Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Minister for Education and Science if he will estimate the cost to the Exchequer of the redress scheme established to compensate victims of abuse in residential institutions; when he expects the redress board to conclude it's work; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44131/08]

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The primary function of the redress board is to provide financial redress to persons who, as children, were abused while resident in industrial schools, reformatories or other institutions subject to State regulation or inspection. The closing date for receipt of applications was 15 December 2005 by which time the board had received 14,513 applications. The board has received a total of 14,549 applications (including 36 late applications accepted up to 31 December 2007).

Up to 3 November 2008, 12,280 applications were processed by the board. The overall average award from the inception of the scheme is €64,892. Awards are determined by the board having regard to the severity of the abuse, the severity of physical and psychological injury and the loss of opportunity resulting from the abuse. The level of awards range in value from €0 to €300,000.

Expenditure associated with the redress board to end 2007 was €745,591,963. Based on the total number of applications received, the final cost of the scheme may be in the region of €1.1 billion, including legal and administration costs. Any estimate of the final cost of the scheme at this point will be tentative as the board has more than 2,000 applications to process and the level of award provided in these remaining cases may vary substantially.

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 very 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.

The Government in establishing the scheme 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. With more than 2,000 cases yet to be processed, it is difficult to say at this point when the board will complete its work. However, from experience, as a board generally clears between 200 to 220 cases per month, and is likely to have completed processing claims towards the end of 2009. While the processing of awards should be completed in 2009, there will be some residual work to be completed by the board in 2010.

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister has informed the House that there are 2,000 cases pending. This figure does not take into account the potential impact of the Supreme Court decision in respect of the O'Neill judgment in the High Court last month. If the High Court judgment stands — I do not wish to speculate on the outcome in this regard — the cost involved will be substantially higher because a cohort people previously unable to claim, those between 18 and 21 years at the time the abuse occurred — will be able to claim.

If that happens the current total of €1.1 billion, for which the State will have to pick up the tab, will escalate further. In this context, will the Minister consider reopening the outrageous deal entered into by this State in 2002 with the religious orders whereby effectively they are handing the State €128 million, a substantial amount of which has yet to be paid, despite the fact that the total cost of the scheme is in excess of €1 billion? I put it to the Minister that if we lose in the Supreme Court, he should consider reopening the indemnity deal which his party put in place in 2002.

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not going to speculate on the court case. The Attorney General and the Government are confident of winning that case.

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Government decided to appeal it?

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have appealed it. The appeal has been lodged. We did so on the basis that we are confident, on foot of the Attorney General's advice, we have an excellent case and we are not satisfied with the result of the court decision. As in other cases, the appropriate course is to allow the appeals process to continue. We will continue to process the 2,000 applications as part of the scheme and as soon as the appeal judgment is issued, we will then review any consequences — if there are any — on foot of that in regard to other matters that might apply.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have two comments and two questions. The Minister complained earlier about the high volume of questions his Department is obliged to answer. If he examined the reply he just offered, he would note he was asked two questions to which he provided approximately 15 answers. That is his own fault in this case. He should parse and analyse the reply that was written for him. He was asked about how much the scheme will cost and when the board will complete its work. In answering it he made a mountain out of a molehill. We could get through far more questions if he answered the question he was specifically asked.

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy will realise that I am given an allocated time to reply.

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is given an allocated answer.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know, but he is adopting the same strategy that was adopted by his predecessor, which is to filibuster to the maximum in the time allocated.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is right.

Jimmy Devins (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister has given the information on this.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is the Department policy. My point relates to the scale of the deal. Will the Minister agree that the Department of Finance recommended to his predecessor, Deputy Woods, that the religious orders should, in principle, bear approximately half of the cost of the restitution? That information is in the public domain. What is now emerging is that they will bear less than 20% of the real cost, if it is €1.1 billion, and, as the Minister rightly said, we cannot sign off on that figure. Irrespective of what the Supreme Court judgment may be, is it not time to revisit the whole compensation deal in the light of the unprecedented scale of the cost of the scheme, which we failed to anticipate at the time?

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are two aspects to this. One is that we have to await the outcome of decision on the appeal. The second aspect is that a definitive contract and deal was done between the church and State. As far as I am concerned, legally, that is the binding agreement that has been made. From reading the newspapers, I understand that is an indication from the church that it would not be prepared to revisit this issue. I have no detailed knowledge of the background to the agreement; I am dealing with its actuality and am quite satisfied the church is complying very much with that it and that great progress has been made.

There has been a transfer of property to the value of €66 million, a cash contribution of €52 million instead of €41.14 million and counselling as part of the service to the value of €10,000 has been provided. The church has met by and large with all the requirements.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is time for a final supplementary.

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand there are two properties for which the deeds cannot be found and they may be compensated for by way of cash.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Minister to have regard to the Chair.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It will amount to only 10% of the total cost.

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister agree that what is important is that this matter would be brought to a conclusion very quickly on the basis that the persons who were referred to in the High Court judgment last month by Mr. Justice O'Neill are well into their 70s? Is it not right that this issue should be quickly resolved? Will the Minister in discussions with the law officer in his Department and with the Attorney General's office impress upon those law officers and upon the courts the necessity to bring this matter to a conclusion for all our sakes?

Batt O'Keeffe (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The important point is that we would all like this matter to come to a quick conclusion. The last thing I want to be seen to do is to be in any way interfering with the courts. They are a separate entity, they do their own business, but we would like the appeal to be heard at the earliest possible date.