Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I compliment Deputy Jack Chambers on bringing forward this very precise legislation which I have no difficulty in supporting. I know the Minister of State to be very personable, but I, too, am shocked by the content and delivery of his speech and the ferocity with which he has told us that the Government will not be supporting the Bill. If he is listening, I remind him that he spoke about a balance having to be struck between the competing rights of the plaintiff and the defendant. That is precisely what has been missing. There has been no balancing of rights. We have had the powerful against people with no power. The Minister of State's failure to grasp this and the content and manner of delivery of his speech are shocking. I might have misunderstood him at the end of it, but did he say he was bringing forward legislation to be of further assistance? That is what I heard, but perhaps I am wrong. Certainly, if that is the case, it should have been brought forward well before now, not 50 to 60 years after the event.

The apology given by Chemie Grünenthal was miserly, delayed until 2012 and only given to the survivors, those suffering from thalidomide injuries. It was never given to the mothers who had suffered on every level having given birth to children with serious defects, not to mention the guilt felt having taken the medication which was sold on the markets as being safe. Before coming into the House, I took the trouble of looking back to see how the drug had been advertised. It was advertised using images of the happy faces of children and mothers who were repeatedly told that it was a safe drug and encouraged to take it. I am a member of the Committee of Public Accounts and we received an update in the past few months, starting in July. We were told that there were 34 active thalidomide related cases. That figure is included in the State Claims Agency's annual report. All of the people in question were born between 1958 and 1962. It is difficult over 50 years later to convince the Government that it should do the right thing. Throughout his speech the Minister of State talked about the common good, but the Government utterly fails to realise what it is.

We are dealing with a very limited number of people and a very precise Bill that simply seeks to remove one of the obstacles for a group of people who should not have to go to court in the first place. In going to court they should not have to override this obstacle because of the passage of time. In his contribution the Minister of State did nothing to right the situation. There are very few grounds for opposing the legislation.

I will clarify a number of things that we sought to clarify at the Committee of Public Accounts. We were led to believe, perhaps inadvertently, that mediation was ongoing and it was clarified that there had been no mediation meetings for almost two solid years, since 20 December 2016. We know that some people who suffer from thalidomide have received absolutely no benefits; therefore, the argument by Chemie Grünenthal that benefits would be affected and the argument by the Government do not stand up. We know that thalidomide status is being challenged in a number of cases, which just beggars belief. We know that the 1975 agreement was never ruled on in court and it is a very serious issue. It seems that even the advice of the Attorney General at the time was ignored. We know that the agreement in 2012-13, following on from a report which had been commissioned, I think, by the former Minister Mary Harney, recommended the payment of a sum of €62,500. As I understand it, the report was carried out with absolutely no consultation with the families or those suffering from thalidomide.

We know that the State has not been innocent in all of this and that it will be for the courts to decide, but a wiser Government would make decisions in the common good and having learned from all of the debacles of the various health scandals. However, the Government seems to be failing singularly to learn from them. This is a golden opportunity to learn from people suffering from thalidomide because certainly they have an awful lot to teach me and the Dáil about surviving with dignity and going on to lead full lives. That their disability is not classified as a disability for the purposes of this legislation is difficult to accept. It is difficult to accept - this is the third time I have said it - or believe the Minister of State made the speech he has made. Some 50 years on we have learned absolutely nothing. We are forcing people into court. We were told initially at the Committee of Public Accounts, again, perhaps inadvertently, that it was the German company Chemie Grünenthal that was raising the issue of the Statute of Limitations. It was clarified that it was not doing so on it own, that the Government was also making the same argument in this case. I have no idea why mediation has not continued, but it is important to state it has not. I would like to think we have learned, but we have not. I have absolutely no hesitation in supporting this limited legislation and would much prefer to see us discussing a scheme for those who have led the way with dignity and show us how things should be done.

See this speech in context