Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 33: To ask the Minister for Education and Science if she is satisfied with the response of her Department in respect of former victims of child abuse who have taken their cases for adjudication before the courts; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13752/06]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Litigation against my Department relating to child abuse arises in two contexts. The first relates to former residents of institutions who suffered abuse while in those institutions. Former residents have been entitled to make an application to the Residential Institutions Redress Board for an award in recognition of the abuse they suffered. A person can decide not to apply to the redress board or to reject an award made by the board and to pursue a claim before the courts.

The second area of litigation relates to day school cases where the Department may be named along with the patrons or boards of management of schools. In this context it should be noted that the education system has long been structured on the basis that schools are run by local management in whom legal responsibility is vested and that with the exception of pay issues, the Department does not employ teachers.

Since 1 September 2005, all personal injury claims against the Minister for Education and Science, including those in respect of child abuse, have been delegated by the Government to the State Claims Agency, SCA. A consequence of this is that the SCA has responsibility for deciding whether cases should be contested or settled. In accordance with a service protocol agreed between the Department and the SCA, the agency informs my Department of relevant information and seeks its views. It is, however, the SCA rather than the Minister or Department which determines how these cases are conducted. In making those decisions, the SCA decides whether to dispute liability or the amount of damages, or both, on a case by case basis. My views, which are conveyed to the SCA, also have regard to the individual circumstances of thecase.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to the most recent case, that of Louise O'Keeffe, has the Minister expressed a view to the State Claims Agency at this point and, if so, what was that view? How many cases are before the Department at present from the State Claims Agency on which the Minister's views are being sought? Does she have figures on the number of cases the Department of Education and Science is defending in respect of child abuse?

In the beginning of March the case of Connellan v St. Joseph's in Kilkenny was heard. The Department of Education and Science and other Departments were co-defendants. What is the Minister's policy on bringing a case to conclusion, trying to settle it early and admitting liability where liability is clear? The Department appears at present to have a policy of defending cases to the very end. I am not advocating that the Minister should give in on every case because obviously she has a duty to protect the taxpayer. However, there are cases where abuse certainly occurred, although the liability can be an issue in some of them. Like the Louise O'Keeffe case, the victims of Donal Dunne have not had the opportunity to go before the redress board. Can the Minister envisage a way of facilitating these people?

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Louise O'Keeffe case is the subject of the next question. It is a particularly sad case in view of the suffering Louise experienced as a young child in her school. The legal advisers of the Department of Education and Science will meet the State Claims Agency this week about that case. The agency will subsequently meet Louise O'Keeffe's solicitors. I have indicated to the agency that this case should be treated sympathetically. The agency had already indicated that it would deal with the case in a sensitive and measured way and the Taoiseach has indicated in the House that he would like it to be dealt with sympathetically.

The claimant lost the case in court and it is general policy that the costs are paid accordingly. It was pursued in this case so the courts could make a determination on it. Each case is dealt with separately and is determined on a case by case basis. The Department's legal advisers will meet the State Claims Agency which will then make its determination on how to proceed. However, I will ask the agency, before it proceeds to determine, to come back to the Department to seek our views on its suggested course of action on this case.

Different cases are being dealt with in different ways. The State Claims Agency has responsibility for determining whether cases should be contested or settled, having regard to the circumstances of each case. It deals with each case individually. What was interesting in the O'Keeffe case was that the High Court ruled that the school manager is responsible for the direct governance of the school. There was precedent for this in previous cases as well. A number of cases are ongoing in the courts at present but the number has been substantially reduced in recent years, largely because we have begun to make much greater provision in the special needs area. However, there are a number of cases before the courts.

The cases are treated separately. The Deputy referred to another case where the State did not contest liability but introduced rebuttal evidence when fresh allegations were made before the court. The State Claims Agency is considering an appeal in that case but has not yet determined what it will do. With regard to day school cases, how they are treated depends on whether the State has liability. The State was found liable for abuse in day schools in a particular case where seven cases of sex abuse occurred in a national school in the midlands in the early 1970s. That was because it was discovered late last year by the Department that officials had been aware of concerns at the time and that the person in question had been moved from one school to another. A settlement was reached apportioning particular amounts to the other bodies that were responsible.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The courts have found that the board of management is the employer. We have not changed anything, since many of these incidents of abuse have occurred, in terms of the management of schools. Does the Minister intend to make any changes to ensure that this type of abuse cannot happen in future?

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Obviously we intend to ensure that every child is protected and that there are proper child protection policies in schools. The vetting procedures, which we will discuss later, are in place in the schools. People should have due regard for the people who have unsupervised access to children, be they volunteers or employees, in the school setting. I do not intend to change the management structure of the schools but it is always important to ensure that boards of management are properly trained, aware of their legal obligations and keep child protection to the fore in all the policies they implement.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 34: To ask the Minister for Education and Science the State's intentions on seeking legal costs from a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13577/06]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I sympathise greatly with Ms O'Keeffe for the suffering that she was put through by her primary school teacher in the 1970s. I have heard her speak in recent weeks and it is clear that she is still in a great deal of pain. There is no doubt that a great wrong that was done to her when she was just a little girl and that this naturally still hurts her deeply. However, while I have great sympathy on a personal level for the awful things that happened to her, the court has found that the State was not responsible for this.

The education system has long been structured on the basis that our schools are run by local management — in the form of the school manager as it was in the 1970s or, nowadays, the board of management — in whom legal responsibility is vested. The judge, therefore, found that the Department of Education and Science had no legal responsibility in this case. Indeed, the judge, in finding against Ms O'Keeffe, commented that had the proceedings been brought against the diocese, the action may well have had a more favourable outcome. This is very much in line with previous case law which supports the view that with the exception of pay issues, the Minister does not employ teachers. While I genuinely sympathise with Ms O'Keeffe for the suffering she endured, the court has found that the State was not liable for this.

The State has a responsibility to the taxpayer to fight cases where it knows it has a strong defence. In that context, it is also natural to seek an order for costs when it successfully defends a case. However, when it comes to pursuing costs, in cases such as this the State is anxious to balance the need to be responsible to the taxpayer with a strong desire to treat people like Ms O'Keeffe in a humane and sensitive manner. In this regard, Deputies will be aware that the State Claims Agency has stressed that it deals with each case individually and that its approach in this case will be measured and sensitive.

While the agency has responsibility for deciding on the issue of costs in this case, it will consult my Department before making a decision. I have asked my Department to convey my view to the agency that the issue of costs should be dealt with sympathetically. Before a final decision on this matter can be taken by the State Claims Agency, it will have to engage with the solicitors for the plaintiff so that it can take full account of her circumstances. I understand arrangements for that process are being put into place.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have been told that the State Claims Agency will meet the legal representatives of Louise O'Keeffe on Friday. Can the Minister be more precise on the instructions or guidance she has given the agency with regard to treating her sympathetically? She is still extremely worried about what that meeting means and whether there is a danger she may lose her house and security for her children. Will the Minister be more specific on what "treating her sympathetically" means?

Can the Minister also tell us how soon Louise O'Keeffe will know the outcome of this process? Her concern is that Friday's meeting may be only the first of a number of meetings. She is anxious to know what will happen as soon as possible. She is distressed about the matter and wants closure on it.

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand that Ms O'Keeffe is distressed about it. Tomorrow, the State Claims Agency will meet the representatives from my Department and on Friday will meet Ms O'Keeffe's legal advisers and should be able to put forward a proposal then. I will suggest that the agency revert to my Department before implementing a decision in order to get our view on what the decision should be. I will ask my legal advisers to deal with the matter speedily and sympathetically. These are issues that happened long ago and while the State is not liable for what happened to Ms O'Keeffe, I do not want her to be under any further distress.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The State Claims Agency has a duty in terms of the public purse, as does the Minister. The Minister also has a broader duty than the State Claims Agency in terms of dealing with the humanity of the issue, with the human person in this predicament. Does the Minister accept that she has a broader role than the State Claims Agency? I urge her to ensure that it is made clear to the agency that Louise O'Keeffe needs assurance that she will not have costs charged against her or taken from her.

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I reiterate that the Taoiseach made it clear in the House, the State Claims Agency made it clear and I am making it clear that we want the case dealt with sympathetically. At this stage, the best thing possible for Ms O'Keeffe is that it not be dragged out further. I welcome the fact that both meetings will take place this week. I would like to see a quick conclusion to the matter and I will put that view across to those involved.