Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

69. To ask the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth to provide an update on negotiations with relevant religious orders and pharmaceutical companies regarding their contributions to the mother and baby institutions payment scheme; how many meetings have been held to date; what actions he intends to take outside of these discussions to ensure religious orders and pharmaceutical companies contribute; when he expects the States redress scheme to open; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54561/23]

Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This question is about negotiations with the various religious orders and, if any, the negotiations with pharmaceutical companies about their contributions to the mother and baby institutions payment scheme. How many meetings have been held to date? What actions do the Minister and his Department intend to take outside these discussions to ensure that religious orders and pharmaceutical companies contribute to the scheme? When does the Minister expect the redress scheme to open?

Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes made significant findings about the failings of the State and religious bodies, which together ran mother and baby and county home institutions. The Government believes that all relevant parties have a collective responsibility to respond to the legacy of these institutions.

In May, the Government approved my proposal to appoint Ms Sheila Nunan to act on my behalf in leading negotiations with religious bodies that had a historical involvement with mother and baby institutions. This was with a view to securing a financial contribution towards the cost of the payment scheme and it followed on from a series of meetings I held with the congregations and other religious bodies. These negotiations, while ongoing, are being treated as confidential. A full report will be provided to the Government once the negotiations are concluded.

With respect to the pharmaceutical companies, following the publication of the commission of investigation’s final report, I had a meeting with Glaxo Smith Kline, GSK, the lead entity in many trials, and conveyed my view that all relevant parties have a moral and ethical obligation to take appropriate action in response to the report. I urged them to consider the failures laid bare in the commission’s report and respond appropriately, given their corporate responsibilities. Ultimately, it is a matter for GSK to decide what action it takes or remedy it offers, having considered the commission’s findings. I am aware that GSK has since publicised arrangements for persons wishing to access personal information which may be contained in their corporate archives.

Intensive work is under way to establish the administrative systems and structures required to open the payment scheme to applications. The conclusion of this work is an absolute priority for me and the Department and my officials are working to ensure the scheme can open in quarter 1 of 2024.

Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reason I raise this issue is that Sheila Nunan was appointed in July. Is that correct?. Six months have passed since then. It is frustrating for people who are listening to this, especially as the religious orders played such a role. I accept that it was ultimately the responsibility of the State and that is key. However, it is difficult to even think that someone had to be appointed to handle the negotiations. They have to acknowledge their role. They have acknowledged their role by publicly apologising and the same is the case for the pharmaceutical companies.

Can we look at other models? There was a similar situation in Australia, where the possibility of amending the legislation on the Statute of Limitations there was looked at to force the religious organisations to accept that they would spend years in court and that, ultimately, people would be owed money. We need to look at something like that. I accept that person was appointed in good faith and, as a former trade union official, I accept it is not always possible to talk publicly about negotiations, but we are six months down the road and we have not heard anything about what is happening. Are any figures on the table? Is money being discussed? It is important for people to know. I apologise to An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach for going over time.

Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I recognise the frustration about not much being said publicly about this. However, as the Deputy alluded to, it is a negotiation process and any negotiation process where little bits of information slip out during the process is one that parties will not engage with. I am not providing a blow-by-blow account because it is the best way to get a resolution, although I recognise that leads to frustration. This process will end and a report on the offers of a contribution that have been made will then come before the Government. At that point, the Government will have to make a determination on whether we see the offers as acceptable. If we do not, we will have to consider our options. However, it is appropriate that we allow the negotiations to take place and see what offers come in, while reserving the right to take other actions if we are dissatisfied.

Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that the Minister would potentially consider other options and the fact that a report is coming. That is information people were not aware of to date.

What is the timeframe? Negotiations cannot go on indefinitely, even with the best will in the world on both sides. It is unfair. The cynical part of me would ask whether the religious organisations are just pushing out the clock in this. That does not even get into the fact that the pharmaceutical companies are not included. Has the Government looked at other ways, or will it when the report comes back on the religious organisations, to ultimately force those two groups to pay up what they should for the horrific human rights abuses they inflicted on people?

On the timeframe, the Minister said he is working to get the administrative part up and running. I will also give the Minister the opportunity to reiterate to survivors that they do not need legal assistance. We have spoken about this before. It seems to keep coming up. We are still getting worried phone calls. Will the Minister take the opportunity to say to people that they do not need to go down that road? They can also contact representatives' offices.

Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for highlighting that point. No legal advice is required and no former resident needs to hire a solicitor to access the scheme. Certain companies are advertising it. It is not necessary. When the scheme opens, there will be an extensive public information campaign. We will let people know when it is open and how to apply. Assistance and advice will be available for people through the office set up to give advice to people on how to apply.

Regarding the other points the Deputy raised, I hope we will have a clear and final conclusion to the negotiations in the first half of next year. I am engaging with Ms Nunan and getting updates on how the negotiations are going. However, in agreement with her, my sense is that it is best not to drip-feed pieces of information out. There will be a conclusion and a report, which will be brought to the Government. The Government will make a final determination about whether what is being offered is acceptable. As I said before, if it is not acceptable, the Government will have to consider its options.