Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)

Is cúis áthais dom teacht anseo i bhur measc agus páirt a ghlacadh ins an díospóireacht an-thábhachtach seo mar ionadaí ón Rialtas. Déanaim comhgairdeas le gach duine a labhair go croíúil, go cruinn agus go beacht ar an ábhar.

I thank those who contributed to this debate. While I may not agree with the sentiments expressed by some Members of the Opposition, I accept Senators have spoken with the needs of the survivors of abuse at heart. I pay tribute to those I had the privilege to hear. Their contributions were open, heartfelt, sincere, humane and committed.

The Government regards the need to bring some closure to survivors regarding their past experiences as being the primary factor in shaping its policy in this area. Its programme of measures began in May 1999, with the Taoiseach's apology to all victims of abuse on behalf of the people. These measures, comprising a nation-wide counselling service, a commission to inquire into child abuse and a redress board, remain in place. It is worth repeating that the only part of the Government's initiative in this area that is under review is the investigation committee of the commission to inquire into child abuse. The commission's other committee – the confidential committee – is working well and has heard over 700 witnesses.

All other parts of the Government's response continue to operate. In particular, the redress board, which provides financial awards to survivors of abuse, is fully operational and is processing 30 claims per week. Some 97% of the offers made by the board have been accepted by claimants, so it is clearly working well. It is worth noting that it is open to claimants to appeal awards to an independent appeals board.

Fortunately, I have been a Member of Oireachtas Éireann for 21 years. Over the last decade, many tribunals of inquiry have been established to inquire into many aspects of public life. It is worth comparing these with the work of the Hutton inquiry in the United Kingdom. Everybody asked and summonsed to appear before the Hutton inquiry did so, some in the absence of legal advisers, without obstruction or legal impediment. They submitted their reports and gave evidence without difficulty. The inquiry report will be accepted by the Government, the public and the media and will stand as the record, the de facto position. By contrast, in this country, the tribunals of inquiry that have been established have become complex and legal quagmires. They have been impeded and obstructed to the extent that even servants of the State who are paid by taxpayers are not prepared to give evidence before them. There is something wrong with that.