Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister and the opportunity to contribute to this Bill. I am fully aware the Minister inherited a difficult situation in which many bridges were broken from previous occupants of her position. All those who were abused look to the Minister to confidently rebuild those bridges. I hope she has, through this legislation, set about the initial steps and will continue to address those problems as they arise.

I welcome the Bill and its intention to streamline the system which will allow survivors of abuse to tell their stories. As the Minister said the purpose of the Bill is to implement the main recommendations of the Attorney General and Mr. Justice Ryan to remove an obligation on the investigation committee to conduct full hearings into each and every allegation of abuse. There is concern in regard to that issue. It is important, by whatever mechanism is necessary, that everybody who wants to tell his or her story is given that opportunity. That is the kernel of the bridging of trust that was lacking and that may be built again. It would enable people to look forward to a recognition of the problem and would ensure that it will never happen again despite the delays that have occurred.

For victims of abuse it has been a long time since May 1999, when the Taoiseach apologised to all victims on behalf of the State, until today when we are provided with an opportunity, through this legislation, to assist the commission in completing a comprehensive inquiry into child abuse within a reasonable timeframe and at a reasonable cost to the Exchequer. The Taoiseach's apology, though overdue, was welcome by all those children who were so savagely abused while in the care of the State in religious-run institutions. It was rightly acknowledged that these victims deserve to have their stories heard. In the past they were forgotten by society and were abandoned by all in a most shameful manner. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, established in May 2000, was to hear their stories, to investigate the abuse of children in the institutions and to publish its findings and recommendations.

The victims of past abuse have had shocking and distressing experiences. It was right that they be given the opportunity to tell their stories and tell us how society had failed them. Today many of them are approaching old age. We have heard much from these people about the State-sponsored brutality and barbarity that can exist in a society that fails to be vigilant.

The resignation of Ms Justice Laffoy in September 2003, a direct result of the failure of the Department of Education and Science to engage with her in a proper manner, was the low point in the history of the commission. The work of the commission and its relationship with the Government was brought under the spotlight. What was uncovered exposed the Government to the valid criticism as to how it had failed to support Ms Justice Laffoy in her approach to the investigation of abuse and how persistent mishandling of the situation led directly to her resignation.

In regard to the Government's approach to the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, Ms Justice Laffoy said that since its establishment the commission had never been properly enabled by the Government to fulfil satisfactorily the functions conferred on it by the Oireachtas. This was a damning indictment of the Government that on the one hand established the commission to investigate the dreadful history of abuse and, on the other hand, failed to give the same commission the support it needed to carry out its functions. Ms Justice Laffoy listed the ways in which the Government thwarted the work of the commission.

Compensation for the survivors of abuse was raised in July 2000 but was not dealt with until July 2002. The issue of payment of legal costs for persons involved in the process of the investigation committee was also raised in 2000 but was not dealt with until 2002. The decision to review the commission's mandate effectively stalled the work of the commission by the slow and contradictory way in which its request for additional resources was handled. The issues were clearly matters for the Government to resolve but the delay in dealing with the requests from the commission, regretful, led to the resignation of Ms Justice Laffoy.

There is a conflict of interest within the Department of Education and Science sponsoring an inquiry when the Department is part of what is being investigated. This is a mistake and it is a pity the opportunity to rectify this in the legislation has not been taken. The actions of the Government stymied the work of the commission and delayed proceedings that are vital to the search for truth that so many victims of past abuse seek.

It is vital that Mr. Justice Ryan gets the full co-operation and assistance he needs from the Government and the Department under the Minister's stewardship which, unfortunately, was lacking and withheld from Ms Justice Laffoy. We must ensure the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse is enabled to work for all victims of abuse. From the moment the Taoiseach made the apology in 1999 the victims expected they would have access to the commission and that their stories would be heard.

Following the resignation of Ms Justice Laffoy and the appointment of Mr. Justice Ryan to the commission, a detailed report on the commission was published in January 2004. In this report Mr. Justice Ryan outlined the difficulties that have faced the commission, in particular the problems associated with the work of the investigation committee. Mr. Justice Ryan made a clear statement on the issue of sampling and the random selection of cases that proceed to inquiry. He said that while there was a readiness all around to acknowledge the problems facing the investigating committee, the idea of sampling the cases was seen as an unacceptable continuation of the entitlement of victims of abuse to bring their experiences to the commission via a committee of choice. It has been accepted that this proposal would have deprived a large number of complainants of the opportunity to participate directly in the inquiry process.

On the issue of sampling, the One in Four group realised at an early stage that those involved were beginning to realise that this was never realistic. The then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, admitted that the State was guilty of an error of judgment when it mandated the inquiry to investigate every claim of abuse. It is understandable that the victims are disappointed because the promise given initially was reneged on. I am pleased the Minister has explained the reason for this in her contribution. It will be received positively by many of those who have had concerns.

In his report Mr. Justice Ryan said he believed the commission should have a wider discretion in regard to which cases go to a full hearing. The investigation committee requires the capacity to come to a conclusion in respect of a particular complainant that it would be impractical, unfair and unreasonable to put him or her through the ordeal of being examined and cross-examined in respect of allegations that were of such a nature as to be unlikely ever to be able to ground a finding of abuse. This is naturally a sensitive and difficult issue.

Like every Member of both Houses of the Oireachtas, the Minister has received representations from a person on behalf of the victims of Donal Dunne, the third paragraph of which reads:

Since Justice Laffoy published details of the numbers involved in her Third Interim Report surely the Commission has refined those figures by now and knows exactly what is involved. If changes to the legislation are necessary because the task is too big then it would help if the actual extent of the inquiry under the present legislation were known.

I hope the Minister will give a response to that matter on which all of us have received representations.

Section 4 amends the Act of 2000 removing the obligation on the investigating committee to hear all complaints and gives discretion as to which witnesses it considers should be called for a full hearing. However, to balance this change in legislation, the commission will meet all victims and will conduct interviews with each one before making a decision as to the cases that should progress to a full inquiry. Mr. Justice Ryan in his report of January 2004 was clear that it was not suggesting that the category of complaints, whose allegations of abuse should not proceed to the full inquiry, would be large in number, which is of some concern. This amending legislation cannot indicate the number of cases that might not proceed to the inquiry.

It is important to insist that if this legislation is passed and the discretion is given to the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, it should only be applied in cases where the intention was to use it in the January 2004 report. The chairman of the commission, Mr. Justice Ryan, wrote to 1,712 outstanding complainants asking them whether they wished to proceed with their complaints. We would have a better idea of the scope of what we are dealing with here if we were told how many people had replied confirming that they were continuing. It would also allow us to debate this issue with a clear grasp of the level of complaint. When Fine Gael contacted the commission it informed us that it would not make this information available as replies were still being received. It is a pity that we cannot have the information available today and I ask the Minister to give an undertaking to make it available when all the replies have been received.

We welcome the establishment of an educational finance board with a chairman and eight members. A matter of concern to some groups is that while four representatives will be appointed from the various institutions, we have no indication as to how these will be selected. I would be grateful if the Minister would outline the criteria for selection.

I also welcome the grants system. However, many victims are not interested in money. They want to tell their story to bring some healing to themselves, which is what everybody wants. I appreciate that the Minister has a difficult task in bringing about closure to the matter. Every group and individual to whom we spoke clearly indicated that money is not the issue. While the level of compensation and the grants outlined are welcome, the victims want to tell their stories. When we reach closure on this matter I hope that all those with the capability to tell their story will do so. I look forward to dealing with other matters on Committee Stage.