Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 1 and 15 are proposed to be taken together as they both seek to include a section in the Bill providing for a report on the operation of the scheme. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to be able to accept these amendments as the Bill already provides for a review of the operation of the scheme under section 49. It sets out two separate reviews that will be conducted on the operation of the scheme. One is an interim review that will take place within two years after the second anniversary of the establishment day and one will take place after the completion of the scheme. Section 49 sets out a list of matters that should be considered as part of these reviews and allows for the Minister to specify any additional matter. In addition, section 12 of the Bill provides that the chief deciding officer shall prepare an annual report on the performance of their function and that each annual report will be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. On an annual basis, there will be a reporting and an accounting mechanism before the Houses. There will be the two-year report, which allows for a review of the operation, including whatever the Minister at that stage decides to add in. In addition, there is a report at the end of the five-year period of the scheme.

The development of proposals for this scheme, as we know from going through pre-legislative scrutiny, is a complex task. It has taken us time to get to this point and further time will be needed to bring us to the point of opening of the scheme for applicants. The reviews of the operation of the scheme, which are provided for in section 49, need to be very much anchored in and designed to reflect the operation and current scope of the scheme. That is set out in the Act.

Paragraph (a) in both amendments seem to pertain to the religious congregations. It should be noted in that regard that while negotiations with the congregations are taking place, these are taking place as part of a separate process. I always wanted to be very clear that I did not want the outcome of those negotiations in any way delaying the passing of this legislation. As I outlined when this Bill was introduced in the House, I will be seeking a meaningful contribution from the congregations. However, the payment scheme should not be delayed pending the outcome of that process. For this reason, I do not agree that it is appropriate to incorporate that matter into the review of the scheme. However, as I said, there will be a full process for explaining the outcome of engagements with the religious congregations to the Houses of the Oireachtas once that process has come to an end. Providing updates before that process has ended is not a good way to conduct a negotiation process.

Paragraph (e) in amendment No. 1 and paragraph (k) in amendment No. 15 seek to remove the legal waiver as part of the scheme. I reassure Senators that the legal waiver would only be signed at the point where an applicant accepts an offer of a financial payment under the scheme. Therefore, applicants will know precisely what they are being offered under the scheme prior to signing a waiver.Applicants will be also entitled to financial support to avail of independent legal advice prior to making that decision as provided for under section 43. Until the point where the offer is accepted, an applicant will have the right to pursue a case through the courts. Furthermore, signing a waiver will not mean that survivors cannot discuss their experience of engaging with the scheme, nor will it prevent them from discussing the payment they have received.

Both amendments seek a report on the need to provide for additional institutions. However, it is important to note that section 50 already contains a provision for the insertion of additional institutions in accordance with certain criteria. The amendment also seeks that the report should consider that the scheme be extended to categories of persons, including those who were boarded out, subjected to vaccine trials or experienced racial discrimination.

It is important to understand the overall approach of the scheme to providing redress, and that is one that provides an all-encompassing general payment to eligible applicants in recognition of the time spent and the harsh conditions, emotional abuse and all the other forms of mistreatment, stigma and trauma experienced by residents of mother and baby or county home institutions. This approach was taken in order to facilitate a non-adversarial scheme where applicants would not be required to bring forth evidence of abuse in order to qualify for the scheme. Taking this decision, so that we can deliver a straightforward scheme to survivors, means the scheme does not rely on a process that would provide dedicated payments for particular matters because that would require an individualised assessment. Many of the issues raised in the amendments go beyond the mere circumstances of the mother and baby and county home institutions.

Both amendments place very challenging timeframes on the Minister in terms of the delivery of these detailed reports. I do not believe that is proportionate. In one instance, the report must be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas within six months of the scheme's establishment day. That would be extremely challenging, particularly at that time. Once the scheme is up and running, the key focus should be on making sure it is operating as effectively as possible, we are receiving and processing applications and we are getting both payments and medical cards out to survivors as quickly as possible. That should be the absolute focus of the executive office once the scheme is established. To put a tight requirement on the executive office to write reports about matters that are not within the ambit of the scheme would be counterproductive in many ways.

Senator Higgins spoke about delays in access to records. To be clear, since the Birth Information and Tracing Act was enacted and applications opened in October last year, 8,200 applications have been received, of which 4,400 have been answered with relevant information provided to adoptees, survivors who were residents of mother and baby homes, county homes and other institutions. As I have recognised previously in this House, there have been some delays in regard to delivery of this information, notwithstanding that 4,400 people have received it at this point. The executive office that will be established under this legislation will have its own direct access to the database of the mother and baby home commission. This is the database we voted to save in 2020 when it was at risk of being deleted. The executive will have direct access to that. There will not therefore be delays in processing applications under this particular scheme.

In the context of the wider response and the design of this scheme, which I have spoken about in the Dáil, this scheme is one part of the Government’s response. All of us know from our engagements with survivors and former residents that the concept of redress means different things to different survivors or former residents. For some, the measures we are discussing in this particular scheme, namely, a financial payment and access to health services, are the key priority. For others, the issue is about access to counselling, which will now be provided free of charge for former residents of mother and baby homes and county home institutions through the national counselling service.For others, it is the respectful treatment of the remains of loved ones. For that reason we passed the Institutional Burials Act. This year, we will see the establishment of the agency for Tuam, with work beginning to exhume the remains on that site. For others still, it is the identity information they have been denied for so long. That is why we passed the Birth Information and Tracing Act.

For yet others, it is recognition where what happened in these institutions is understood in our history. That is why we have agreed to proceed with the creation of a records and memorial centre in Sean McDermott Street to act as a site of conscience and a site where what happened in mother and baby and county home institutions and, indeed, in Magdalen laundries and other institutions can be understood. We will also have a dedicated archive. This is run by the National Archives of Ireland and the National Museum of Ireland, where the information will be available. That is where the scheme lies, which is in that overall response.

That is a response that is directed and where the State is attempting across a range of measures to bring forward various types of redress to meet the needs that have been indicated by survivors. We were always very clear and recognised that there is nothing the Government can do can make up for the hurt and for the impact of time spent in mother and baby homes and county home institutions. This scheme is as part of that overall range of measures.