Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

I thank colleagues who have contributed. Referencing another point that they made, separate to amendments Nos. 9 and 13, I fully accept that there are institutions or individuals who are not included in this redress scheme. It is important to note whether it was this particular scheme, the residential institutions redress scheme back in 2002, or even more recently, the mother and baby homes scheme at different stages before it came into law and before any of the supports were provided, different institutions were included along the way and there were increases in the numbers of those who could avail of the supports. I acknowledge that does not include everybody. We obviously have further work to do. It is something that I will be working on through the Department of Education and Youth, particularly looking at our schools. That will be at Cabinet shortly, as well as looking at a wider commission. There is still work to do, which I acknowledge, but it is important to say that some institutions were brought in under these schemes and others that we are not speaking of here today.

Specifically on the amendments, I fully agree with the intention behind the first amendment. The reason I am not accepting it is that it is already provided for in law. Section 18, in particular, provides for the transfer of a certain set of data from the Residential Institutions Redress Board to the Department, specifically the name, address and the date of birth of each person who received redress from the board back when it was open. The amendment proposes that any individual whose information has been provided would be able to access that.The very clear advice I have been given is that this is already provided for under existing data protection and freedom of information rules. These provisions would, in effect, double up on the existing legislation, which applies to the individuals we are discussing. The only reason I am not accepting the amendment is that provision is already there for what it proposes. Individuals' ability to seek information already exists under freedom of information and data protection laws. It is really important that people can access that data.

I am not able to accept amendment No. 13 for a different reason, which is that it would undermine the basis under which the redress scheme was brought into play. We discussed this the previous day, particularly in the context of people choosing to access the redress scheme or go the judicial route. The redress scheme was not a judicial process. It did not involve finding anybody guilty or at fault. The scheme was put together on that basis and we must protect the privacy of everybody involved, not just those who received redress. While I appreciate and acknowledge that the amendment provides only that the applicants to the scheme have access to information, that process could, in turn, identify another individual who has not gone through a legal or judicial process. For that reason, I cannot accept the amendment. I understand the reasoning behind it, which is to make sure individuals can access their information, but what is proposed goes beyond what is allowed for within the redress scheme. Where possible, at every step of the way, we must ensure individuals who received redress under the scheme have access to their own information as readily and easily as possible.