Victor Boyhan (Independent)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 9, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: "(iii) the payments for educational services and supports shall be subject to a review on an annual basis.".

I, too, welcome every visitor to the Gallery here today. It is great to see them all here. Also, I am conscious there are a lot of people tuning in to this important debate. I also welcome the Minister. I particularly welcome her officials, whom I have engaged with, as I have with the Minister, since we last met in the Seanad.

To provide the context here, we are dealing with the Supports for Survivors of Residential Institutional Abuse Bill 2024. I thank the Library and Research Service for its detailed analysis of this Bill. It clearly has made it easy for us to navigate and it is important we acknowledge it. One great aspect of the Library and Research Service is that it gives us a sort of independence of Government, independence of the Minister's office and a critical and honest assessment of the Bill, and it raises a number of challenges and issues. I have referenced those challenges and issues and I do not intend referencing them today.

I am also conscious today that we need to get the business done. Most of us who contributed last week to many of the key issues and the recurring themes, and I do not intend to go into great length on those. We all know where we stand within it. Suffice it to say, in the context of this amendment, I acknowledge and welcome a statement issued today from the Minister, Deputy Foley, on her commitment in relation to her Department, which, of course, is clearly separate from the Minister, Deputy McEntee's. It raises a number of issues about the commitment to survivors of institutional abuse, mother and baby homes, and the bits that dovetail with her Department as opposed to Deputy McEntee's Department, the Department of Education and Youth.I acknowledge that. It is a measure of the momentum of the Government. Clearly, there has been a lot of media interest in the past few days. The media have engaged strongly with me. There will be a number of media interviews on this issue in the next few days. There is a key focus on the issue, which is not a bad thing.

I, the Cathaoirleach and many other Members of the Seanad received an invitation from the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, relating to the Irish diaspora. We had an opportunity to contribute to the new strategy. The current strategy expires at the end of the year. I was invited to speak and I know others share the concern about the Irish diaspora, particularly in the UK. I opened my comments by saying that while some people left by choice, many left because they had no choice. Many people felt excluded and felt they had to run away. The rich Irish diaspora covers arts, culture, heritage and a load of other issues. Any strategy must also recognise the forgotten Irish, including the undocumented Irish in America and other parts of the world, and why they left. We know that many of them left in very sad circumstances. Their own families many times washed their hands of them. We also know that too many of those who are overseas want to come back. Some may never want to come back. Many were, through no fault of their own, excluded from redress measures.

Recurring themes will, we hope, start today. Although not everything will be addressed in this legislation, we must continue to focus on and retain our commitment to the diaspora and the measures to which the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, has committed. We must remember that we have Irish people - our people - all over the Continent and the world. Many of them, though not all, have been excluded. We must work out a mechanism for the terms of support. I just wanted to say that.

I will go straight to the amendments. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are being taken together in this grouping. I and my colleague, Senator Craughwell, have proposed and seconded one of those two amendments, and I will speak to them together. Amendment No. 1 is to section 6 of the Bill and applies to educational services and supports for residents. This amendment will add a sentence to the Bill. I suggested it the last time the Minister was before the House and I submitted the amendment again to keep a focus on the debate. The amendment proposes on page 9, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: "The payments for educational services and supports shall be subject to review on an annual basis." The Minister made a strong case and committed to engaging with me. I acknowledge that she did that. I appreciate her and her staff. Subsequently, the Minister has proposed amendment No. 2, which I will go into now.

When I spoke to the Minister, she clearly set out the rationale for concerns about an annual review. A year is not a long time. I am by nature a pragmatist. I am a reasonable person and want to achieve results. Quite frankly, I do not care who is the proposer or proponent of successful outcomes. I recognise that the Minister gave thought to the issue. Her suggestion was to submit an amendment to section 6 on educational support and services for residents. The amendment will create a new subsection within section 6 in Part 2 of the Bill, under "supports". She suggests that the Minister, who is Deputy McEntee for her time in office but it will also apply to subsequent Ministers in the future, "shall review the criteria determined under subsection (3)on a regular basis and may amend the criteria following any such review". The review under paragraph (a) of the amendment "shall be carried out not later than 3 years from the date on which the criteria under subsection (3)are first published". The Minister has also clearly indicated that she, as Minister, can review it at any time. She has set in statute a case that I tried to make. We have come to an agreement with the House and with the support of the Minister. She will have an opportunity to respond. There will be a statutory review in three years. That is progress. We did not have that last week. We will have a review but it is still open to the Minister in office at any time to conduct a review in respect of education. I am not a hurler on a ditch and believe in being honest and proactive, and seeing what best we can achieve. This is a reasonable compromise and I am happy, with the consent of the House, to withdraw my amendment in favour of amendment No. 2, proposed by the Minister. She will want to share her view on that amendment. She might confirm my clear understanding that the Minister will now have the power to review the situation within three years. That will be on a statutory basis. There will be no doubt about it. No one is saying that he or she might review the situation at some time in the future. The legislation was vague last week and contained ambiguity. We now have an absolute commitment that there will be a three-year review in respect of the educational supports. If that is the case, it is a positive. It is affirmative and definite, which is important.