Frances Black (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 75:

In page 20, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“(3) (a) Where the determination includes a determination that the applicant is a relevant person, and where an applicant has provided testimony, or any oral, written, or documentary evidence of, their lived experiences of their time spent in a relevant institution, a notification undersubsection (1)shall further include a statement of recognition of those lived experiences.

(b) A statement of recognition under this subsection may include, but not be limited to, recognition of lived experiences of —

(i) forced family separation,

(ii) racial discrimination and abuse, and

(iii) non-consensual or illegal medical experimentation.”.

This amendment will create a mechanism whereby the Government will have to provide a statement of recognition of survivors' lived experiences when they apply to the scheme. It is about providing for a more holistic form of redress. Our amendments have called for additional payments in recognition of those who experienced specific harms in the institutions, including for racial discrimination and forced family separation. In addition to the financial aspect of recognition, however, we need a more holistic, multifaceted and rounded form of recognition that involves the State saying it acknowledges and accepts that this happened to the person and that that was profoundly wrong.

The amendment is broad in that it will allow the Government discretion to decide the exact form of the statement. I ask the Minister to consider introducing an amendment to this effect before the Bill leaves the Seanad, if not by accepting our proposals than through his own amendment on Report Stage. This is building on the sentiments expressed repeatedly by Senator Higgins during the earlier Committee Stage sessions regarding the total absence of recognition of specific harms done in the institutions.The general payments in this scheme recognise only time spent in the institution - literally the number of days and nothing else. We proposed many amendments to recognise specific harms, such as forced family separation or racial abuse, through the making of additional payments for these specific harms. The Minister declined to accept these proposals. In the absence of actual financial recognition of the additional harms experienced by people in the institutions - not just the length of time they stayed – we need, at the very least, a formal, verbal recognition of some kind.

While the Minister has spoken at length about a non-adversarial approach and not requiring survivors to supply evidence of additional harms experienced, many survivors will share their testimonies of those harms regardless. It is reasonable to expect that survivors will try to supply or attach testimony of various experiences they had when applying for redress. It is horrible to think that under the scheme, their testimony will simply be ignored and possibly not responded to. Imagine telling an official about your worst experience of abuse at the hands of the State and then receiving no response. It is quite traumatic. Our amendments attempt to ensure that some kind of response will be made. While it might be inadequate and might not involve financial redress, it will at least be better than silence.