Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

440. To ask the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth the criteria or actuarial tables that were used when calculating the cost of redress under the proposed mother and baby institutions payment scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [56554/22]

Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Extensive thought was given to how best to structure a fair and sensitive payment scheme for survivors.

In terms of the payment approach, the Interdepartmental Group which developed proposals for the Scheme advocated for a general approach based on time spent rather than individualised assessments. This is because of the stakeholder views that any scheme should be kind and non-adversarial with a low burden of proof, and the evidence that a general payment is the best way to achieve that.

Taking account of learnings from other schemes, the approach to this Scheme gives greater reassurance of causing no further harm through the application process. Notably, it takes account of the experience of the Australian Stolen Generations Reparations Scheme. That scheme moved from an individualised assessment to a common experience payment on the advice of the Independent Assessor appointed to consider applications. In making this recommendation to the Australian Government, the assessor explained that his role of assessing the level of harm that had been caused to individuals – and by extension the level of reparation to be offered – was problematic as the judgements he would make would necessarily be subjective and risk unfairness.

The approach proposed for the Mother and Baby Institutions Payment Scheme eliminates the need for applicants to bring forward evidence of abuse to demonstrate an entitlement or undergo cross examination of this evidence, which by its nature can be adversarial and re-traumatising. However, their experience is still recognised through a payment structure which also takes account of more prolonged institutional experiences.

The payment rates for the Payment Scheme were modelled on the approach taken in Magdalen Restorative Justice Ex-Gratia Scheme. While the rates were set out in the Interdepartmental Group Report containing proposals for the Scheme and, subsequently, included in the General Scheme of the Bill to establish the Scheme, I have improved the overall approach to payments in the recently published Mother and Baby Institutions Payment Scheme Bill by introducing more refined payment bands.

These more refined bands, which are defined by reference to days and are supplemented by additional quarterly rate bands, will serve to benefit applicants, particularly where they would have been at the upper end of a given annual band under the original proposals. The more refined approach set out in the Bill will smooth and narrow the gap between payment amounts for applicants, and increase fairness and transparency.

I have also introduced into the Bill that periods of temporary absence of up to 180 days can be included when calculating the total duration of a person’s time in a relevant institution and their corresponding financial payment. The inclusion of such periods of temporary absence will have the effect of increasing the payment amounts to which some applicants may be entitled.