Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

1. In page 5, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following: “Report on operation of Scheme

2.(1) The Minister shall produce a report which will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas 24 months after the Scheme has commenced.

(2) A report under this section shall consider the following matters:

(a) whether and to what extent persons engaged in the management, administration or operation of relevant institutions should be permitted or required to contribute to the cost of making payments under this Act;

(b) whether the 180 days residence requirement provided for in section 18(1) and (4) should be amended or repealed;

(c) whether the Scheme should be extended so as to make provision for recognising persons who were boarded out as children as relevant persons;

(d) whether there is a need to provide for additional institutions in Schedule 1;

(e) whether the requirement imposed on applicants by section 32(3) should be removed;

(f) whether the duration of the Scheme should be extended;

(g) whether payment rates under the Scheme should be increased;

(h) whether assistance or support such as reparations could be offered to those who were subject to drug trials;

(i) whether funds from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in Ireland, could be allocated or reallocated to provide assistance, support or reparations to persons mentioned in this Act.”.

I thank the Minister for his presence here today. I thank the Members who are in the Chamber to discuss the Bill. In particular, I welcome those who have tuned in, those in the Gallery and those who are listening today. I was very conscious over the last few days - given that this will be the final process in this legislation as it goes through both Houses, although it may go back before the Dáil - that I was gathering my thoughts. I intend to use this amendment to outline most of my concerns in relation to this Bill. They are relevant and pertinent to the wide-ranging issues covered in this amendment, which was crafted by me and will cover the issues I think are particularly important, although there are many important aspects.

As I prepared for today and gathered my thoughts, I thought that I would like to put all this in a box somewhere, although I do not want to throw it out. I was reminded of how long all of this has gone on for. I want to say at the very outset that we get hundreds and hundreds of emails, but there was an email that came in this week and many Members will have received it. We spoke about this matter in relation to the hate crime legislation, but it also relates to this Bill. The writer of the email, who spoke on behalf of himself and his wife who was in institutional care, reminded us all of the prayer that we open the Seanad with every day. Many people can say a prayer by rote every day and half-get it. Today, I took the time to ask the assistant clerk to send me that prayer, and I will read it into the record again, because it is relevant, as he said, to our deliberations and our considerations in this House. This prayer is said as part of Standing Orders. It states:

Direct, we beseech Thee, O Lord, our actions by Thy holy inspirations and carry them on by Thy gracious assistance; that every word and work of ours may always begin from Thee, and by Thee be happily ended; through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

That is the prayer that we recite here and it is part of our Standing Orders. It reminded me of a piece that was in The Irish Times by the former Archdeacon, Gordon Linney, who is a former rector of Glenageary parish in Dún Laoghaire. He has a piece in The Irish Times every Saturday called "Thinking Anew". He recited and made reference to a very famous hymn, which I particularly like, by Richard Gillard, which states:

We are pilgrims on a journey

Fellow travelers on the road

We are here to help each other

Walk the mile and bear the load.

That is it. Some may that is all a bit trite or a bit religious. However, I do not have any difficulty with it; I have great admiration for the religious. I want to make that point here and now. Many of them have been much maligned in the discussions about institutional care and in discussions in relation to their role. I can say as someone who has travelled that road and who has interfaced with religious people of all sides of opinion that there are many good people there. I would not like to think that somehow they would be lost in all this debate, because I think it is important that they, too, are recognised. Many of them, too, were victims in relation to institutional upbringings and institutional regimes. Many of them had no options and were not given the supports. Remember, the State itself did not stand up to the plate for them on many occasions. Yes, there were evil people there who did things in the name of the Church and in the name of their belief. They were misguided and they were wrong and they should be called out for that. Yet, there were many good people too. It is really important that I open up with that.

My amendment deals with a number of issues to which the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, has responded before in my absence. I read his response, so I know what he may or may not say. I know he has put review mechanisms into the Bill and I acknowledge that too. However, it is critically important before I go any further in relation to the issues to acknowledge the important work that was done by the joint Oireachtas committee on children. I want to acknowledge that this work was done by a number of Deputies and Senators. I note in particular Senators Clonan, McGreehan, O'Sullivan, Ruane and Seery Kearney, some of whom are here with us today. I do not knock the work. I think they did a great job. I read every line of the transcript in relation to this process. More importantly, I was very interested in the Minister's strong recommendations.

As someone who sits on two joint Oireachtas committees, I know that when we do pre-legislative scrutiny of legislation, we have a lot of debate and ongoing discussions and we ultimately make recommendations. I always come to the House and make a strong and robust case that these recommendations are to be put across the line. That has not altogether been the case. I do not know why and I will not make any judgment call on that, but I am disappointed that we have not seen that robust defence and articulation of the strong recommendations. I went back and viewed the video tapes and the conversations in this committee. There was a lot of work, passion, conviction, shared experience and shared knowledge and expectation.There was a lot of expectation created by this committee's report for people outside of the organisation who expected redress. That has not shone through in this legislation process. Perhaps that is for another day and a review of parliamentary democracy and how we do our parliamentary business. The strong recommendations are interesting, as are the foreword remarks by the Cathaoirleach of the committee, Deputy Kathleen Funchion. I want to acknowledge the enormous work, commitment and dedication she has given to this issue.

Some of the key recommendations include that the six month residency requirement for children be removed. Anyone who was resident in the institution should be entitled to payment regardless of the time spent there. Those boarded out should be included in the scheme. This is part of my amendment. I am deeply concerned about those who were boarded out of these institutions, many illegally. There was no parental consent. It was questionable who was in loco parentis as these children were farmed out. I have had many of these people in my office. I have had many of them come into the restaurant in Leinster House and break bread and share their experiences with me and some of my staff in my office. It is harrowing what has happened to them. Yet today if we pass this legislation we are doing nothing for them. We are not doing anything for these people who were farmed out at seven, eight and nine years of age. I particularly think of a cohort of men that came from Galway and one man who happened to be here on his 75th birthday. I said to him that I was surprised that it was his birthday. He told me that they did not really mark their birthdays in relation to this. The boarding out houses are very much pertinent to and part of this amendment-----