Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendment No. 8 is in the names of Senators Stephenson, Higgins and Ruane. I understand that Senator Victor Boyhan has permission to move the amendment.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 12, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following:

“Report on adequacy and constituency of supports provided by the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board 16. (1) The Minister shall, not later than 9 months after the commencement of this Act prepare and lay before each House of the Oireachtas a report on the evaluation of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board.

(2) The report shall include—

(a) the number of applications received and processed,

(b) the range and uptake of supports provided,

(c) a summary of any appeals or complaints received, and

(d) an evaluation of survivor experiences of the scheme.

(3) In preparing the report, the Minister shall consult a panel of survivor representatives appointed in accordance with principles of transparency and independence.”.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the amendment.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This amendment was already discussed with amendment No. 6. Does the Senator wish to discuss the amendment?

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No. It is my understanding we more or less dealt with it last time. I wish to press the amendment.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 9 and 13 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 13, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following: “(c) on request of a person seeking personal data who was, for any period, resident in an institution specified in the Schedule to the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002;”.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the amendment.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister and her officials for being here today. I thank all of the guests here. It is great to see so many people here. It is interesting to see that with the exception of two or possibly three men, they are all women. While this is a family matter, it is a particularly important piece of legislation. It is great to see so many people here and no doubt they will have an opportunity to read up on this again at some other point.I will be moving amendments Nos. 9 and 13. For those in the Visitors Gallery, the Bill is the Supports for Survivors of Residential Institutional Abuse Bill 2024. There are a number of reliefs and proposals by the Minister for education, who is taking the Bill at this stage. Amendment No. 9 relates to the transfer of data from residential institutions and from the redress board to the Minister and the disclosure of such information. It also seeks to allow the Minister to disclose personal data to a former resident of a residential institution on request. Amendment No. 13 seeks to amend the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002 to remove restrictions on applicants to publish information relating to their own personal application or a reward they may have received under the Act. Currently, survivors are not allowed to publish any information concerning their own applications or relating to an award received that could lead to the identification of an institution or a person, including the applicant himself or herself.

This is about the ownership of the story and, of course, about the victim of abuse, the survivor or the affected person whom we talk about. We talk about people who were in institutional schools, mother and baby homes and other people. For the many people who do not quite understand it, a journalist stopped me today and asked how it is that only certain institutions that were, supposedly, responsible for the care of children were on the schedule and others were not. I was talking in the context of an horrific story that was covered in our national press last Sunday, where a brother in a religious institution and school in Blackrock has received just short of a five-year sentence after many years. That school was St. Augustine's in Blackrock. It is an horrific story. I journeyed with one of the victims and assisted him in navigating the possible remedies open to him.

I remind the Minister of something because I think it is important for all of us in this House to remember. That particular institution, St. Augustine's, which was run by the St. John of God order in Blackrock, was not on the original schedule for redress but, despite many objections, we managed to get it included. That is a case in point, when we look back on the history of this. This was recorded in great detail in the Irish Mail on Sundayand a number of other newspapers last Sunday. Here was an institution with hundreds of boys and, later, girls who went through an institution that was a school - it was carrying out the curriculum of the Department of education - for children who were classified as slow learners or having special needs. A very high percentage of those children who resided or did not reside there came from nearby residential institutions, some of which qualify for redress.

I do not really want to open this up today as it would not be appropriate, but this makes the point that there may still be people, adults now, whose institution was not included in the schedule and, hence, they would not benefit. Only the people whose institutions are on the schedule are going to benefit from this redress. One of the terrible tragedies and anomalies of this scheme is that people, who were children and are now adults, whose institution, for whatever reason, was not included in the schedule are not getting the same redress. That is unfortunate. Later, I will touch on some ideas I have about how we can be inclusive of everybody. We should not be excluding people. I know there is a bureaucratic system in play, and parameters and guidelines had to be drawn up, but people are excluded.

To return to the amendments, they are about ownership, as the Minister will appreciate. Of course, the amendments were put together by Senators Higgins and Ruane, who are strong supporters of equality, redress and a fair deal for the victims and survivors of institutional care and institutional organisations in the State. Unfortunately, they are tied up with other parliamentary business and cannot be here. However, they have impressed upon me the issue of the ownership of these documents. People took risks. People went out and told their stories. It is never easy to tell your story about abuse.You bring a certain amount of guilt. You also bring a focus on your family, particularly if it is rural and isolated. People do not necessarily want to confront or talk about the horrific abuses. What this deals with are critical issues around the rights of access to information, particularly information of vulnerable people, who have now, after many a years-long journey, been able or felt empowered through supports of others to be able to share their story. It has been a discovery for them too, for much of this information was not known to them in earlier years. The Minister has got the gist of what we are talking about and I look forward to her response.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let us never forget about the institutions we are talking about and that the horrific things that took place in these institutions was known far and wide within our society. I remember the great threat as a child was that if you misbehaved, you would find yourself in Letterfrack. People knew that if you went there, you were going to be subjected to brutality, at least, if not other sorts of abuse. Key people in our society knew what was going on. Doctors, nurses and teachers knew what was going on. Blind eyes were turned everywhere. As my colleague Senator Boyhan pointed out, thanks to the bravery of the women who are sitting in the Gallery and their colleagues, we are learning and people are gaining the courage to come out and tell their story and nobody should be excluded.

I go back to what I said the last day we were here. This predates the Minister. It even predates me and I am 72. It goes back a long way. Institutions made a lot of money out of the labour of those incarcerated in those places. Worse still, they made money out of the sale of babies. Somehow or another, they are walking away free. We must not close the door to anybody.

Pauline Tully (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Am I permitted to read a letter to Members from survivors of Ireland's industrial and reformatory school system?

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will allow it at the end. I am just conscious that there are two people with the same letter.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not the same letter. There are two different letters. Given what we are talking about and the years and years of pain and suffering, ten minutes of the Seanad's time will not kill anybody.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not disagree with the Senators but I want to get to the amendments and then we will come to wrap up.

Pauline Tully (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can I be permitted to speak on the Bill at a later Stage or now?

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the tail end, if that is okay. Does anyone else want to speak to the amendments? We are on amendments No. 9 and 13.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We dealt with amendments Nos. 9 and 13.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

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.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendment No. 10 has been ruled out of order.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 11 and 12 are ruled out of order due to a potential charge on the Exchequer.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 14, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following: "Amendment of section 28 of Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002

20. Section 28 of the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002 is amended by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (6):

"(6A) Nothing in subsection (6) shall preclude an applicant from publishing information relating to an application made, or reward received, by them under this Act.".".

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the amendment.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendment No. 14 has been ruled out of order as it involves a potential charge on the Exchequer.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 15, after line 11, to insert the following: "Report on adequacy of implementation of supports to survivors of residential institutional abuse

22. (1) The Minister shall, not later than 12 months after the commencement of this Act, and annually thereafter, prepare and lay before each House of the Oireachtas a report on the operation of this Act.

(2) The report shall include—

(a) the number of applications received and processed,

(b) the range and uptake of supports provided,

(c) a summary of any appeals or complaints received, and

(d) an evaluation of survivor experiences of the scheme.

(3) In preparing the report, the Minister shall consult a panel of survivor representatives appointed in accordance with principles of transparency and independence.".

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the amendment.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Before we continue, I ask the ushers to move our distinguished guests from the Public Gallery to the Distinguished Visitors Gallery.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The guests may have thought they had been downgraded but now they are being upgraded.

The amendment proposes that the "Minister shall, not later than 12 months after the commencement of this Act, and annually thereafter, prepare and lay before each House of the Oireachtas a report on the operation of this Act" outlining the adequacy of implementation of supports to survivors of residential institutional abuse. The report shall indicate the number of applications received and processed, the range and uptake of supports provided, a summary of any appeals or complaints received and an evaluation of survivors' experiences of the scheme. The amendment further states: "In preparing the report, the Minister shall consult a panel of survivor representatives appointed in accordance with principles of transparency and independence." This is in the names of Senators Stephenson, Higgins and Ruane. They cannot be here because they are on other parliamentary business so I will speak on this.Effectively, this is the last amendment so I will take this opportunity to touch on elements that directly relate to it. We have had a long debate and there have been many issues. I know the Minister is going back to the Dáil with this legislation in the next week or two. There is a view that there needs to be a mechanism for reporting on and accounting for what happened and for quantifying the numbers. We know the numbers are horrific and the instances are horrific. I think of that one last week, where an 85-year-old man is now in prison. It struck me in the newspaper article on Sunday that it is an institution that hundreds of people complained about but no one believed them. There was a time when people, including me because the institution is very close to where I live, advocated and asked that the institution be put on. With great difficulty, we eventually got it put on. The Minister was right earlier when she said some were put on but initially they were being refused. The bureaucracy of the systems did not allow it.

It reminded me of a letter. I will not read it out in full. The lady is called Miriam. What jumped off the page was this: "I am writing sincerely to thank you for the courage shown, etc., in relation to the Bill last week." She goes on to say:

Since the State's apology in 1999, many of us felt invisible. The so-called redress process was deeply flawed. We were forced to accept what was offered and punished if we dared to appeal or to speak about it. We had to sign waivers and non-disclosure agreements under the threat of arrest if we spoke about what we had received. We cannot even tell our own stories [I talked to the Minister earlier about people telling their own stories] without fear of prosecution.

That is true. I know many people who availed of redress and were sworn to secrecy about that experience. It was very difficult for them to share their abuses and horrific stories, yet they had to sign an agreement not to divulge the nature of their redress, compensation, contribution - call it what you like. The letter goes on to say: "Meanwhile, solicitors made millions off our suffering." Indeed they did. I looked at a spreadsheet last week to see the enormous sums, millions of pounds, given to a number of solicitors. Yes, they did their work, but many solicitors received way in excess of the compensation, redress or contribution the victims received.

The letter goes on:

They never truly worked for us. They were paid by the State. Many survivors received little or nothing. Deals were done between the church and the State to silence us. Children like us were given criminal records simply for being sent to those institutions, but what crime did we commit? Can people not see the injustices? We were children. I travelled from Kerry yesterday to be with my friends. [Her friends are the ladies sitting here on my right-hand side.] We were fellow survivors. For the first time in a long time within Seanad Éireann or any place, I felt like I belonged. We carried each other's pain. Yes, when I returned home, I cried through the night. Decades later, we still ask ourselves what more must we do for our voices to be finally heard.

As long as I am in this House, I am a voice. I will shine a light. I will articulate and advocate for anyone or regarding any injustice in any institution within this State. I know I speak on behalf of the people in this House. We are advocates. There are difficult tasks.

To our guests, I know how hard it is for you to be here today. I know the courage it took for you to take this journey. You are brave women. You are more than survivors. You are courageous citizens of our State and you will always have a welcome place in this House. I want to assure you of that.

What struck me most in all of this was:

I am not a number now. I am not number 1061. I am Miriam.

I, Victor Boyhan, am not a number. I was number eight. I am now Senator Victor Boyhan in this House. I thank the people across this country who elected me and shared their support for me.

I never wanted to be a politician. I never sought to be a politician. I sought to be an advocate and as long as I am in this House my only ask is that I will be an advocate, that I will have the courage to give voice to others, that I will have an opportunity to shine light in many a dark place, that I will encourage others, facilitate others and help each other so we can have justice. To Miriam I say, you are not 1061, and that must be one of the greatest reliefs. You are Miriam - your first name, Miriam - and I say well done to you because I receive many letters but the hardest, most powerful and most moving was Miriam; not 1061 anymore, but Miriam. I thank you for sharing that with me.

I say to the Minister that it is critically important that we give voice. It is a difficult time, but she and I know in our own families that we have had our setbacks. She and I know in our own families that there have been challenges and cases where our siblings or parents have had difficulties in their own relationships and with their own families. That is life. Yes, there were taboos and many things were never spoken about, but we have now moved on to a new Ireland, a liberal Ireland that is free from the dominance of church, that is free from State control and will empower its citizens. We as politicians or advocates must give voice to people. I drove in today and wondered if this was the beginning or the end of a period of campaigning that has gone on for more than 30 years. It can only yet be the beginning. I say to the Minister of education that there is a plethora of schools coming down the line. She talked about the need for a wider commission, and I think that is important too.

I go back to the amendment and what it hinges on. It is about some way of recording and accounting to the people. One of the greatest fears in all of this legislation is that we tidy this up, because what are we doing today? We are wrapping up Caranua, our “new friend.” It is the organisation we thought would stand in solidarity with the victims, with those who were physically, mentally, emotionally and sexually abused. We were told in the original legislation that they would never be abandoned. Somehow that is all gone.

The Minister's predecessor, Deputy Norma Foley, on 16 April 2024 left Government Buildings and said, "The whole of government is acutely conscious of the enormous trauma which has been endured by all survivors of abuse, including those in residential institutions [and schools]. It is vital that survivors know that government is responding." I do not doubt the current Minister. I have every confidence she will see it through. She is Deputy Foley's successor. She is now the Minister for education. She carries the mantle of responsibility for education and schools. I recited and talked about St. Augustine's, which was a school. It was meant to be educating children, but it was educating vulnerable children, who had already been in care and were going into that place daily. The courts last week sentenced a brother from there who perpetrated the most horrendous and heinous crimes on innocent children. We seek to cherish all the children of the nation equally. It is important that we commit, through the Minister's response to this amendment, even if she does not directly accept it, that there be accountability and a summary of the appeals and complaints processes. I hope to have an opportunity at the end of this debate to set out nine key asks as I leave.

In this final amendment we are closing one chapter and one door, hoping we will open other doors, but we must clearly send a message of solidarity. We must stick with the people we bargained with. We gave them hope when they had none. I am talking about men and women who had neither brother, sister, mother nor father to contact. They had no advocates. They were slave labourers. There were pregnant women in slavery. There were men farmed out, living in pigsties with no support. We owe it to them. We have a diaspora and a new diaspora vision, which I spoke of in foreign affairs the other day, at the kind invitation of the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond.

Maybe there are more of the people I talk about outside the island of Ireland now than there are on this island, and we must never forget them because they too are part of this story. I look forward to hearing the Minister's response to this amendment.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister want to speak to the amendment? There will be an opportunity for everyone to speak after we pass it. I call Senator Harmon.

Laura Harmon (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to briefly speak to support and second the amendment. I welcome the women in the Gallery. I thank them so much for being here. It is wonderful to have them here for this debate. I thank them for their continued campaigning and advocacy. I commend my colleague, Senator Boyhan, on his powerful contributions and advocacy on this.

This amendment is extremely important because it is about follow-through and ensuring that we monitor and evaluate the scheme and the uptake of it, the range of supports that have been provided and given out and any appeals and complaints that may be received as part of this. It is extremely important that we evaluate the survivors' experiences of the scheme because we do not want to retraumatise survivors as part of this scheme. Subsection (3) is really critical whereby "the Minister shall consult a panel of survivor representatives appointed in accordance with principles of transparency and independence". Survivors need to be part of this scheme throughout the process and into the future.

I will take this opportunity to say that this is a moment in our history and a reckoning for us as a country. We must acknowledge the architecture of containment we had in 20th century in our society, how we treated people and how we subjected children, women and men - those in society whom we shunned; the most vulnerable - to subhuman treatment and slave labour. We must acknowledge the trauma that was experienced by these people and the intergenerational trauma and lifelong effects, which no scheme will ever be able to fully put right. We can only do the best we can, however. We need to ensure that this amendment is accepted as part of the Bill. I wish to put on the record my support for the survivors. Connected to this, I attended the commemoration at the Bessborough mother and baby home location at the weekend. We heard from other survivors who have been mistreated and traumatised by the State and religious institutions and orders in this country. It is an absolute stain of shame on this nation what we have done to thousands of people. It is a stain of shame on our history. We need to absolutely ensure that people have access to the justice they need and deserve.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not going to take a lot of time on this. My colleague, Senator Boyhan, said more than any of us could say. The passion with which he speaks is incredible, and I am proud to call him my friend. Ordinarily, I would be against a motion seeking something to be laid before the House in 12 months, but on this occasion I support this for one reason and one reason only. By looking for it to be reported on a 12-month basis, it means it constantly remains in public sight. From that point of view, I believe it is highly beneficial for that reason alone. We must never ever forget, because we forgot those who were incarcerated in these places. So many have died who will never ever see any retribution. What is going on in Tuam at the moment is heartbreaking stuff. I say again today that not one God damn father has ever come forward and said he fathered that child or he was the one responsible for putting that women into an institution. The fathers were quite happy to walk away and, in some cases, they accused the woman of being a loose woman or whatever else to protect themselves. Many of them went on to have great careers, families, etc. I hope any of them who watch what Senator Boyhan said today rot in their graves for deserting those they landed in these institutions.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I apologise to the different crowds who came in who I did not see. I acknowledge Sheila, Mary, Miriam and Mary. I thank them for being here at every debate, as difficult as I am sure it has been for each and every one of them. I acknowledge so much of what we have spoken of here today, not just specifically Caranua or the redress scheme but the trauma, hurt and pain that has been inflicted, as Senator Boyhan said, on every family in the country. There is nobody who does not know someone either close to them or within their circle or community who has not been impacted by what we are speaking of today. We must always acknowledge it and our failures as successive governments and communities because everybody had a part in this. Everybody knew what was happening. Everybody could see what was happening, whether it was acknowledged at the time or not. We need to make sure in everything we do that we acknowledge it and endeavour to ensure that it never happens to anyone else. As challenging as that may be, that has to be an objective and endeavour to which all of us subscribe.

I know, coming in at the very end Stages of this Bill, that so much work has been done and so much engagement has happened since the report, the redress scheme, Caranua's establishment and now, obviously, what comes next. With regard to this amendment specifically, I apologise that it will not be accepted but it is for the reason that this information is and will be made available and provided through the Department of Education and Youth report and the Caranua report that will have to be published once this has wound down, which will state very clearly much of the information Senators have mentioned. The Department of Education and Youth report will also have to state the number of applications that have been processed, the range of supports provided and availed of and the uptake.

I have given a clear commitment in the amendment we will bring back to the Dáil that there will be a review of the education supports to make sure they are working as they should and that people are able to access them, and that it will be done in a maximum three-yearly basis but it could be done before then. As with any scheme or piece of legislation, we must make sure that the lived experience and survivors' experiences in particular are taken into account. I absolutely commit to doing that in the coming weeks as we announce a new commission and set out exactly how that will work. It is only through the lived experience of survivors that we will get it right and ensure that their voices are very clearly heard. Anything then in terms of a redress scheme obviously has to be based on what has gone before, but it is about how can we learn from it and make anything like that better and how can we improve the way in which we are supporting survivors first and foremost.

I commend Senator Boyhan in particular on his bravery and the way in which he has spoken and, I believe, more than any of us, represented victims and survivors in the way he has. I know he is somebody who will continue to do that long after today and long after this discussion and debate. I assure him that the information that is being sought will be provided through the reports that are already being committed to and that will be published by my Department. It is really important that we do that and understand and learn from every step of the way what has worked, what has not and how we can do better. We can always do better, and we always need to do better. I acknowledge that also.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendment No. 16 has been ruled out of order as it involves a potential charge on the State.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When is it proposed to take the next Stage?

Pat Casey (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Now.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome to the Distinguished Visitors Gallery survivors of the mother and baby homes: Sheila O'Byrne, who was in St. Patrick's Mother and Baby Home, Navan Road, Dublin, Miriam Moriarty Owens, who was in Pembroke Alms Industrial School, later Nazareth House, Tralee, Mary Smith, who was in Sunday's Well Magdalene laundry, Clonakilty, and Mary Dunleavy Greene, who was in Mount Saint Vincent's, O'Connell Avenue, Limerick.

Senators may make remarks on the Bill.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not going to delay the Members too much because we had a lot of debate on this for many years in both Houses. Ultimately, we live in a democracy and politicians make decisions, and ultimately some of them are held to account and others are not because of the different electoral systems we have. I am a democrat and I am also a pragmatist. There will be other days and opportunities and I believe in the power of democracy and engagement. We will have to go back to the grind and impress upon politicians again what has to be done.I think today in particular of the survivors of Westbank Orphanage in the home town of the Tánaiste. I think of the commitments the Wicklow TDs, and, indeed, a few Senators and councillors, gave them. I believe we will see a way forward for the Westbank survivors, and rightly so, as the commission recommended. They should be included in the redress scheme.

I spoke earlier about St. Augustine's school for children with special needs and learning difficulties, which was one of many facilities run by St. John of God. Many of those people came from disadvantaged homes and institutions. We have seen very little justice for them but, last week, the courts gave a five-year sentence to an 85-year-old man, who is now in Mountjoy Prison. However, it is not much consolation to the brave victims, men and women, who lived in Dublin and elsewhere in Ireland. There were also the children in Malawi, where this man was sent and where he continued his horrific crimes.

We saw how the religious orders surrounded their brother member. Of course, there can be one bad apple in an orchard and I will never condemn all religious. I have a lot of time for faith-based communities. Many of them have suffered and are victims themselves. In a community, be it a family or religious community, when someone goes astray and does horrible, dangerous and evil things, it sometimes reflects on everybody, which is not always fair. I have always said we must acknowledge the good people in religious life who had great difficulties in highlighting their concerns.

l thank the Oireachtas Library and Research Service. As I say in reference to every Bill we debate, without the support of its staff and the forensic detail they provided in the digest on this and other legislation relating to the residential institutions redress scheme, I would not be equipped with all the facts. I thank in particular Dr. Caroline Sweeney, one of the senior parliamentary researchers in law, who serves us so well in her work.

We must be positive and pragmatic as we go forward. I again refer to the statement by the Minister's predecessor in the Department, Deputy Foley, when she said: "The whole of government is acutely conscious of the enormous trauma which has been endured by all survivors of abuse, including those in residential institutions [and schools]. It is vital that survivors know that government is responding." I believe the Minister, Deputy McEntee, will respond. I believe the exchanges we have had in the past few days have impacted on her. I think she has learned something from our exchanges, and I thank her for that.

I have a number of requests for the Minister. I ask that we look again, with a whole-of-government approach, at access to the Health (Amendment) Act card, as it covers more than the enhanced medical card provided under the scheme. I will email her about this. Most of the people we are discussing are in their 70s, 80s or 90s and already have medical cards. I had a letter from, and spoke to, a woman who is on medical pain relief patches that cost €90 a month and are not covered by her medical card. I have spoken to people who have to go a chiropodist and only get €30 off a €75 consultation because it is not covered by the medical card. These are people who have real issues with their health. Let us look at access to the HAA medical card.

I ask that we prioritise using local government services to see whether housing and supports can be accessed for survivors. We should consider working closely with the Camden, Tower Hamlets and other councils in the greater London area. There is huge demand from Irish people living there and elsewhere abroad to avail of the services provided for under the scheme. The Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, is doing a lot of work with the Irish diaspora. There are challenges in this regard. I visit London six or seven times a year and that includes visiting the Irish centres and the people who go there, who are now in their 80s and 90s. We must look at how we can help them. The phrase "bring them home" has a nice tune to it but it is not possible. In many cases, the home they left is not the home to which they would be returning. I ask that we prioritise housing for those people.

I ask for a special pension for survivors, who include child labourers and pregnant women who had to work in industrial laundries. They have no pension contributions and no special provision. The Minister, Members and people in the Gallery know of these people. There should be a special pension or subvention - it can be called whatever the Minister likes - to give them some decency, dignity and care in their old age.

I ask that we consult with survivors on suitability of nursing home care. These are people who were in institutions for years and may now have to go back into institutional care. Many of them have no partners, children or family members and they will need care. It is important that we have an aftercare package for them.

We must continue to offer full, free and unlimited counselling support services for survivors. That should be guaranteed through whatever measures may be required.

I ask for measures to address the intergenerational impact of abuse by way of counselling services and educational supports for the children of survivors. The intergenerational impact of abuse is something I have learned about in recent years. I know of teenagers and people in their 20s and 30s in addiction, homeless and with other difficulties whose parents came through very difficult times. It is a cycle of intergenerational suffering. There is a lot of work to do in terms of networking and providing supports. It is an area that needs particular care.

We need redress for people who were boarded out. Girls who were put into slavery have been given no recognition, care or support and no pension. Many of them ran away and are now in mental institutions or otherwise in difficulty. Men were farmed out with no consent from their parents. Nobody seems to know who was in loco parentis. I have brought a number of those individuals as guests to Leinster House and have heard their stories and experiences. We surely must do something for them, including providing outreach. I know of a man who was left a smallholding in Galway who, because he was not related to the owner, had to sell all the land to pay the inheritance tax. These were nice people with no children who took a boy aged seven into their home. He worked as a farm labourer, picking potatoes and stones, but he had a loving and meaningful relationship with those people. The greatest honour that couple could bestow was to leave to the boy, now a man, their homes and 30 acres when they died, but he had to sell it. Others have probably had similar experiences.

I ask for justice and redress for the vulnerable children who were used for drug trials. The Taoiseach gave a commitment to both Houses on a number of occasions to investigate the testing of drugs and vaccines on children without any consent by their parents or guardians. The facts have been ascertained and the Government is fully aware of them. We continue to have an immunisation programme delivered by GlaxoSmithKline, which is the successor of companies involved in those trials. A number of successful journalists have done a lot of work on this issue. We must look at how we can address a situation whereby people, many of whom contact my office on a regular basis, were victims, as children, of drug trials in State institutions.

The Minister has committed to pursuing rigorously the indemnity agreement that was made between the Government of the time and the churches. I hope she will follow up on this. We should remember that it was those indemnified institutions that were included in the redress schedule. Where religious orders did not enter into the indemnity scheme - a full copy of which I have in my office, signed by the religious superiors - many of the relevant institutions were not allowed into the redress scheme. As we all know, the people who lived in those institutions did not and will not qualify under the terms of the Bill the Minister has brought to the House.

Those are my requests to the Minister, which I will email to her. I know she cannot pursue them all on her own. I ask that she bring them forward as part of the whole-of-government approach her predecessor, Deputy Foley, spoke about in April last year. I am committed to pursuing these issues and I will not lose heart. I believe in the parliamentary and democratic process. I ask my colleagues, if they support any of my requests, to take it upon themselves to advocate for and pursue them within their parliamentary parties.Will they chip away and try to see if we can make this world a better place for a generation of people who are mostly now over 75? These are men and women who served this State with distinction, people who still want to call themselves Irish, who are our diaspora, who are all over the world and who connect with Ireland. They have not lost heart with Ireland. They may have lost heart with their faith, they may have lost heart with people who they thought cared about them, but they are innately Irish people. I hope that, as an Irish state, as a republic, a true republic in the meaning of what a republic is all about, we will stand with them, work with them and commit to advocating and making this world, for the past few years that they have, a somewhat better place than the experience they had to endure at the hands of this State in the past.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Senator for being a voice for the people who found themselves in the industrial schools, Magdalen laundries and institutions where so much pain occurred.

Before we took the vote, I was reading the names into the record but the recording did not occur. Before I ask Senator Boyhan to take the Chair for the remaining part of this Bill, which I think is fitting and appropriate, I welcome to the Distinguished Visitors Gallery: Sheila O'Byrne, who was in St. Patrick's Mother and Baby Home, Navan Road, Dublin; Miriam Moriarty Owens, who was in Nazareth House, formerly Pembroke Alms Industrial School for girls, Tralee; Mary Smith, who was in Clonakilty and also in the Sunday's Well Magdalen laundry; and Mary Dunleavy Greene, who was in Mount Saint Vincent's, O'Connell Avenue, Limerick.

I ask Senator Boyhan to chair the remainder of the Bill.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you for the privilege of taking the Chair. I sometimes have to pinch myself and remind myself of the journey that I took. It is always a great honour to be with colleagues in the Seanad. We endeavour to do what we do to the best of our own ability and commitment, and within our own political movements and our own political strengths. I call Senator Tully.

Pauline Tully (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I want to explain why Sinn Féin has opposed the Bill. There are supports in this Bill that are welcome for survivors. However, in good conscience, we could not support it when it excludes some survivors from different residential institutions. We feel there should be equal access to support for all, irrespective of whether they had received a settlement from Caranua or any other type of settlement from any other scheme. The legislation is excluding people on spurious grounds and it does not take a human rights approach. People who were boarded out or fostered out, people from certain institutions and people who spent less than 180 days in an institution are excluded from this scheme. When redress was announced, many people were living overseas, some were in prison and others were in other institutions and, therefore, were not aware of or not able to apply for redress. To be excluded from the supports in this Bill because they did not apply for redress at the time is retraumatising for all of those survivors.

We know that many of the survivors from the institutions here, perhaps up to 40%, live overseas and a large number live in Britain. The once-off payment of €3,000 is not sufficient. It should be increased or at least index-linked. While I acknowledge it is outside the scope of this Bill, there should be some way of seeking clarification that these payments are disregarded when it comes to means-tested payments, especially for those living in Britain.

The consultation with survivors report, which was commissioned by the Department of Education in 2019, contained a number of issues for priority that were identified by the survivors. The first was the request for a HAA card. An enhanced medical card is included in this Bill but while an enhanced medical card is a medical card without means-testing, which is welcome, it does not really give anything additional to anyone who has a medical card. A HAA card could lead to shorter waiting times for procedures or give survivors access to different supports they need without limitation and without having to wait for months or years for those services. A range of supports needs to be put forward for survivors in recognition of the trauma they have been through in their lifetime. They do not need to be waiting further for supports.

The other priority is housing. We know that many are living in social housing or are on a social housing list. It has been suggested by Patricia Carey, who is a special advocate for survivors, that additional priority on local authority housing lists could be given. This would be similar to the priority that is given to those with medical conditions or a disability so they get priority on social housing lists but also adaptation grants or other grants that will make their homes liveable so they can continue to live there.

I wish I could support the Bill because if I could, it would mean that all of the supports are being made available to all of the survivors. That is what we need to see. We need to see everybody treated equally. We need to have the hurt, the beatings, the sexual abuse, the hunger, the lack of care and the lack of education in some cases - all of that – acknowledged and somehow, in some small way, made up for. If people are continually excluded from supports, that cannot happen.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is a lot I would like to say but as my colleague, Senator Victor Boyhan, pointed out in his various contributions during the passage of the Bill, we are here to give voice to the voiceless. With the permission of the Cathaoirleach, I have been granted permission to read a letter from Sheila O'Byrne into the record of the Seanad. These are her words, not mine:

I Sheila O Byrne, who is an Institutional Church and State Survivor Mother, incarcerated in Mother and Baby institution I am writing this letter as I have supported institutional industrial survivors, the traveling community in the system many years, I listened individually to the horrific drama and treatment of abuse by the hands of the church and state they were children taken brought to court by the hands of the cruelty man award of court little children not knowing why taken, placed in church and state system taken by the cruelty man, branded as criminals little children brought and locked away into a system no compassion abused by the hands of the powers to be inside the walls controlled inhumanly little children treated lesser than less never allowed to speak out, some of the children were taken because their mother died not allowed be looked after by their own family sisters and brothers taken away brought separated in to different institutions little children age of innocence interfered with by the hands of the cloth and lay people in their care for years up to sixteen years eighteen years when released no accommodation no money given only clothing, other children their mothers had mental break downs and put in to mental asylums abused, sexually in the care by the church and state also lay people, under their care took advantage medical profession ignored the abuse mothers taken trafficked in to the mother and baby institutional system after giving birth babies taken adopted against the mothers will no other choice given church and state lay down a law sentenced for the terrible crime for breaking the original sin no matter what situation the mothers were in god him self would not have created a law invented by the church and state church of Ireland played its role same system we have to remember babies little children mothers who didn't survive from behind the walls buried in unmarked graves all over Ireland very few survivors who died in the hands of church and state acknowledged in death buried in sacred grounds also whom died in the asylums acknowledged in death, I am proud to be a voice for the survivors of the industrial institutions for our living and our dead as we are all connected I would add the funding of millions was given to survivors under a gagging system a code of silence instructed to each industrial survivor empowered on to children now grown up signed their voice taken of the horrific justice inflicted horrendously hiding the truths covering up the terrible wrongs protecting church and state who are the criminals whom should be brought to justice now in this present time there is 50 thousand left that was awarded to industrial institutional survivors who are crying out for help with needs of resourses housing health medical needs and medical card mental health which are not being given for the purpose to fecilitate each survivors needs which they truly deserve and are being ignored these are the children who were not cared by the church or the state it’s the Governments responsibility and duty as in the Irish Constitution its written all children will be sheltered and cared for up to the present day this year 2025 unfortunately institutional survivors who were children are still not looked after with the means they require if all is not bad enough, when we ask for support and help from these state funded agencies and advocates we are turned away time and time again and excuses made, not enough funding and not enough staff elderly men and women are offered silly courses and told about waiting lists for limited councilling services, one excuse after the other doors shut in our faces. Many forced to still work to support themselves, despite being broken mentally and physically, many living in homes not fit for purpose many unable to meet there own daily needs, some survivors are left with responsibility of caring for their siblings who were in industrial institutions isolated unable to complete simple tasks such as visiting the doctor, hospital appointments and even shopping Solicitors were complicit and some of their offices are still open to this day we are still here we are not a number on a spreadsheet, a statistic is it to much to ask that were listened to, not plamaused, that we can live out the reminder of our years in dignity and comfort. Every year we bury more and more, until well just be a search on google or an artefact in a 300 million euro museum on Sean Mc Dermot street, were people can come and say wasnt that terrible till were no more just a memory written by survivor Sheila O Byrne.

The Minister knows, I know and everybody in this room knows Sheila has been outside the gate of Leinster House for many years. I commend her on putting her thoughts on paper. They are not my words; they are her words from the heart. Having listened to my colleague Senator Victor Boyhan today and having listened to these ladies, it would draw the heart and soul out of you.

I want to say this before I take my seat. Unlike many Bills that have come to this House where the Minister appears for a few minutes and a junior Minister comes and takes over from there, the Minister, Deputy McEntee, has been with us every step of the way. Her empathy was obvious right throughout the Bill. I know she is constrained by what her Department can and cannot do but I commend her on what she did and on having been here, and I thank her.

Laura Harmon (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I I wanted to put on the record why I oppose the Bill. While it contains good measures, from my perspective and that of the Labour Party, we believe that anyone who spent so much as a minute in one of these institutions should be able to access redress, and those who were boarded out should be included as part of this as well.

In terms of other jurisdictions, we saw mass trafficking of children from this country in the 20th century. Those who are living with this now, in the US and Britain, should not have to choose one payment scheme over another. They should not be put at a disadvantage in applying.

I just wanted to put it on the record again that thousands of people suffered physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse and mental abuse, were denied access to records and information about their identity, and were subjected to medical trials as part of this and, indeed, what I would call slave labour. This has contributed hugely to institutional trauma and to our national psyche. We need to have full and proper healing, respect and validation for all survivors in this country. Unfortunately, there are many not with us who will not be able to ever avail of this because they are no longer with us. It was a grave injustice that this happened.

I commend the special advocate, Patricia Carey, on her work on this. I thank the survivors in the Gallery and my colleague Senator Victor Boyhan, who spoke so passionately and eloquently on this.

People were made to feel ashamed in these institutions for who they were but the shame belongs to the State, the institutions and the perpetrators of these injustices and crimes alone. It is the State's shame only.

Gareth Scahill (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the survivors in the Gallery: Sheila, Mary, Miriam and Mary. I thank them for sharing their stories with us.

I commend our colleague Senator Victor Boyhan on the way he has explained his story over the past couple of weeks and opened up on it. The survivors have an exceptional advocate in this Chamber. After their ten requests there, I am sure my Government colleagues and I will be happy to work with them to see how we can develop that.

This legislation, as I have said previously, is a reaffirmation of our commitment to the survivors of some of the darkest chapters in the State's history. For too long, the voices of those who suffered in residential institutions were not heard. Hopefully, today is going a small way towards addressing that, but I wanted to be clear that this is not the end of the process but the beginning of a new phase in how the State supports those who were so gravely wronged. It is a statement that we will not forget, we will not abandon and we will not fail to act.

Like the Minister, over the past couple of weeks, I have learnt an exceptional amount about the history and what has happened. I commend everyone who has made statements in the Chamber on this. I commend the Minister and her Department and also the research department within the Seanad here for the work that it has done. I commend everyone on passing this Bill.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is Senator Tully indicating?

Pauline Tully (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If I may, I will read this open letter to all Members of the Seanad from the survivors of Ireland's industrial and reformatory schools system, dated 30 June 2025.

To whom it may concern,

We, the Survivors of Ireland's Industrial and Reformatory Schools System, write to you today with heavy hearts and unwavering determination.

For decades we endured cruelty, neglect, abuse and the erasure of our dignity in institutions run by the state and religious orders. Our childhoods were stolen, our innocence lost and our Stories too often silenced.

In 1999, then Taoiseach Bertie Ahern issued a formal apology on behalf of the state and the people of Ireland, in 2009 a promise by Minister Batt O'Keeffe to allocate 500,000 euros for a national memorial to remember the children of the Industrial Schools, yet here we stand in 2025 still waiting.

As of the close of business on Friday, 3 July 2025, if our reasonable, humane requests have not been granted we will commence a hunger strike.

We do not take this decision lightly. Our patience, like our Health and our time is not infinite.

We are asking for: 1. A HAA Medical Card - So Survivors can access necessary medical care without delay or denial in recognition of the physical and psychological trauma we carry.

2. An Enhanced Pension - A modest and respectful financial recognition of the hardship, lost education opportunities and wellbeing we were denied.

3. We request a dedicated Industrial School Survivor Trust fund for our children (In Lieu of your proposed education fund) to support them when needed.

4. A National Memorial to honour the thousands of children who suffered and those who never made it home. In September 2009, 500,000 Euros was allocated for this purpose. We demand that this promise be honoured and that a fitting memorial be established as a lasting public testament to our history, which is at risk of being forgotten neglected or erased from the public consciousness. Because promises were made and promises must be kept. Our message to the Government: Your apology was a start. Apologies without action are hollow. We demand the promises made to us be fulfilled. We urge you to act now before more lives are lost waiting with courage, hope and unyielding resolve.

The letter is signed by: Miriam Moriarty Owens, Mary Donovan, Mary Dunleavy Greene, Mary Smith, Catherine Coffey O'Brien, Ann O'Gorman and Maurice O'Connell, who are survivors of Ireland's industrial and reformatory school system.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Tully for reading that letter.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will not repeat what I said earlier. I thank colleagues for their engagement. This is something that has obviously been ongoing for some time. I appreciate how challenging and difficult it has been for colleagues and particularly for survivors. I again acknowledge Mary, Mary, Miriam and Sheila, who are here today.

After the conversations we have just had, I am not sure there is anything I can say that would accurately reflect the trauma inflicted on so many different people in so many different ways. While we are discussing Caranua, the Ryan report and industrial schools, at every step of the way, we have to acknowledge our past and the wrongs that have been inflicted on so many people so many times. We need to do better. In saying that, I acknowledge that issues have been raised about the supports we are providing here but I hope that what is being provided in this Bill, which can be put in place once it is enacted, will go some way, albeit a very small way, towards acknowledging the trauma I have mentioned here today. There is a lot more we have to do and that I am committed to doing as Minister for Education and Youth. I particularly refer to the commission of investigation into our schools. I have no doubt we will have many more conversations like this in the years and months ahead as a result of that. I will engage with colleagues at all stages and will do so in good faith, as I know all colleagues will because we all have the same objective and goal, which is to reflect and acknowledge what happened and to do what we can to put in place supports for survivors and, where possible, for their families. I acknowledge this does not just stop at one individual but impacts on a great many other people's lives.

I again acknowledge the many things we have discussed here today. For my part, where I can work with colleagues across Government, I absolutely commit to doing so. I again acknowledge the passing of the Bill and colleagues' contributions here today. I particularly acknowledge all survivors who are here and those who are not here as well. We can never rectify or change what happened to them but we can acknowledge it and do what we can to support them. We are absolutely committed to doing that.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On behalf of the House, I wish the Minister well with the challenge she faces as she embarks on her role as Minister for Education and Youth. She has our good wishes and support.