Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)

I want to read the text of the amendment into the record myself, which is Senator Boyhan's recommendation for amendments that are ruled out of order. I recognise that there is a potential cost on the Exchequer regarding the HAA card rather than the enhanced medical card that is provided to survivors. I would like to speak about the experience of many survivors when they access services using the enhanced medical card. We have heard reports that the card is not recognised. Service providers in the HSE ask people what the card is for and why people are entitled to it. Being asked such questions in a medical setting when one is seeking services could be incredibly retraumatising. It is deeply inappropriate. The Minister can correct me if I am wrong but the HAA is physically easily identifiable in terms of what it represents. Providers know what it is and they do not ask questions. While the amendment might have been ruled out of order I would like to put on the record that we must examine the application of how survivors are using the existing card, namely, the enhanced medical card; how it is working in practise and their experience of using it. Perhaps changes, minor or otherwise, could be put in place without a cost to the Exchequer, be it for educational pieces so that when people working in the services encounter survivors with the card they do so in a trauma-informed way and they do not take any actions that might cause retraumatisation.

My other amendment, which has also been ruled out of order, relates to access to a contributory pension. I included it as a way of recognising the years of unpaid labour in the homes, institutions and communities. In many cases, such labour enabled society and communities to function. I recognise the challenge involved in putting a cost on the Exchequer, but providing a contributory pension would go some way towards acknowledging the years of exploitation and unpaid labour engaged in by the survivors and their parents.