Thomas Gould (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am supporting a lady in my constituency who is currently in unsuitable housing. She is housed by Cork City Council. She has applied for a transfer and the council has agreed to this. It has offered to her to go on the transfer list and is assessing her situation. She is a survivor of the mother and baby homes. She is someone who the Minister probably knows personally. She has assisted the Department and the Minister in revealing the truth of what happened in these institutions. The Minister previously said that support will be available for survivors of these institutions to access State services. This must include social housing.

I wrote to the Minister about this lady on 15 September 2023. I received a response indicating that nothing can be done by the Minister or her Department about housing for this lady. I believe it is shameful and disgraceful that a lady has gone through such trauma, including the trauma of telling her story and revealing what went on in these institutions and now, when she needs help and support, she is being failed again by the State. Will the Minister contact Cork City Council, if I resend the lady's details, and ask it to step in immediately? This has been going on for the almost two years that I have been involved and maybe longer before the lady came to me. She has been clear from day one that she has specific needs due to the trauma that she suffered at the hands of the State. That means it is not possible for her to live where she is living at the moment. For far too long, victims and survivors have been failed by the State.

If this lady had a home that she could feel safe and secure in, it would make such a difference to her. She and other victims have suffered so much. Surely a home at this stage is the least the State can do. At least it would help to ease some of the trauma but instead, having to live in this unsuitable accommodation is retraumatising this lady all over again. It adds insult to injury. This lady has suffered emotional suffering and an emotional toll in her life and continues to suffer because she does not have a home.

This Bill delivers some good points but has failed to deliver what the victims and survivors deserve. I am asking the Minister for this lady and for all other survivors who need suitable accommodation to instruct local authorities and approved housing bodies to step in and support them once and for all.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Boyd Barrett.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle and our Malaysian colleagues for those kind words.

The abuse, neglect, beating and mistreatment by tens of thousands of children by church-run institutions in this country over decades with the collusion or facilitation of the State is a dark chapter of shame in the history of our country. Thousands and thousands of people who survived those industrial schools, orphanages and other forms of residential institution where this abuse, neglect and incarceration took place are elderly now and most of them have been marked indelibly with the scars of the abuse, punishment and neglect that the church and State inflicted on them. They have fought long and hard for that redress. I think when Bertie Ahern was Taoiseach, he initially apologised for the abuse of these children, and they were children, in their tens of thousands by church and State in this way. I do not know how many taoisigh ago that was but it is quite a long time. We have a Bill that is supposed to be about providing supports for the survivors of that residential abuse which the representatives of the survivors say should not proceed because it has failed them and because the Government has not listened to what the survivors of this abuse said and asked for.

That is pretty damning. Of course, they know best. I only know from individual accounts. I refreshed my memory by reading some of the documents provided by the Library and Research Service and the comments that are being made by the representatives of the survivors in the media over the last few days. It is surely pretty damning that the people for whom we are supposed to be providing the services, supports and redress are saying that this Bill is so inadequate that it should not proceed and that we should stop it until the Government actually takes on board what the survivors and their representatives have asked for in the form of true redress and justice for the people who suffered so horribly.

It is worth reminding ourselves, as I did when preparing for this discussion, of the level of suffering that these children went through. The facts are really shocking. Some 90% of those who went through the institutions had survived multiple forms of mistreatment, especially physical and emotional abuse and neglect. Almost 50% had suffered sexual abuse by members of the church, employees. Moreover, the failure of the State to properly inspect and oversee these institutions where this sexual, emotional and physical abuse was endemic and systematic over decades.

Four out of five had psychological disorders, more than double the rate in the rest of the community. The rate of psychological disorders was more than double that in international community samples. It was much worse than anywhere else in the world. More than half reported one or more trauma-related symptom in the six months prior to the survey being done. They reported symptoms such as avoidance, while 50% suffered flashbacks and 38% suffered anxiety. Three quarters had experienced one or more very significant lifelong problem, including educational disadvantage, unemployment, homelessness, self-harm and so on.

The ramifications for the individuals roll on for decades and into old age. As a result, the Trutz Haase report, commissioned by Caranua, found an incredible concentration of disadvantage among the survivors, who were overwhelmingly working class children – the children of poorer families. The research findings concluded that the current living conditions of survivors are highly disadvantaged when compared with the population as a whole. More than half of all survivors are living in the most disadvantaged 20% of areas, suggesting that their experience of institutional residential care in Ireland may have compounded and certainly did not alleviate any baseline risks of poverty, deprivation and social exclusion they may have inherited as a result of their social origins.

We know that from talking to the survivors. We have let them down badly. According to them, only four out of the 24 recommendations made by their consultative forum have been taken up, including some of those that have been enumerated by previous speakers. If you have suffered that much damage, it is indelibly marked. These people were children, but it has rolled through at every level in terms of education, health - physical and mental – housing, their ability to gain employment and their requirement for other supports. The damage and trauma they suffered has rolled on to their children and sometimes grandchildren. In spite of the intergenerational impact of that abuse and neglect we have not listened to them. We have not recognised that they have complex and specific needs. They are human beings. That was the whole point. We took a minimalist, one-size-fits-all approach rather than recognise the individual, specific trauma that people have suffered and provide the supports necessary to give them redress from the State and the institutions that failed them. That means listening to them in the first instance, because they were so neglected, ignored, incarcerated, brutalised and so on, and developing redress and supports that actually match their individual needs. It also means giving redress for the terrible suffering and neglect they have experienced.

That brings up the question of the Health (Amendment) Act card, not just an enhanced medical card. It also brings up the question of housing, the related issue of income – not just a miserable €3,000 payment but one that is related to their actual needs, the cost of living, in particular as they get older, the types of individually necessary counselling supports - some people mentioned psychotherapy - and educational access and supports in order to address the damage that has been done.

I do not know at this stage if the Minister will listen to the survivors, but it would be a terrible travesty and make a mockery of the apologies we get periodically after people suffered, were neglected or ignored by the State - these grandiose moments of State apology with a huge media fanfare, but when we look at what happens after, we fail people. We do not follow through on the apologies and give them what they need.

As I mentioned on the day Simon Harris was nominated and elected Taoiseach by this House, I do not know many of the details but I am still not clear what he is going to do about the 50 children who suffered abuse in the Westbank Orphanage, which was excluded from the supports provided by this Bill and from the mother and baby homes redress scheme. They suffered abuse, neglect, beatings and were injected with substances. Why are they being excluded? Are we going to give them what they ask for, and include them in a proper redress scheme and the supports they need to make atonement for what the institutions of church and State did to these children? I hope the Minister will listen to the voices of the survivors. They are the ones that matter.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The survivors suffered abuse; they suffered trauma; they suffered pain. They were children and now most of them are elderly. They feel strongly that this Bill does not represent justice and genuine redress. They are right. It is important that their critical voices are heard in this discussion.

Tom Cronin, a member of the consultative forum said, "The Government is using this Bill to masquerade the fact that it is ignoring the views of survivors once again. The Government repeatedly consults survivors and then ignores them,".

Maurice Patton O'Connell said, "They're trying to save money and wait for all of us to die." "They" refers to the Government. Mary Donovan said the Bill shows "a complete lack of understanding" of what survivors need, before going on to say that "time and time again" survivors had asked for a pension in recognition of the unpaid labour many did while in institutions or boarded out as children. They are fairly damning criticisms. The survivors are correct. This Bill falls far short of what is needed.

Many survivors have been excluded. Many of them applied for the redress scheme thinking it related to only sexual abuse and not to other forms of abuse. We must reach out to those who did not apply and include them in the arrangements.

Only four of the 29 recommendations of the consultative forum are included in this Bill. Survivors need a decent income to be able to live a decent life in their later years. They need incomes which will provide for them for the remainder of their lives. That is very different from what it is included here. They need a proper healthcare package that will provide quality health services free of charge and with easy access for the rest of their lives. The enhanced medical card is little more than the medical card entitlements those survivors already have.

They need arrangements to be made in the areas of housing, local authorities, etc., to guarantee their housing needs are met for the rest of their lives.

On education, a certain amount of puzzlement has been expressed in the debate that education has been prioritised over the health needs of people, many of whom are over the age of 65. While education should be included as part of the Bill, it should be open to family members such as sons, daughters, grandsons and granddaughters. There is a such thing as intergenerational trauma and the education package should be available to the other generations also. The proposal to give a €3,000 once-off payment to survivors who are living abroad is pitiful; €3,000 is nowhere near being good enough.

Some 30% of survivors are in the UK. For many of them, the financial benefit they will get from this Bill, as drafted, will be means-tested. Arrangements need to be put in place whereby they will not be means-tested and more needs to be done in that regard. These children were failed by the State. They were failed by the State in their early years and they must not be failed again in their older years. This Bill falls far short of what is needed and the survivors’ voices must be listened to.

Michael Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. I will speak on the various aspects of the Bill. It is important that the Bill is passed to ensure that the provisions within it are brought into law in order that survivors of institutional abuse are looked after. It is very difficult. Like all public representatives, over the years I have met individuals who have suffered. I do not want to discuss their names but this calls to mind many conversations I have had over many years with people who have suffered enormously. They discussed the challenges they faced in their lives as a result of this.

We must look at the various aspects of the State’s involvement and the lack of oversight by the State. Concerns were raised by many people over the years and they were dismissed. I find it difficult to discuss the Bill because it brings to mind a number of conversations I have had with individuals, particularly those who were in later life. Even before I became a public representative, people discussed the challenges and difficulties they faced as a result of the abuse they suffered. It is hugely important, as some Members and people who have come to me have said, that the State accepts that abuse was suffered. It was abuse. In some instances at the time, it was an acknowledgement that abuse took place in institutions that had been providing services to the State and that they were not being properly watched over.

I have met many individuals who have outlined the difficulties they have had throughout their lives. They gave me very challenging information. We have worked for many years with individuals and families to try to get the best possible advice, counselling, etc., for them. It always harks back to the challenges, issues and traumas they experienced. That led to addiction issues, as well as to confidence issues whereby they were unable to fulfil their dreams. One individual said to me that their dreams and aspirations were pounded out of them when they were in these institutions, as though they were non-human and were not entitled to have the same as any other human being.

This goes back to the Proclamation of independence and cherishing all people and citizens of the State equally. It is hugely important that now and in the future we, as public representatives, constantly keep that at our core, because the results of our not doing that have had an enormous impact. I am often reminded in these debates about one discussion I had many years ago. There was an elderly gentleman, or that is what I thought of him at the time. Now, when I look back at it, he was not so elderly. This goes back more than 30 years. We were speaking as we were doing a job together. He discussed the challenges he faced in life after abuse and how it had such a detrimental effect on him, his family and subsequent relationships. That day, he said, "You know, Michael, when we were at our most Catholic, we were at our least Christian”. Every time a discussion takes place on redress for institutional abuse or when cases are brought forward about what happened in the past and, in some instances in the not-so-distant past, that statement reverberates around us. It is hugely important that in this Bill and as we go forward, we must make sure we reach out our hands. There is the enhanced medical card, there are provisions for education and so on but at the very core of this, we must acknowledge the desperate trauma that was visited upon people. They have not been able to put it beyond them for a variety of reasons, no matter how they have tried and no matter what supports were given to them. It had a lasting and devastating impact on the lives of individuals and families.

There are good measures in this Bill that address the shortcomings of the State. Yet, it is important that every day, we are reminded of what we must now do to deal with the trauma of the past in order to ensure it does not happen in the present day. We can see the lack of services in a whole variety of areas of the provision of care for people. It is important that we, as public representatives, the Government and the State are challenged to not allow a situation that may spark a debate again in 30, 40 or 50 years’ time in the Houses of the Oireachtas to bring redress for something that is happening in the here and now. We must be mindful of that at all times. We must be mindful of the horrendous trauma that was visited upon people. We should make sure that, here and now, this is not being done by the State. We must bring any challenges and information to the right authorities to make sure this is not visited on individuals or families.

Patricia Ryan (Kildare South, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Ireland of today may seem to be a million miles away from the Ireland that the survivors of these institutions remember. This was the Ireland where, as children, their daily lives consisted of abuse, neglect and distress. They were shunned by society and failed by the State. That Ireland will not be gone, however, until the survivors get the recognition and redress they deserve. These people went into these institutions as children. They are now adults, having survived, despite the State’s failures, and standing firm in the face of successive governments that have been stubborn in their refusal to acknowledge their fight for justice.

The average age of the survivors of residential institutional abuse now stands at 69, yet incredibly for survivors who spent years working for nothing - I ask the Minister to let that concept sink in - in residential institutions, getting access to a contributory State pension is still an uphill struggle. That must change. Even something as basic as access to their personal information is not guaranteed. A lovely lady, whom I know quite well, called to my office the other day. She was asking if I could help her to find out how long she was in such an institution as she could not access her own information and could not remember. The lady is old and ill, and should not have to beg for what is hers by right. As the Sinn Féin spokesperson for older people, I find this extremely unacceptable. We are becoming an older nation and have a lot of older people who deserve to be respected. Survivors deserve more. They need real support and not half-baked solutions.

In short, this Bill needs to include all of the key recommendations contained in the pre-legislative report of the joint committee published last December. Those recommendations include equal access to all support for all survivors and making survivors living abroad eligible for a payment. By the way, €3,000 is not enough. The recommendations also include the provision of a State contributory pension in recognition of the years survivors spent working for nothing in those institutions. That would allow them to live out their lives with dignity. These people have already been failed by the State and previous governments for decades. I am asking the Minister not to fail them again and to include all the report's recommendations in this Bill, to implement them and to recognise the survivors of residential institutional abuse once and for all.

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important issue. It is tough for everybody to try to grapple with what happened in the past. When the Government brought in the redress scheme for mothers and babies homes, it built things into the relevant Bill that created division. It included a timeframe requirement whereby people had to have spent six months in a mother and baby home before they were entitled to redress. That created division among people and categorised them differently even though they were all survivors. Listening to the speakers today and looking at this Bill, some of the survivors will be thinking that the same thing is happening again and that we are not bringing forward something that they need. I do not know if people are afraid that we will spend too much money on this or that it will be open-ended but when we give a State apology to survivors and say that we, as a State, are sorry, and repeat it again and again, it is important that we listen to the survivors to whom we are apologising. We need to listen to them and take on board what they are saying and what their asks are.

I do not believe we will come up with a one-size-fits-all solution. For some people, it is not about money but about support, education and housing. A multitude of headings apply. At the end of the day, these were children who survived all types of abuse, including mental, physical and sexual abuse. They have survived and carried that torment with them for most of their lives. As Deputy Patricia Ryan said, the average age of survivors is now 69 and it is important that contributory pension status is given to those people without any kind of qualification. I say that because these people did a lot of work in this country for nothing. They worked hard but received no payment. If we are to do a redress scheme or help these people to whom we have apologised, that is one way we can do it.

There is disbelief among survivors that only four of the 29 recommendations that were put forward are taken care of in the Bill. That makes it seem from the outside as if the Government is not listening or not caring to listen. It is important that we develop a redress scheme that fits the individual rather than engaging in an exercise of saying we have provided a redress scheme. It will not be as easy to do that and it will take more management and administration, but so be it. If we are to do things right, let us put in the time and effort.

We talk about survivors, how they live their lives and the torment they have been through. We are talking about them again today but they are not happy with what we are doing. It is a huge indictment on us, as a political body, that we are not doing the things that are necessary to respond to the trauma associated with this abuse. While it is being recognised and apologised for, we must now put in place some of what I would call the "pain relief" in terms of support to help people for the rest of their lives so they do not have to worry about housing, medical cards and financial issues. These people have spent their lives worrying about those things and bottling up all that happened to them during their lives.

We should not take this as something we need to do or something that has to be done. This scheme must be something we want to do. We must bring in a redress scheme in a way that allows people to access it easily. We must ensure there is a body, a one-stop shop, to which survivors can go to get advice and as many supports as they need rather than putting paperwork in front of them and driving them away. We need to ensure this is a user-friendly support scheme so those eligible can understand what their entitlements are, what the services are and where they are available. A clear pathway needs to be set out so there is no ambiguity and nothing is hidden in the small print that would mean applicants are told at the end of the day they are not entitled to support because of a time constraint, an age restriction or anything else.

One of the big things I come across is that people are very upset when they are looking for access to their own files and property. It seems that survivors of mother and baby homes and other institutions find that an enormous barrier. There does not seem to be a place, person or entity who can take them in, get them the information they need and give them some closure on that part of their lives.

We need justice, reparation and redress. We are talking about human beings, Irish people and equal citizens, who, through no fault of their own, landed in these institutions. As others have said, they were people of the working class and people of little means. They are the bravest people we have in this country because of what they went through and survived. It is incumbent on us, as politicians, to ensure we recognise that in a meaningful way. I ask that the survivors are listened to and that what they say is taken on board. I know that if we take everything on board, we will achieve nothing but the way the Bill has been structured and the recommendations have been treated has caused disappointment and anger. People tell me not to let this Bill pass because it is not good for survivors. We must look at it again to see how we can make it right for the survivors who need justice because we must provide justice for them.

As no other Sinn Féin Deputies are offering, we will move to Deputy Mattie McGrath who has two and a half minutes. We will adjourn at that stage and he may speak again when the debate resumes.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCeann Comhairle. I did not think I would get in but I am delighted to speak on the Bill today. This is a difficult and trying issue on which we have around the Houses, with investigations over the decades. I have often said how sad it was that people were put into these homes. To hear the stories related today in the Chamber is also sad.

I had a lovely neighbour who I will call Peig. She lived less than a kilometre from where I was born but I never knew she existed until her late brother had a stroke and she arrived back to mind him. They are all deceased now, God rest them. I never knew she was part of the family. So many families, though not that family, in towns, in the country and in cities had people who were put into these homes. The things that happened have been well aired and extrapolated, some of them of an horrific and cruel nature but also some very kind things as well. We cannot comprehend it in this day and age.

This did not happen in isolation. The State, the church and families were involved. We can never forget that families had their family members put into these institutions, knowingly and willingly. We can never forget that. It would be wrong to forget it because it happened, and very often. They were very different times, obviously, compared to today. Having learned so much from the past, there is so much that we have failed to learn as well. There are still many injustices. Children go missing in State care under the care of Tusla.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We must adjourn the debate. The Deputy's group will have 17 minutes remaining when it resumes. The clock is wrong.