Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the engagement by the Minister, and I know he engaged with Senators, particularly regarding the NDAs and the amendments that will brought forward accordingly. I welcome that. That engagement was important. The second change that is being brought in, related to the private records and ensuring that they are protected, preserved and that no harm comes to them, is obviously an important amendment. It is something that has been highlighted. Again, I commend the Minister, having engaged with those who were concerned, for bringing that forward.

I want to go back to an issue both myself and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle raised last week when we discussed this Bill in more detail. Being new in this role, I feel very much obliged to raise this having met so many of the survivors particularly in the last few weeks, and more so given that we are in the dying days of this Dáil. I met and put on the record last week the case of Michael Grant whom I met. He was in Temple Hill. He has not unwell, was not sick and did not need hospital care yet Temple Hill in Blackrock is excluded from the mother and baby institutions payment scheme because it is deemed a hospital. I have no idea why it is deemed a hospital. Seemingly, it was notorious for adoptions to the US. His birth mother had paid a £100 adoption fee and a £5 clothing fee and she paid those fees at 5 shillings a week for four years until his adoption became legal in 1954. How would someone be paying that kind of money to a hospital? It makes no sense. I am not as au fait with the other institutions but for the one that has been brought to my attention more recently, and that just happens to be Temple Hill, there is a serious question mark over its exclusion based on the fact that children were advertised in newspapers, as was Michael Grant, and adopted and sent to America. I cannot explain to Michael Grant why he, as an adoptee, is being treated differently from other survivors. I certainly cannot explain to him why Temple Hill would be deemed a hospital when his birth mother was paying an adoption fee and fees to keep him there, and she paid those fees for four long years. It makes no sense to me at all. I appeal to the Minister in the dying days of this Government that he look at those four institutions that have been excluded. I use Temple Hill as an example because, as I said, I met with Michael Grant and his daughter last week. The Minister may perhaps explain the hospital element because I do not understand it.

Lastly, I refer to the underspend of €158 million in this scheme. We know applications have been slow and maybe that is understandable because it is only open since March. More people will apply and that is good and well and fine. However, that is a lot of money. The €100 million being brought forward for next year, unless the applications rise significantly next year, will not be spent. I do not believe it will be spent. That gives us now an opportunity to look at those excluded. Again, I use Temple Hill as an example but I cannot understand how a building from which babies were adopted for money via advertisements can be deemed a hospital. I do not understand that and I do not believe it is correct. I do not care what kind of a building they were in, if they were adopted via an advertisement in a newspaper, all survivors are more than entitled to access that recognition and respect, which is basically what the payment scheme is. It is not about the money. It was never about the money for any of these people. As I said, being new in this role I would not have met many survivors before coming into it and I feel obliged to raise that. There is money there. In the remaining days and weeks of this Dáil, it should at least be said this will be looked at again. The money is there and the cases are there. It would mean a lot to the survivors if it were said this evening that it would be looked at. That is all; just that it will be looked at. What I have heard from the likes of Michael Grant regarding what was deemed a hospital does not make sense. Perhaps the Minister can rationalise and explain that; I certainly cannot. Before this Dáil finishes, will the Minister consider these four institutions and see is there any way around this, given the level of money that is there and that will not be spent? Of the €100 million allocated for next year, is it not better to use that money to give to the survivors rather than have perhaps another underspend next year? I make that ask to the Minister here this evening.

See this speech in context