Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Áire. I regret the fact that out of frustration I have had to put down this motion. A resident of Carlow who could not vote for me in the last election due to the boundaries attended as a child the residential institutions of St. Patrick's, Navan Road, and St. Philomena's, Stillorgan. As these institutions were not listed in the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002, she could not seek compensation.

I understand that institutions which were left out in the past are being added to the list to allow those who attended them to seek compensation. In trying to address this matter, we have been given the run-around from various agencies which assured us that the Bill would come before the Houses of the Oireachtas last Christmas. Subsequently, it was stated that the Bill would come before the Houses in January but five months later we are into July and it has not appeared.

I hope that in her reply the Minister will give the woman on whose behalf I have raised this matter a definite indicator as to when the institutions she attended will be listed to allow her to proceed with her case. The lady in question is unwell and there are other complicating factors in her case. The Minister would not want anyone to suffer any longer than this lady has already.

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I dtus báire, ba mhaith liom leithscéal a ghabháil ar son an Aire; ní raibh sé in ann bheith anseo. Tá mé thar a bheith buíoch den Seanadóir as ucht an ocáid a úsáid le cur in iúl don Seanad cad atá ag dul ar aghaidh go díreach faoi St. Patrick's and St. Philomena's.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to outline to the House the current position on the inclusion of St. Patrick's, Navan Road, and St. Philomena's, Stillorgan, on the Schedule of the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002. The Act which was signed into law by the President on 10 April 2002 provides for the establishment of both the Residential Institutions Redress Board and the Residential Institutions Redress Review Committee. The board and committee have been put in place and are fully operational.

A serving member of the High Court, Judge Sean O'Leary, has been appointed chairman of the redress board and nine other members have also been appointed. The review committee is chaired by Judge Frank Murphy, a former member of the Supreme Court. A further three members have also been appointed. A total of 31 administration staff have been appointed to the board and the committee. The latest information available to my Department indicates that the redress board has received 3,945 applications to date and made offers to 1,370 individual applicants. The average award to date has been €77,000 and awards have varied between zero and €300,000.

The purpose of the Act was to establish a framework to enable victims of institutional abuse to apply for redress. Awards are being made in line with the recommendations of the Ryan report and are equivalent to the level of awards made by the High Court. The provisions of the Act allow the board to make awards based on a lower threshold of proof than is required when taking a case through the courts. An applicant is expected to provide proof of his or her identity, that he or she was resident in an institution and injured while so resident and that the injury was consistent with any abuse alleged to have occurred. An applicant may accept or reject an award or may submit it for review to the review committee.

In framing the legislation, the Government was conscious that it was putting in place structures to provide redress for victims of abuse and to bring closure to a tragic period of Irish history which spanned almost six decades. Currently, 128 institutions are listed on the Act's Schedule. The provisions of section 4 allow the addition to the Schedule of institutions identified as reformatories, industrial schools, orphanages, children's homes and special schools in respect of which a public body had a regulatory or inspection function. The Department has received correspondence from individuals and survivor groups identifying a number of additional institutions which may be eligible for inclusion in the Schedule.

As a first step in the process, discussions have taken place between my Department and other Government Departments which may have provided a regulatory or inspection function in the operation of these facilities to ascertain whether they are eligible for consideration. In some cases, the initial information received was limited due to the long period which had elapsed since these institutions were closed. The process of verifying each of these institutions has therefore been time consuming and is continuing.

Officials of my Department have sought confirmation from the Department of Health and Children on any regulatory or inspection function it may have had in respect of St. Patrick's, Navan Road. To date, the Department has not been able to confirm any such responsibility. The Department of Health and Children continues to check its records and has agreed to revert to my Department should any such records become available. The Department of Health and Children has confirmed a regulatory or inspection function in respect of St. Philomena's, Stillorgan, and the institution is under consideration for inclusion in the Schedule.

Inquiries as to the eligibility of all institutions of which my Department has been notified have not yet been completed. I am considering proposals which are at an advanced stage to permit progress on institutions in respect of which inquiries have been completed.