Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to the House and congratulate him on bringing forward this important legislation. It is long overdue. Unfortunately, the 1998 Act did not go far enough. Many people would be behind bars if the obligation to report sexual offences had been included in that Act.

Can the Minister consider the issue of people being informed by a credible source that abuse has taken place in an institution, a family or similar setting? I am sure other Members have received information in such circumstances and I have been in a similar situation myself. The Bill would not have required me to act in that case. Perhaps the Minister could look at that. Reporting by a third party, who has not himself been abused, to a Member of the Oireachtas or a health professional, for example, that he believes abuse is happening or has happened should be covered by the Bill. If this legislation had been in place in 1998, many people who had information would have been prosecuted since then. In the cases I have dealt with, those who came forward with information had often sat on it for many years or even decades. That is most disturbing. When asked to make a report in writing, they refused to do so. As a result, the abuse continued.

Most abuse takes place in the home. A study in the United States has shown that in the case of abuse outside the home, the average number of children abused by a single abuser is 154. In the case of institutional abuse in Ireland, where abusers often have access to children on a 24 hour basis, the number of children abused by a single abuser has been in the thousands, according to the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church. The abuse continued because the people who knew about it, and who should have acted, did not do so because there was no sanction or consequence for them. The case involving Cardinal Brady is recent. If this legislation had been in place since 1998, we know where Cardinal Brady should be now. Abuse continued only because he failed to act.

I accept that a report by a third party who has not been involved in abuse but has a credible belief it took place can be described as hearsay. If I, or anyone else, receives such a report, I am not obliged to act. If we truly believe the report and if we could stop the abuse by our actions, we should put pressure on the person, citing this Bill, to report it. Otherwise the abuse will continue.

On one occasion I received a telephone call from a priest who said he had been asked by his religious order if he had had contact with a public representative in relation to issues within the order. He told me he had received a letter to that effect from his superiors. I asked him for a copy of the letter but he replied that was not possible. I asked if I could see the letter and offered to drive to Cork to look at it. He refused. I said, "There is no letter, is there?", to which he would not reply. There was no letter, but he had credible information. His silence over a long period had no consequence for him. This Bill was not in place and, therefore, he had no reason to act other than to protect children, which one would think any human being would do. We know that in an institution, whether a political party, a religious institution or a company, the whistleblower is the one who suffers. I know the Minister intends to introduce whistleblower legislation.

If this Bill had been on the Statute Book some years ago, many more children would have been saved. People who, out of self interest, refuse to act to protect children would take action if it were in their own interest to do so and if they would go to jail themselves. I am aware that this goes against the law of hearsay. However, if someone goes to a health professional and if he or she has credible information - I accept that this extends the chain and causes difficulties - he or she should be able to offer it to the relevant authorities. I am aware of a number of cases where such credible information was available but where the individual in a position to offer it was not the injured party, namely, the person being abused. I would like the net to be stretched as wide as possible in order to ensure that if people who have information and who do not have the guts to act could offer it to someone who is brave enough to make it known and thereby bring the abuse, which may have been ongoing for some time, to an end. When the legislation is enacted and when people realise the consequences to which it could give rise for them, they will act out of self-interest. For too long, people have remained silent because they were interested in protecting themselves and the positions they hold. This happened at a cost to the children involved.