Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

This Bill removes the power of the Residential Institutions Redress Board to consider applications made on or after 17 September 2011. It also requires the board to advertise this fact at least six weeks before the effective date in Iris Oifigiúil, two Irish daily newspapers and two UK daily newspapers.

The redress board was established under the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002 to make financial awards to assist in the recovery of certain persons who as children were abused while resident in certain institutions in the State and who have or have had injuries that are consistent with that abuse. The original closing date for the receipt of applications was 15 December 2005, that is, three years after the establishment of the board. However, subsection 8(2) of the 2002 Act allows the board to extend the period for receipt of an application in exceptional circumstances, while subsection 8(3) requires the board to extend the period when it is satisfied that an applicant was under a legal disability.

It is now over eight and half years since the board was established and five and half years after the initial closing date. The 2002 Act provides that when the Minister is satisfied, after consultation with the chairman of the redress board, that the board has completed the performance of its functions, he can make an order to dissolve the board, following a positive motion by each House of the Oireachtas. It is necessary to amend the 2002 legislation to provide for a final date for the receipt of late applications, to facilitate the winding-up of the redress board.

The work of the redress board is a cornerstone of the response to the appalling and shocking reality of abuse suffered by so many of our citizens who as children were resident in the scheduled residential institutions. The establishment of the board afforded the abuse victims an opportunity to receive fair and reasonable financial compensation for the abuses they suffered as children, without recourse to the courts system. Making awards on an ex gratia basis, involving no finding of fault or declaration of liability, the redress board requires a much lower burden of proof than would have been required in court. The arrangements put in place reflected the moral and societal duty to pay compensation to those injured. The procedures adopted by the board reflect its duty to ensure that hearings are conducted as informally as is possible having regard to all the circumstances.

To qualify for an award, an applicant must prove his-her identity and establish to the board's satisfaction that he-she was resident in a scheduled institution while under 18 and that he-she was injured while so resident and the injury is consistent with any abuse that is alleged to have occurred while so resident. The redress board commenced making awards in May 2003 and has processed over 14,600 cases, resulting in over 13,700 awards to date. Awards are made by the board in accordance with the framework set out in Towards Redress and Recovery, the report of the independent compensation advisory committee which advised on the appropriate levels of compensation. Awards are determined by the board having regard to the severity of the abuse and the severity of physical and psychological injury and loss of opportunity resulting from the abuse. The resultant weightings produce an overall assessment which the board reviews to ensure that it is reasonable in all the circumstances for the particular applicant. The amount of redress payable is then determined according to the redress bands.

The redress board is chaired by Mr. Justice Esmond Smyth and its other ten members are drawn from the legal and medical professions. The board is wholly independent in the performance of its functions. Independent legal advice is available to applicants and the vast majority chose to avail of this. It is open to each applicant to accept or reject an award made by the board and the review committee provides an appeal mechanism by which an applicant can seek to have his-her award reviewed. The review committee, which is chaired by the Honourable Mr. Justice Frank Murphy, can uphold, increase or decrease the amount of the award.

Of the 13,720 awards made to date, 78% were made following settlements with a further 19% made following hearings. The remaining 3% were made following reviews by the residential institutions review committee under the independent appeals mechanism, to which I have just referred. Applicants may reject awards. To date 13 people out of over 13,700 have rejected their awards. Where an applicant does not accept an award, they retain the option to pursue any legal avenue which may be open to them.

The Government is satisfied that every reasonable effort has been made to advise potential applicants of their right to redress and that it is now time to move towards winding up the board. By the end of June 2011, the board had received a total of 15,173 applications and had finalised 14,645 cases. Of these, 13,720 have resulted in awards being made by the board, with the remaining 925 either being refused, withdrawn or resulting in no award. In terms of the late applications, that is, those received after 15 December 2005, a total of 1,540 have been received by the board at the end of June 2011. Of these 725 have been allowed and the board has a further 559 to adjudicate on. In all, between original and late applications, the board has just over 1,000 applications to finalise. By stipulating a final cut-off for receipt of late applications of 16 September 2011, it will be possible to finalise the workload remaining for the board and to plan its orderly wind-down.

I believe that the redress board has fulfilled its functions. It has operated independently and with certainty for applicants. In keeping with its statutory duty, the board undertook an extensive advertising campaign up to the end of 2005. It utilised press advertising as well as television and radio advertising and held information days and distributed leaflets and pamphlets to the network of Irish societies in the UK. In total, the board placed 1,492 advertisements since it was established.

This Bill requires the board to undertake further press advertising to advise the public of the closing date for receipt of late applications. In tandem with this, the survivor group network, the Irish societies and the embassies are being asked to alert any relevant contacts known to them. The publication of the Ryan report in 2009 and the Murphy commission reports, most recently on the Cloyne Diocese, have also ensured that the redress board retains a high public profile.

The overall cost of the redress scheme had been estimated to reach €l.l billion and actual expenditure on the scheme and associated litigation reached €1.05 billion at the end of 2010. This figure includes some €836 million in awards made by the board and €158 million in associated medical and legal costs. The average value of the awards made is some €63,000. As the end of 2010, some 36% of awards made attracted awards of up to €50,000, 49% attracted awards of between €50,000 and €100,000, 13% attracted awards of between €100,000 and €150,000 while the remaining 2% of awards attracted awards of between €150,000 and €300,000.

The response to residential institutional abuse also involved the establishment of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse which was tasked with investigating the causes, nature and extent of the abuse. The publication of the Ryan report in 2009, as I said at the time, "shocked a nation that thought it had got beyond being shocked". The litany and scale of the abuse recounted by anguished voices caused us all, as a people, to be ashamed and to apologise to those whose childhoods were stolen and who in many instances, could not live full lives as adults.

The commission's conclusions were unequivocal and damning, detailing the failures of those who managed the institutions and the failure of the State to protect its vulnerable children. Its report justified the decision to establish the Residential Institutions Redress Board to compensate survivors outside of the court system. The report's findings are an indictment on us all and it is our duty to ensure that the lessons of the past are learned and that such abuse is never repeated.

There is a need for all involved to accept their role and responsibility. It is in this context that the Government has called on the congregations to meet the costs of the response to residential institutional abuse on an equal basis with the taxpayer. This is a fair and reasonable approach. The final cost of the response is estimated to be approximately €1.36 billion. However, the offers from the 18 congregations to date have fallen far short of the approximately €680 million needed to meet half of these costs. The Government believes that the transfer of school property currently owned by the congregations offers an opportunity to reach this target. I have invited the congregations to meet me later this week to discuss these matters. The management bodies of other institutions included within the redress scheme have also been approached to make a contribution towards the costs involved. Their potential to similarly transfer school infrastructure will be explored.

The Government is continuing to address the needs of survivors of institutional abuse. Increased funding has been provided to the Health Service Executive for the national counselling service set up to help victims cope with their experiences. My Department is continuing to fund the Origins family tracing service, operated by Barnardos, which assists former residents wishing to trace their families of origin.

I recently announced that the Government is proceeding with legislation to provide for the establishment of the residential institutions statutory fund to support the needs of survivors of residential institutional abuse. Such a fund was unanimously endorsed by this House in the period following the publication of the Ryan report. The fund will utilise €110 million of the contributions - essentially the cash element - offered by the congregations and will target support at survivors' needs, such as counselling services, psychological support services and mental health services, and such health and personal social services, educational services and housing services as the fund may determine. The fund will also promote understanding of the effects of abuse on former residents among service providers and will evaluate the effectiveness of the approved services in meeting the needs of former residents. To date, €21.05 million of the contributions pledged have been received and lodged in a special interest bearing account in the Central Bank pending the establishment of the statutory fund. I hope to return to the House in the autumn in respect of the residential institutions fund Bill.

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of all those involved in the operation of the Residential Institutions Redress Board and I commend the Bill to the House.