David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I will start by setting out a number of points I made when the tribunal was first established. Obviously, I will support what is a technical Bill to extend the period during which women may make claims to the end of July. It is welcome that this period is being extended. The fundamental question, though, is why it is being extended. I have spoken to members of the 221+ group and their legal representatives, and their view as to why it is being extended is that very few women have lodged claims. Rather than deal with the substantive and genuine reasons most of these women have not made claims, we will simply extend the period during which they may make a claim. Their view is that, without dealing with the very real issues that were not dealt with and their concerns leading up to the establishment of the tribunal, we are not really making any changes at all.

I have said from the outset that the CervicalCheck survivors deserve compassionate treatment. They have asked from the outset for this process to be non-adversarial, and I think we would all accept that was a very reasonable ask, as were their requests that the State should be prepared to settle rather than contest claims where they are clear-cut and that, where possible, the labs should be pursued separately and the State should not use the survivors to do its work for it.

I also asked at the time of the establishment of the tribunal that no woman or her family be statute-barred from making a claim due to the delays in setting up the tribunal. The Minister said at the time that the chair of the tribunal would have discretion and that it was his view that no woman would be prevented from making a claim. Essentially, however, as the women saw it, they were being asked to take a leap of faith, and that was one of the difficulties. We cannot expect women in these circumstances to take a leap of faith because the Minister himself said it will take some time to rebuild trust. There has to be a cast-iron guarantee that no woman in the 221+ group will be statute-barred from making a claim at the tribunal. Every option, including a return to the tribunal where there is a recurrence, should have been fully explored and put in place. It is important that the tribunal has the confidence of the women and their families.

The Minister and the 221+ group published correspondence exchanged between them just prior to the establishment of the tribunal. The Minister stated in a letter on 8 November 2020:

I strongly believe that proceeding with the final steps necessary to commence a tribunal is the right thing to do. Doing so will enable women and families who are seeking access to the tribunal to proceed with their claims without further delay.

The question is this: has it worked? Have women lodged claims? How many claims have been lodged? How many have been heard? We know how much the tribunal has cost. That should not be the issue, but it has cost more than €2.5 million. It was set up to give women an alternative to the courts system and a less adversarial approach. Hundreds of women had access to the tribunal. As the Minister knows, we cannot get information now - or at least were not able to do so up to last week - because of the cyberattack, but the most recent information I have is that five claims were lodged. Maybe that number has gone up slightly. I do not know. That number suggests that women are voting with their feet and saying to the Minister loudly and clearly that there are problems with this tribunal and that there were problems from the get-go with recurrence, the statute of limitations and whether their legal advisers sought an alternative to the courts system. There is little point in establishing a tribunal for a section of society and for those women who were so badly wronged by the State and so badly let down and who feel genuinely so hurt if it does not have the confidence of the women. That was a problem.

I extend my best wishes to Vicky Phelan. We all know she is in a battle and we all wish her the very best. I also extend my solidarity to all the women affected, as I am sure the Minister and everybody else in the Chamber would. It is our job to make sure we do right by them and that we stand by them and stand with the families. By standing with those families, the Government would set up a tribunal that works for them. Quite clearly, with the figures we have, that does not seem to be the case. While I will support this Bill to extend the deadline for women to make more claims, I am really concerned that so few women have stepped forward.

See this speech in context