Victor Boyhan (Independent)

I wished to indicate in respect of an earlier amendment, which I would like to speak on briefly.

When I looked at the debate in the Dáil and the commentary in the stenographers’ report, the reasons for the ruling out of order of amendments were missing. As the Leas-Chathaoirleach will know, it is provided for that Deputies can make a request of the Ceann Comhairle in that regard. It did not happen there for some reason, but it is going to happen here under my watch. It is important that the Leas-Chathaoirleach read out the memo she has been provided, or should have been provided with, stating why amendments have been ruled out of order. When we look back on these things, we need to have the record straight. It is not a willingness on our part, or necessarily on the part of the Minister, to frustrate it. Rather, it is a process. Amendments were ruled out of order. I ask the Leas-Chathaoirleach to read out the reasons.

While I am on my feet, I will touch on what Senator Stephenson said. I support her in her work on this amendment. It is important, particularly as regards the issue of professional advocacy. I note the Minister’s commentary on Sage Advocacy, which is doing amazing work and I have every hope for it. This needs to be put on a clear basis, though. When Senator Stephenson talks about the professional supports and agencies, we need to know that. The Minister might shine a bit of light on this matter later.

The special advocate has limited functions. I sought to put the role of the special advocate on a statutory footing, but that does not seem to meet with the approval of the Government. That sends out a negative signal about what is a long-term commitment.

I wish to take Members’ through a few things. The consultation on survivors of institutional abuse and the themes and issues addressed by the survivor consultation group made a substantial number of recommendations.It is about having confidence in counselling, support and advocacy. It is about it being professional and appropriate to the special sets of circumstances and needs. That is important.

While I am on my feet, I wish to acknowledge the great work of our library research team. I say this every time, but the team did an extensive Bills Digest on this Bill and shone a light on many aspects that never came out in the debate. I have taken the trouble to download all of the links to this, since external people cannot see it, and it is going up on a particular website on Monday, I believe. It raises a number of issues.

I just want to speak in support of the amendment. We need to be very careful in what we are doing here today. At the end of the day, we cannot keep giving excuses. This has gone on for years and years. Child sex abuse is a devastating crime. It shatters the lives of the victims and causes deep and lasting pain. This afternoon, we in these Houses have an opportunity to do something about it and to respond to their needs and requests. It is all very well to talk about the cost to the Exchequer but the current Administration has been in power for a long time in one guise or another. Nothing new is coming down the tracks here. Either people are committed or not. There are budgetary processes and other cases. I want some sort of assurance. Actually, it is not me, but the people who are outside listening in or who, when we send out the link to this video tonight and put it out into the media, will want to hear that. Forget this tone deaf stuff. They want to be able to say that we have a Minister and parliamentarians from all sides of this House who are committed to putting in place the appropriate professional supports that they can have confidence in and need. This is not an interim gap and most of these people involved are over 60 years of age. There are not many of them around but they need the comforts and support for their lives. We must never forget that it is not all about abuse at the hands of the religious and lay people. The State had oversight of all of this and it, too, has a responsibility. That is the thing that somehow people are forgetting in this great debate. It is incumbent on the State and on us as legislators to put measures in place and to reassure people. This is not going away. Next week, we will have the Spiritans. In a few weeks' time, we will have St. John Ambulance Ireland back in Leinster House. We have a number of religious orders, also. A lot of things are going on and there are a lot of lay organisations, such as the scout movement. I could list them on and on.

The system we put in place is important. The title of "special advocate for survivors of institutional abuse" gives a sense that, but it does not appear to be a long-term strategy for the Government to keep this office in place, so I want to hear about that from the Minister. The current advocate is Patricia Carey. It is not about the person, it is about the office, but she has done amazing work, travelled overseas, met people in Liverpool, Manchester and London and has linked them into services. It is important that someone has trust, can talk to people in confidence and can link them in. It goes back to what Senator Stephenson said about appropriate interventions and supports.

I ask the Minister for some concrete suggestions as well as guarantees that these two offices - this includes Sage Advocacy, which the Minister fully endorses, and I agree with her in that regard, as it does great work - have the remit to provide professional care and support. I looked at Roderic O'Gorman's press release on gov.iethis morning. With great fanfare, he and the then Government announced the special advocate for survivors, but I received a letter yesterday from someone who had contacted it and been told that the matter was outside the service's remit, so the service could not help that person. What is this grand job of special advocate for survivors of institutional abuse, which is funded by the State? I know it is within the remit of the Department of children as opposed to the Department of education but we are not in a vacuum in here. There is an all-of-Government approach to all of these issues.

What we need to put in place are not promises and hopes. Rather, we need to give these people what they are entitled to. There should be a fully resourced - I use the word "resourced" in a broad sense - and multifunctional service that interacts with the HSE and other State agencies. In this way, people can be guaranteed that this thing is going to be in place. I am referring to these two critical pieces of support infrastructure, namely, Sage Advocacy - Damian O'Farrell has done amazing work in this area and I know him very well - and the special advocate, Patricia Carey. How can we be sure that those offices will be continuously empowered to give professional services to the people who need them the most?