Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Minister for Education and Science if her Department has an estimate of the full costs that will be incurred by the Residential Institutions Redress Board; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10722/07]

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

The Residential Institutions Redress Board was established under statute in 2002 to provide financial redress to victims of child abuse in residential institutions in order to assist them in their recovery and enhance the quality of the remainder of their lives.

Expenditure associated with the redress board to the end of 2006 was approximately €564 million. At that time, 7,290 applications out of a total of 14,540 received were processed by the board. The average award to date is approximately €70,000 with awards ranging up to €300,000. At this point it is estimated that a provision of another €600 million may be required to meet the remaining award, administration and legal costs of the board. This would bring the total cost of the scheme to an estimated €1.16 billion. I should emphasise, however, that this revised estimate, like earlier estimates, is tentative as the board had some 7,250 outstanding applications to process at the end of 2006 and the level of award in these remaining cases may vary substantially. The final cost of the scheme will not be known until the board has completed its work, which may take up to a further three years.

The previous estimate of up to €1.3 billion for the total cost of the scheme, which was included in the 2005 appropriation accounts, was based on the number of applications received by the December 2005 deadline, an average award of €76,000 at end 2005, and legal and administration costs of approximately 20%. The average award has fallen to €70,000 since then, but there is no guarantee that this will continue.

The Comptroller and Auditor General has stated that any estimate of the ultimate liability arising from the redress scheme is based on assumptions which are impossible to validate and should therefore be treated in a cautionary way. While earlier estimates of the cost of the scheme, made by my Department, were lower than the current estimate, the scheme is without precedent and nobody could have predicted with certainty how many applications there would be.

Of course, the final cost of the redress scheme must be viewed in the context of the Government's acceptance of its responsibilities in apologising to victims of abuse and the substantial costs that would have been incurred had no such scheme been established, with cases processed in the normal manner through the courts. The scheme enables victims to obtain compensation for their injuries without having to face the trauma of pursuing their cases in court.

In establishing the scheme, the Government considered it was the just and humane thing to do as the State was responsible for children that were placed in institutions by the courts and other public bodies.

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

In view of what the Minister has said, and given the hugely escalated costs above what was originally anticipated, does she believe that the Government was wrong, at that time, to impose a cap on the responsibility of the religious institutions? Should the Government have insisted on some kind of joint responsibility on a percentage basis, rather than a cap, in view of how much larger the State's contribution has been? Does the Minister expect many future court cases in the context of this legislation? When does she expect the full complement of properties to be transferred to the State under the indemnity deal? Most important, will the Minister and her Department revisit the total washing of hands concerning the abuse that was perpetrated in the past on day students in schools, and which may well be continuing now? We all know of cases where people have tried to get some kind of justice but got nowhere. They can be faced with enormous costs. I have raised one such case with the Minister on a number of occasions.

In the context of the current situation, parents may suspect that abuse is going on, yet they may feel their concerns are not eliciting a serious response from the school's board of management and possibly from the patron. Will the Department of Education and Science take any responsibility in such cases? It makes a mockery of the apology that was given on foot of everything we have found out about the past, if the State body — in this case, the Department of Education and Science, which runs the schools and pays teachers — completely washes it hands of anything that has happened or could possibly happen in day schools.

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

As regards the indemnity agreement, it should be made clear that the State had a duty to make amends for the abuse of children placed in institutions. The State was involved in placing those children in institutions and obviously had a responsibility to make amends. Nonetheless, it was considered that the congregations should make a contribution towards that. That is why the negotiations were entered into between the Government and the congregations. The Deputy spoke of a possible 50-50 arrangement.

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

As recommended by the Department of Finance.

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

Yes but at the time it was quickly realised that that would not be achieved and that the best deal available was the €128 million. The amount was agreed with the Department of Finance.

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

In secret and without the Attorney General's involvement.

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

The reality is that had all of these people gone to court — which it was open to them to do — and sued the State, the State would have had to pay for every single one of them.

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

No. Other people would have been cited in the cases as well.

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

Yes, but the one with the deepest pockets has to pay. In those cases, the State would always be seen as the one with the deepest pockets.

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

How come the State is not paying out for day students?

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Please allow the Minister to continue without interruption.

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

That is the phrase as regards the law.

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

It is not as simple as that.

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

The Deputy asked about property and cash. It was broken down as follows — cash contributions of €41.14 million; provision of counselling services, €10 million; and property transfers of €76.86 million. The cash and counselling contributions of €51.14 million have been received in full. The property transfers of €66 million and cash in lieu of property of €10.7 million — which amounts to €76.7 million — have also been agreed. The balance of €160,000 is to be settled shortly. Some properties are still held up with the commissioners for charitable bequests whose consent is required before the transfer of title can be effected. We are anxious to get our hands on that property quickly, once the legal issues have been dealt with, because a number of schools are awaiting the transfer. There is no difficulty with it, however. I wish to clarify also that the value assigned to those properties is the value at the time of the agreement, not the current value. Therefore, it is not as if we are going to get any less property just because it has not been transferred to date.

There is a significant difference between the State's responsibility concerning day cases and residential cases. Children placed in industrial schools and other institutions were taken away from their families, who had responsibility for care and protection, and the family unit was not available to them. When children did not have that care and protection the State had a responsibility to ensure they would be adequately cared for in State care. The State had to make amends when children were abused in those institutions.

The day care school system is quite different because the education system is structured on the basis that schools are run by local management which has legal responsibility and a duty of care for pupils. With the exception of pay issues, the recruitment, appointment, discipline and dismissal of teachers in an individual school is a matter for the board of management. This has been clarified in the courts by three different High Court judges in four separate cases. The responsibility of the State is very different in a day school than in residential care.

Schools have a serious obligation relating to child protection guidelines which have been issued to schools along with training for staff. New teachers are vetted as are other staff working in schools from this year and we are working towards the vetting of existing teachers. The protection of the child is crucial in every school.

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

That is an enormous responsibility for boards of management.

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

The State pays the salaries of teachers in these schools and the Minister will be aware of the case of Fr. Donal Dunne in my constituency. He taught in seven different schools and received references to facilitate his move from one to another. It is clear that by the later stages of this case the Department of Education and Science was aware of the matter and did nothing about it, so I do not understand how the State can wash its hands of such cases. It is very difficult for victims to understand how the State can wash its hands in some cases and accept responsibility in others.

Of the 16 properties transferred to the Minister under the indemnity deal how many had received investment from the Department of Education and Science over the years and does the Minister know the total value of properties being assigned to her Department?

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the State responsibility for day students that stayed overnight? Does the €1.6 billion the Minister mentioned regarding redress include money awarded to date in the courts? How much has the legal profession made in this area?

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

Will the State take even partial responsibility in this matter? Does the Minister not feel that this is an onerous responsibility to lie entirely on the shoulders of a school's voluntary board of management?

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

The figure relating to the indemnity deal was actually €1.16 billion and this is expected to be the total cost, including everything to do with the board and legal costs. I cannot say what investment was made in the properties in question but some were schools that were transferred to the Department.

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

The payment was made twice.

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

Given the level of investment the State made in buildings at the time I suspect very little investment was made in these buildings because in most such cases the religious orders built their own buildings. I do not know the exact answer and will check if the information is available.

Regarding Deputy Crowe's questions, there were a number of criteria that influenced whether the State had a liability relating to an institution including where a child was placed by the courts and where the State had an inspection role.