Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government committed in the programme for Government to address the issues of thalidomide survivors in Ireland and to compensate them. Two years later, we are still waiting for it to do so. It is hoped the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, will be able to give survivors, the number of whom is reducing, some hope of their issues being addressed. While many people have been waiting since this Government took office two years ago for address of this issue, many others have been waiting the more than 50 years, since they were first affected, for it to be addressed.

The drug, introduced in 1959, was supposedly safe, non-toxic, had no side affects and was an effective treatment of morning sickness, nausea and sleeplessness. Later that year, questions around how unsafe it was first emerged and deformities in foetuses and infants were highlighted in many reports up to 1961, following which many states withdrew the product from Chemie Grünenthal. However, the Irish State did not move as quickly as others and failed to inform mothers of the horrific consequences of their taking thalidomide, including deformed limbs, malformation of the heart, bowel, uterus and gall bladder, shortened life spans, deafness, weakened facial muscles and a range of other health problems.

In 1975, the then Minister for Health, Mr. Brendan Corish, convinced thalidomide victims, many of whom it was believed would not survive beyond their teenage years, to agree a lump sum. However, there are now a number of survivors whose needs we need as a society to address into the future, in particular their medical needs as they grow older.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this important issue for discussion. I tabled this matter in the aftermath of the undeniable progress being made following the Taoiseach's statement on the Magdalen situation. I commend the Taoiseach on his remarks in that regard and on how he has dealt to date with that particular issue. The manner in which that issue has been dealt with has given rise to renewed expectations on behalf of two other groups in Irish society, the victims of symphysiotomy and the 32 thalidomide victims.

I am aware that the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, has taken great interest in this matter, which she has demonstrated in a practical manner down through the years. It is regrettable that the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, has left the Chamber as this issue is being discussed. When in opposition, the Minister indicated a serious level of interest in this matter. Thalidomide survivors are inordinately disappointed with the lack of action in this particular matter on the part of the Minister for Health since taking office.

Quite clearly what they want are medical and social services provided on a statutory basis and adequate compensation. They are conscious of the fact that in other jurisdictions updated schemes of compensation and supports have been put in place, but they have not been put in place here and this flies in the face of the commitment in the programme for Government.

I hope it will be brought to the attention of members of the Cabinet that the Topical Issue system will not work unless we can depend on the responsible Minister coming to the House to answer the questions being tabled. It is the height of effrontery to leave the Chamber at a time when an issue of the significance is being taken.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will pass on the Deputy's remarks to the Ceann Comhairle.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the Minister for Health I wish to say it was because this is directly after an hour and a quarter of questions and the Minister had something else timetabled. I am sure he has not only seen the response but is still very committed to this area. With regard to the previous debate we had on Question Time, it is significant that two Deputies, both from the Opposition, raised the same matter as a Topical Issue.

I am pleased to take this opportunity to outline the Government's position on Irish survivors of thalidomide raised by Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Ó Fearghaíl. The Government recognises that each individual survivor of thalidomide faces challenges. How could we not? In this context, the Government's aim is to address the health and personal social care needs of thalidomide survivors living in Ireland. The Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, has stated he is willing to enter into discussions with the Irish Thalidomide Association and the Irish Thalidomide Survivors Society on the basis of a health care package on a non-statutory basis, which I know is not what they seek; an ex gratia payment having regard to current financial circumstances; and a statement to the Dáil recognising the challenges faced by survivors. I genuinely believe if we get two out of three we will have the basis for engagement.

The current position is that in 2012 the Irish Thalidomide Association publicly announced it had ceased talks with the Government. The association's legal adviser has initiated personal injuries claims against the manufacturer and distributors of the thalidomide drug and the State. The Irish Thalidomide Survivors Society has sought guarantees on other issues, including an independent agency and a statutory health care package to include other aspects of their needs such as housing, heating, transport and clothing. These are outside the remit of the health sector. The Minister requested that the society consider, in good faith, proceeding with a health care protocol. The health care protocol envisaged appointing and training a multidisciplinary team, arranging a multidisciplinary health evaluation, identifying and documenting the health care needs and issues of thalidomide survivors and developing plans to address these needs. The Minister's position remains unchanged.

I would also like to outline for the House the financial supports provided to Irish survivors of thalidomide since 1975, which is in no way to say they are in any way a compensatory issue. The payments made by the State in 1975 to the survivors of thalidomide and their families were made because the State believed then that it was appropriate to make some provision for the survivors. The payments made were substantial and were designed to augment payments made to the survivors by a German foundation. As Deputy Ó Snodaigh correctly pointed out, at that point it was never envisaged that survivors would live into middle age or beyond. There are 32 Irish thalidomide survivors, and each survivor received lump sum payments from a German foundation and the Irish Government in the early 1970s. In 1975, the lump sums paid by the Irish Government ranged from €6,400 to €21,000. In addition, each survivor receives ongoing monthly payments from both the German foundation and the Irish Government. Combining the Irish and German payments, most individuals receive €30,386 per annum or €2,572 per month, tax free. The German and Irish monthly allowance is not reckonable for State benefits and each individual is automatically entitled to a medical card. The Government's response to the plight of thalidomide survivors from 1975 to date has been reasonable and compassionate in its provision of financial and other supports to augment payments made by the German foundation. The Minister's proposals to provide a non-statutory health care package and his offer of meaningful discussions around a financial gesture of goodwill towards survivors of thalidomide represents the Government's commitment in the programme for Government, very much recognising that the 32 people involved face substantial challenges every day of their lives.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Given the earlier debate, I am concerned that only two Deputies, whether Opposition or Government, tabled this matter as a Topical Issue because I presume we all received the same reminder about the issue.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Deputies are not as telepathically tuned in as the Government.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a pity.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do not have the resources of the Fine Gael press office.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are dealing with the question of 32 survivors who struggle with everyday life. The amount mentioned by the Minister of State that they receive from the German foundation eases the burden but does not lift it.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is an acknowledgement of the role the State has played since 1975, but given the fact they face substantial new challenges because of middle age and old age the victims have reasserted their call for the issue to be dealt with, as the programme for Government stated it would be.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have all received correspondence from two extraordinary women, Maggie Woods from the Irish Thalidomide Association and Carmel Daly McDonnell from the Irish Thalidomide Survivors Society. The Irish Thalidomide Survivors Society has taken a more conciliatory approach, but it reports to us it has not seen much sign of conciliation from the Minister. Responses are not more readily forthcoming as a result of their conciliatory approach.

It is widely reported that in the aftermath of the first discussion and the first statement by the Taoiseach on the Magdalen issue that the Minister of State went to a Labour Party Parliamentary Party meeting and indicated her very strong dissatisfaction. She motivated many of her backbench colleagues to jump up and down and insist something meaningful be done for the survivors of the Magdalen laundries. I plead with her today to do the same thing for these 32 men and women who suffer on a daily basis as a result of the State having failed them for more than 50 years. The cost of doing justice will be minimal compared to the overall cost of State expenditure. We owe it to them. We have a moral obligation to do something for them. The Minister of State has the opportunity to do something about it and I trust her to do it.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I cannot possibly comment on what is reported in newspapers, as the Deputy knows. This is not an issue which has gone away. We need to continue to try to find a resolution to it. I will do my very best on this issue.