De Kerk en haar mysteries

KLIK

“That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”

 I will be sharing time with Deputy Seán Kenny. This is an issue on which I was not originally inclined to speak, but having been approached by members of a survivors of child abuse group I decided it was appropriate to speak. It is quite far removed from any experience I have had in my life, so in a sense the more I looked at it the more it shocked me on two fronts. The first is with regard to the State. The 1916 Proclamation aspires to cherish all the children of the nation equally and sadly this story indicates the opposite. Given that religious institutions were involved, the treatment is absolutely in contradiction with the core Christian message of loving one’s neighbour as oneself. It is particularly shocking when related to those two things.


 bad girls do the best sheets
Residential abuse in Ireland represents an exceptionally dark chapter and we had a number of dark chapters in the 20th century. We are now familiar with the scars of torture that were inflicted on young children during their internment in these institutions. The abuse perpetuated in so many industrial schools operated by the Catholic Church is difficult to comprehend and quite stomach churning. The Ryan report exposed one of the blackest stains in the history of the State, including that the entire system treated children more like prison inmates and slaves than people with legal rights and human potential. Some religious officials encouraged ritual beatings and consistency shielded their orders amid a culture of self-serving secrecy. This is where the State comes in because Government inspectors failed to stop the abuses.

The entire State system, from the Garda to the Government, turned a blind eye. It is a testament to the courage and the fortitude of the victims of these institutions, three of whom I met on Monday morning, that they did not give up the fight for justice for themselves, and that finally after many years of complicity and turning a blind eye the State and the religious institutions accepted that they had wronged those who had been placed in their care. The Bill before us is the continuation of the process by which the State seeks to make amends for the abuse and the suffering it facilitated being inflicted upon a particularly vulnerable set of children.

Having known the Minister for many years, I know that the victims of this abuse will get nothing less than the highest priority when it comes to this Bill. However, I wish to bring a number of issues to his attention. Given the horrific experiences of many of the people held in these institutions, it is critical that those administering the fund must have a sufficient degree of empathy with the victims of abuse. Having spoken to some victims of abuse, I understand that there is room for improvement in this regard. Obviously, there must be safeguards in place, but at the end of the day, it must never be forgotten, in any part of the process, that the State is one of the guilty parties here, and that the victims are carrying very deep wounds and must be dealt with gently. I therefore urge the Minister to make his appointments on this matter with an extra degree of care and consideration for the needs for the victims. It is the least that the State owes them.





I have a concern over the financing of the administration of the fund. Having read the Minister’s opening speech on this debate I am somewhat unclear on the issue and would be grateful to get clarification. Victims are very concerned that any funding for the administration of the fund should come from outside sources. It would not be appropriate to fund both the administration and the reimbursements for victims from the same source of funding.

I understand that approximately 400 students who are the children of victims of the abuse have been receiving assistance to complete educational courses. They are nearly finished but may be cut off from funding before they can complete them. I urge the Minister to ensure that those who have already begun a course with the help of the Education Finance Fund can continue to be supported by the fund until they have completed their current course of education.


Former residents, who did not put in claims to the Residential Redress Board, are essentially locked out of any form of redress under the Bill. I appreciate the need for a cut-off point in this regard, but I understand from survivors groups that a substantial number of victims did not go to the redress board and should perhaps be given a second chance. I ask the Minister to clarify whether this is feasible. However, these people should be kept in mind in some way. Just because they did not claim redress from the State does not mean they have not been deeply hurt by the abuse they suffered. Perhaps they were too grievously hurt by their experiences to go through the pain of dragging it up again. Let us keep them in mind.


I wish to raise a related issue. Because I am a member of the Protestant minority, I have been approached by a number of people with connections with Bethany Home. Unfortunately, no redress has been forthcoming from the State in regard to these victims, who suffered the same sort of punishment as the people covered by the Bill. This matter is still a running sore for the victims of Bethany Home, and I ask the Minister to raise this issue with his Government colleagues. I know that the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, has being making positive sounds in this regard and I hope it will yield positive results. I want to pay tribute to Mr. Derek Leinster, Mr. Niall Meehan and their colleagues in the Bethany Homes Survivors Group, who continue to campaign for justice for all the victims in Protestant institutions. I would appreciate if the Minister could bring that back to Cabinet.