Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 5, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:

“Report on operation of Scheme

2.(1) The Minister shall cause a report on the operation of the Scheme to be commenced on the day that is six months after the establishment day and to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas as soon as practicable after its completion.

(2) A report under this section shall consider the following matters:

(a) whether and to what extent persons engaged in the management, administration or operation of relevant institutions should be permitted or required to contribute to the cost of making payments under this Act;

(b) whether the 180 days residence requirement provided for in section 13(1) and (4) should be amended or repealed;

(c) whether the Scheme should be extended so as to make provision for recognising persons who were boarded out as children as relevant persons;

(d) whether there is a need to provide for additional institutions in Schedule 1;

(e) whether the requirement imposed on applicants by section 27(3) should be removed;

(f) whether the duration of the Scheme should be extended;

(g) whether payment rates under the Scheme should be increased.”.

I acknowledge that it was Deputy Sherlock who originally proposed this amendment on Committee Stage. This redress scheme is a deeply insulting and disrespectful response to the unimaginable pain and suffering endured by thousands of people at the hands of the State and church. It is a shameful and intentionally inadequate response to the scale and magnitude of State-sanctioned abuse, violence and injustices perpetuated against girls and women, victims of rape and incest, disabled people and people of colour. While no amount of money can ever compensate the survivors, this is about recognition and the State fully and completely owning up to its past. Instead, the Government is clearly and loudly declaring that only the trauma of some survivors matters and only some violations will be recognised.

Mother and baby homes, institutions and county homes were involved in criminality and extreme human rights violations. They targeted abuse at some of the most vulnerable people in society. The Government's Bill intentionally excludes 40% of survivors, dismissing the pain and trauma of whole categories of people with arbitrary and cruel thresholds and zero understanding of trauma and transitional justice.

Unfortunately, this amendment is the only way we can legitimately raise the most egregious aspects of this so-called redress scheme. The substantial changes needed to remove the massive exclusions and denial of justice cannot be discussed. The Government is using its money message, as the expansion of the scheme would have a budgetary implication, to prevent even the consideration of these essential matters.

The scheme should include those who suffered forced family separation, people who were boarded out and people subjected to illegal medical trials. The survivors, with whom the Minister consulted strongly, advocated for the scheme to recognise all survivors. Numerous UN human rights officials also called for this and all Members have received hundreds of emails from ordinary Irish people on this matter. Despite all of that, the Minister is determinedly and wilfully telling up to 40% of survivors that their horrific experiences and the breach of their human rights are not sufficient or valid enough to be acknowledged in the scheme.

Compounding this is the fact that we cannot talk directly about these issues today. I cannot propose an amendment for the scheme to include children who spent less than six months in a mother and baby home or county home. I cannot propose an amendment that recognises the horrendous crimes of forced family separation or illegal adoption. I cannot propose an amendment to ensure the scheme covers approximately 5,000 people who were boarded out as children. I cannot propose an amendment to acknowledge the children illegally experimented on by pharmaceutical companies facilitated by the State and religious orders. I cannot propose an amendment to provide redress for mixed-race survivors who endured particular abuse and discrimination. The only relevant amendment I can propose is to seek a report on the scheme, after six months, that would consider these fundamental flaws. I emphasise that again. After years of campaigning by survivors and advocates, after evidence from human rights experts and after thousands of ordinary people contacted us, the only thing I and other Opposition Deputies can do today is ask the Minister to consider a report. There are no words for how much this Government has failed survivors and now the rules of the House are failing them.

The number and categories of survivors being excluded from the scheme are deliberate. The Minister, the Government and senior officials in both the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform are all aware of these issues. They know what the OAK report's recommendations from survivors were, what UN bodies and officials have told us and what the Irish people want and they do not care. The denial of justice and disregard of survivors are startling. The Minister is directly responsible for crafting and leading this process, but every Government backbencher and Independent who quietly votes with the Government shares culpability for this injustice.

This amendment is the only instrument we have to discuss any of these issues. It is a gesture, a last call for some decency. Anyone who has engaged with survivors recently, or seen their posts on social media, will know they are tired. Survivors know the State will ultimately win. They have been worn down, so well done to the Minister and the Department as it seems that was the goal from the beginning. I am genuinely struggling to find the words to describe how wrong this is, to sum up how this redress scheme is more insulting than nothing and that it is just a new form of abuse, and I cannot even propose a meaningful amendment.

There is an opportunity to show some sort of decorum and understanding by letting this amendment pass. We know the Minister will ignore the report in any case but perhaps it will give his successor a basis to bring in a new and proper redress scheme. At this stage, all I can hope for is a new Government that will be willing to stand up for survivors and finally give them something more than empty promises.

See this speech in context