this as positive as possible. There were calls for the resignation of the chief executive. We endeavoured not to go down that route for the moment and rather to make it as applicable to as many people in the Dáil as we could.

Fianna Fáil has failed in this regard. I have supported many Fianna Fáil motions. I do not think the Fianna Fáil Members have read my motion or the Independents 4 Change motion, which is a general motion calling for a review not only of the criteria but of the operations of the scheme.

The negativity attributed to me by the Minister does not arise from me. It arises from complaints from the survivors who are enduring abuse in our name in the Dáil. The Minister referred to teething problems. This organisation is old enough to have molars and it still cannot cope. It has put a stop on processing of applications from 15. Those involved cannot answer the telephone or meet clients directly. The organisation is acting in contravention of the legislation. Section 7 of the relevant Act puts an onus on the board to act in accordance with the principles of equity, consistency and transparency. I have outlined in detail how the board is failing to do that. The board has introduced contradictory schemes. It is treating survivors in a manner that is discriminatory. Some are confined to a limit while others are not. Some are confined by way of priority while others are not.

The Minister and his Department have been at the least disingenuous in their responses to questions on whether they have given permission for rent. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, who is sitting beside the Minister, has come to the House and backed up the Minster. I do not want to go down the route of personalising anything but the Minister has an obligation under the legislation to give consent to every contract, including a lease. Will the Minister confirm whether he has given it? Will the Minister confirm whether he gave it for the extension of the lease entered into by the Office of Public Works?

Caranua appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts. Arising from what I heard there and from what survivors told me, my colleagues and I tabled this motion. The purpose was not to be negative but to ensure oversight of the board primarily on the part of the Minister and his Department. We need a proper board. I have pointed out that the most outspoken member of the board has not been reappointed. Since then, it has been pointed out to me that the diversity of the board has not been considered and that a person of mixed race has not been re-appointed.

Numerous issues have not been addressed by either the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, or the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee. It appals me. This is why we end up with inquiries. The Minister has a responsibility. He should assume that responsibility. Deputy Mattie McGrath put it in a nutshell when he asked the Minister to take control. Control amounts to having oversight and giving crystal clear answers. Did the Minister give permission for all the contracts? I know the Minister did not give permission for the fitting out of new premises. They were fitted out without consent and paid for out of the funds. Is the Minister standing over that situation? The organisation is going into premises at a rent of €272,000 approximately per year from a fund that is in place for survivors.

Reference was made to a mix-up over the hospitals. Deputy Byrne from Fianna Fáil might read the legislation. He might also read the minutes that noted the serious concern of the board in respect of whether money would be left for the hospital. The matter was to be clarified by the Minister. I am glad the Minister is clarifying today that the money will not be going to the hospital. The amount will be anything up to €110 million. What has the Minister not clarified? What about the interest that he was asked about by other Deputies? Is that going into a fund for the hospital? Will it go into this fund? Even at this late stage, I appeal to Fianna Fáil Members to read the motion and withdraw their amendment. For once, let us stand together for those who need our voice to be heard in this Chamber.

See this speech in context