Catherine Connolly
Galway West · Ireland
“We must zone in on the smaller businesses because that was the problem; the smaller companies and businesses could never avail of the research and development tax credit. This morning, I had the privilege of listening to the organisation, ALONE. It pointed out that older people living alone are €300 worse off compared to last year.”
“Those patients are human beings and they are being left on trolleys. There are some good things in this budget, which I welcome. I welcome the increase in social welfare, but when it is matched with the increase in the cost of living, it is worth absolutely nothing. I welcome that the money for artists has been extended.”
“Maybe the hint for what has happened with this budget is captured in the words of the Minister, Paschal Donohoe, who said, "Our schools, our hospitals and our public services are responsible for so much good in society." They certainly are, but that is not their function.”
“We have given a reduction in VAT down to 9% for developers with absolutely no evidence that this will help in any way and no context given. Today I attended a presentation in Buswells in relation to derelict properties all done on a voluntary basis.”
“There is 2% less funding at a time when we need balanced rural and regional development more than ever. I welcome the commitment to diversifying our economy. It should have happened years ago. Again, it is lacking in detail.”
“I preface my remarks by using a few seconds to talk about the four people who are outside here on the 18th day of their hunger strike. We have passed a budget in one of the richest economies in the world and we have four people who have been 18 days on hunger strike outside. They have survived the industrial schools.”
The complete record
Every one of 683 lines we hold for Catherine Connolly, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 14.
“I want to see development but I want to see balanced regional development. I want to see a masterplan for the public lands because there has never been one. The harbour, which is public land held in trust for the people of Galway, is going ahead with its own plan for premium housing on public land to keep the price artificially high. Ceannt Station, with something like 14 ha in the city, has its own plan. There is no masterplan. When I was there I was told the council could not afford to produce a masterplan, so it would let the developers do that. Thus we have developer-led development. I say this openly at the risk of losing votes. We have developer-led development in Galway. We have absolutely no vision and no understanding of the challenges we face due to climate change and flooding. We need transformative action for Galway.”
“There is not a sign of a treatment plan for that. Then we have two pipes under the Corrib Estuary, down where I live in the Claddagh. A report was done on behalf of Uisce Éireann to say one of those pipes is in imminent danger of collapse. There is another more technical name for it. This is one of the major pipes carrying the sewage from east Galway out to the Mutton Island treatment plant and it is in imminent danger of collapse. The former Minister of State, Senator Noonan of the Green Party, was there and he took this seriously enough but it went nowhere. We were told it was a misunderstanding and the engineer had not said that and the engineer’s report had not said that, so I went back and looked and of course that is the position in Galway. I am a proud Galwegian. I want it to grow sustainably.”
“Níl seans dá laghad go mbeidh forbairt chothrom i gceist ó thaobh an chontae agus ó thaobh na cathrach. Tuigeann an tAire Stáit é sin. It is impossible to have balanced regional development and balanced city and county development if we do not have basic infrastructure. If we take one major example in Carraroe, there is no sewage treatment plant so no houses can be built. When we go to updates twice a year, finding out what the problems are is like pulling teeth without anaesthetic. We find absence of infrastructure is a problem. Galway city is destined to grow as one of the five cities. I ask the Minister of State to come and look at what is happening in Galway, because there is not even a site for a treatment facility for east Galway. The plan is for Ardaun to have a population of 10,000.”
“Location of land acquisitions. Where are main areas for private development and where is significant development taking place. How many units are dependent on critical infrastructure [and so on]. He also talks about "funding" and "resources". This is 2025, and an emergency housing task force is finally beginning to ask questions when the crisis has become absolutely out of all proportion. We can look at what has happened. We see the county and we see An Cheathrú Rua i gcroílár na Gaeltachta gan aon chóras séarachais. Níl aon chóras séarachais. Tá séarachais amh ag dul isteach san fharraige. Is constaic ollmhór í sin do chúrsaí tithíochta. Tá sé ráite go neamhbhalbh ag an gcomhairle contae nach féidir leo tuilleadh tithe a thógáil de bharr easpa infreastruchtúir.”
“This is what he is telling us, six years after the task force was set up. The minutes state: For the next meeting the Chair requested a short document providing a story of the maps to include the following: What is going on in the Housing Market in Galway (both private and public). What is going on? I imagine that was the most basic question. It was the first question that should have been asked back in 2019. A report on that should have been produced. Here we are in 2025, and there are waiting lists on which some people are waiting, without exaggeration, up to 20 years. Most are waiting somewhere between eight and 15 years for a public house. He tells the two managers what is needed and asks what is going on in the market. The minutes also refer to: Usage of Local Authority land for housing purposes ... What lands are not being used ...”
“There is an absolute prejudice inbuilt into this Government and every government in relation to public housing, which should be an essential part of the solution. When it abandoned that, it created an emergency that is getting worse and worse. The Housing Commission has asked for a radical reset of housing policy, but it has been utterly ignored by the Government except for the piecemeal tinkering with rent limits. The Housing Commission says that we need at a minimum 20% public housing, but this has been utterly ignored. I have looked at the most recently available minutes of the task force. The new chair, if I am not wrong, is a former general secretary or economist. He has expressed his utter frustration at what is going on in Galway city and county. I will quote him precisely.”
“It asks for the turnaround time for an empty house to be 12 weeks with some flexibility, for direct labour and for a report in real time every six months. I have no problem supporting it. I cannot understand how the Government has a problem with it. Let us go back to this famous task force in Galway. It was announced in 2018 and set up in 2019. It is now six years later and the task force is still sitting. All that has changed is that there is a different chair. It was set up because there was a housing emergency in Galway directly related to the Government's policy because it failed to build houses. Deputy Hearne is perfectly right. I put it differently although I agree with him.”
“I thank Sinn Féin for tabling this motion. I cannot tell you how many times I have spoken on this issue. I will come to the housing task force, the minutes of which the Minister was instrumental in getting us. When we talk about empty houses tonight, we are doing so against a background of the highest ever number of homeless people: 15,580, 4,475 of whom are children. This Government is taking pride in its policy, a jigsaw of pieces that adds more confusion, keeps house prices artificially high, and continues to treat housing as a commodity rather than a fundamental, basic unit of society - a home. You clap yourselves on the back with no overall picture. Sinn Féin has tabled a motion that is very practical. Honestly, if the Government had any sense, it would agree with it, even just for appearances' sake.”
“It is similar with State investment. We are actually investing in war bonds. We have moved beyond asking the Central Bank to stop the role that it has and if it cannot do so, we should then bring in the necessary legislation. We now find out that we are investing public money in war bonds.”
“The occupied territories Bill, however limited, has to be passed for goods and services. It is the least we can do. The constant refrain that Europe might take infringement proceedings against us is unacceptable. Let us face that if it happens. There is a genocide happening in our name while we stand here and talk, so we need to take action. The limited way that the Government is dealing with the Central Bank's role and its refusal to look at that is also part of this discussion. It is limiting it to the three Cs, namely, comprehensibility, consistency and some other C. The Government is not looking at the overall obligation on the Central Bank to comply with its own Central Bank Act. That Act says it must comply with European law, which lays down fundamental human rights. It is not even being measured against that, or public policy.”
“I have a completely different view, if you look at EU law. I asked a question and the answer I got is really shocking. First of all, I asked a very specific question about all State investments in Israeli bonds. It took until the end to get the answer, namely, that the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund has invested in Israeli bonds. The most recent figures available are for the end of 2023. There are no figures for 2024. That entity now holds direct holdings in Israeli war bonds totalling €2.62 million.”
“Does the Tánaiste see the date on the occupied territories Bill? It is 2018. It is now 2025. I welcome that some progress has been made. However, it has taken the deaths and slaughter of 54,000 Palestinians, and that figure, which I read out this morning, is totally inaccurate. According to The Lancet , the figure is much higher than that. At the very least, this occupied territories Bill needs to be pushed through before this summer to ban goods and services, if our word is to mean anything. I do not mind or care whether our trade is limited. This is something that needs to be done at its most basic level. During the week the Government refused to vote to stop the selling of bonds in Ireland or, rather, the approving of the prospectus. It said to do so would not comply with EU law.”
“I understand this question is in a group, such is Deputies' concern about the occupied territories Bill or, to give it its proper name, the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018, which incorporates a ban on imports and services from the occupied areas, supported by the advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s occupation and settlements issued on 19 July 2024 by the International Court of Justice. It takes on added meaning with Israel's announcement today that it intends to establish 22 further new settlements in the occupied West Bank.”
“Now it is March 2031. The planning was set for September 2023, then 2025 and then 2027. The Minister of State can see the frustration, all because the size of the project was never anticipated. They were working from the wrong figures and data. The following was the reply to my most recent question on the matter in February this year, "There will be an opportunity for the public to view and comment on the design options, currently scheduled to take place in June 2025." Will the Minister of State tell me in his summing up, which I will watch from my office, whether that specific timeline is on target? Will that be missed as well?”
“We need those reports urgently on Clifden and Oranmore to Kinvara, which was greatly affected by the last storm and flooding. I have a parochial interest in what is proposed in the Claddagh because I live there. There was supposed to be a scheme for 312 properties and then 940. I have no problem with that but from day one it was obvious. The scheme moved forward and went backwards. I received the following reply: "As regards the increased work involved, Galway City Council engaged with its [consultants] to reprogramme the scheme. This has been agreed in principle by the steering group, and the revised dates are as follows." Submission of planning was to be September 2023, then July 2025 and then it went forward to July 2027, subject to the revised programme being agreed. Then, construction was to begin in October 2025, then 2029.”
“The Minister of State and I have had an engagement on this before. First, the scheme in Galway has not been prevented because of objections or bureaucracy. Second, the catchment flood risk assessment and management was the biggest flood risk assessment and it affected two thirds of the population. It was a brilliant piece of work. It was completed in 2018. Unfortunately, when the consultants were eventually appointed in 2020, they came back with a report that identified that the scale of the flood risk in Galway is much greater than that identified by the CFRAM study. We were therefore in trouble from day one because the study was based on outdated information on the scale and the rapidity of the change due to climate change. What is proposed in Galway, and in Clifden, was already mentioned; I will not repeat it.”
“I want to share with the Tánaiste a positive letter I got from Galway City Council. It is delightful. I am told the council is incredibly proud of the impact the energy retrofit programme is having in providing warmer and more efficient homes and helping to reduce energy poverty. It is a delightful letter except the family about whom I raised representations has gone on a waiting list and the city council has no money for the energy retrofit programme. It is all used up and that family is gone onto a list for next year. Yesterday, we heard the head of the Environmental Protection Agency tell us we will fail to meet all of our targets. I am drawing this to the Tánaiste's attention to show the staff are there, ready and willing, but there is no funding for them to carry out the retrofit programme.”
“He can say a lot of things, and then we watch Shannon being used, an occupied territories Bill that is going nowhere and trade with Europe. Ours is a small country. It is time we led, given our history. It is time we called for an absolute ceasefire, led in the UN, made our words mean something and called out that narrative for what it is. Israel is a rogue state. It is not a democratic state. That narrative allowed a congressman, who said of Palestine, "Go in there and kick the ... [S-H-I-T] out of them", to come into this room just two months ago. This is a congressman who is fêted by one of the Tánaiste's colleagues and by another colleague in Fianna Fáil. How dare you shake your head? You stand up-----”
“We all may well be appalled and sickened, but the Government is refusing to face the elephant in the room. Israel has an umbilical cord attachment to America. America, followed by the EU, is the biggest supplier of arms to Israel, and the Irish Government is waiting for a morally corrupt and inept EU to take action. The EU is the second biggest supplier of arms to the genocide. Let us call a spade a spade. We have no difficulty, and the Government has had no difficulty, criticising Russia. The same condemnation has not been used as regards Israel, identifying it as the aggressor that is perpetuating genocide. The Tánaiste's facial expressions do not help in that manner. This is far too serious.”
“I cannot find a more comprehensive and fair analysis of what has happened except The Hundred Years' War on Palestine . It is time for us to reflect and stop the cognitive dissonance where we praise ourselves for taking the best action on Palestine and ask how an independent sovereign state - a republic - is standing over a narrative that is utterly false regarding Israel. Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for your forbearance.”
“I do not have much time, but I will read out some of the bullet points. On 6 October 2023, Israel controlled most of Palestine in complete defiance of international law. The people were kept under a blockade with electricity for less than a few hours per day. It continued the blockade of most of Gaza's population. At that point, Israel had built up an extensive infrastructure in the West Bank exclusively for Jews against international law. On 6 October 2023, Israel had already killed 250 Palestinians by October, including almost 50 children, in the most aggressive settler push across the West Bank for almost two decades. I am quoting from a new book called Catastrophe: Nakba II to be launched tonight by Fintan Drury. I invite all Members to go along to Hodges Figgis.”
“How have we allowed this to happen? I include myself in that question. We have let it happen because we have bought into a narrative that has been pushed for over 100 years - I would say 140 years at this stage - that the Jewish people were a people without a land and Palestine was a country without a people. Arising from that, the narrative took hold that they were entitled to that land, notwithstanding the Nakba in 1948 or the new Nakba that is happening under our eyes and noses. The narrative is that Israel is the only democracy and the bulwark against the Islamic religion and Muslims. We have all bought into that to a certain extent. When the Hamas attack took place on 7 October 2023, which we are on record for condemning, I also said that history did not start on that day.”
“I am returning to the issue of Palestine and the genocide that is going on there. This morning, we listened to RTÉ's report of what the Palestinian ambassador to the UN said. He spoke of how flames and hunger were devouring Palestinian children. We also listened to an eyewitness account of a doctor on the ground. I will provide a few figures, but how have we reached this point? How have we let this happen? A total of 54,000 Palestinians, including 15,613 children, are dead. The Lancet puts the figure for dead and injured much higher. More than 630,000 people have been displaced. At least 28 aid workers have been killed since 1 May, an average of one worker per day. Since 7 October 2023, 452 aid workers have been killed. What did Israel do today? It announced that it intended to establish 22 new settlements.”
“SIPO's secretarial staff also have responsibility for other operations within SIPO's remit. There is a need for a definition of "political purposes" and "third parties". On expenditure limits, there are no limits on expenditure for Seanad elections or referenda, unlike other elections. There are inconsistent disclosure requirements for political parties and so on. It has little power by way of investigation. Local elections are treated differently. That is only a small sample of the inadequacies of the existing legislation. It is the opposite to what democracy needs.”
“I will stick with what SIPO tells us. I will go back to 2019 and to the submission to public consultation on the regulatory impact analysis. It states that SIPO's "mandate includes oversight of the electoral Act". It then goes on to outline some of the challenges for SIPO in this role and the lack of independence of SIPO in terms of budgets, staffing and reporting to the Oireachtas. It states that SIPO does not have its own Vote, unlike in other jurisdictions and that a dedicated Vote would allow it more independence, which is vital, and autonomy. It outlines the "burdensome framework for reporting" and that seven statutory reports are required under the electoral Act alone. Four of the six members of the SIPO Commission are ex officio with other commitments, which limits the time they have to focus on SIPO.”
“It is more than two years after the departmental review and the Minister has no heads of Bill for us, no date or no anything. There is an absolute failure to recognise what SIPO is telling us in terms of governance, oversight and its lack of power to act.”
“I have to agree with the previous speaker on this. I looked back to April. This is not a priority. In its 2009 annual report, SIPO "recommends that the Department of Finance should draft new legislation to be based on best practice for dealing with conflicts of interests and ... consolidate". Fast forward to the 2021 annual report, SIPO states "For a number of years, the Commission has called for a comprehensive review of the existing ethics framework...in annual reports" and so on. It says it over and over. It is not good enough for the Minister to come in today and say it is complex and he is still looking at it. The review was completed more than two years ago. It took years to get the review. I am quoting from an annual report from 2009. It is now 2025.”
“The religious orders got away with holy murder – forgive the use of bad words – while their assets increase in value all the time. It is too late to appeal to the Minister not to put this Bill through, but those are my reasons for not being able to support it. She might address the consultation process we set up when we put in place a special advocate who had a very special background that gave her great understanding in all the roles she has played. She set out clearly what is to be done. The Minister and the Department ignored that, however, all to save a few pence. I cannot support the Bill.”
“We should give them reassurance that they will not end up in institutions again, because I know the fear they have of ending up again in an institution in older life. It is devastating for survivors that they would ever again be under the control of officials or those in power. I do not think it is that hard. We have put aside billions. We have apologised repeatedly, yet we keep bringing up defective schemes for survivors, to which we are supposed to give the thumbs-up. I accept the Minister's bona fides but, as a mother and a woman, I question that a mother and baby homes scheme would be brought in on an arbitrary basis to save money, particularly as the Department said money needed to be saved following the numbers that were crunched.”
“More than 20 psychotherapists wrote to the previous Minister and Government asking them not to do this because it was arbitrary. That is all on file. They asked the Government to please not exclude babies under six months because the first six months of life are fundamental to child development. The scheme ignored the advice on babies under six months, as well as ignoring all those who were boarded out and those who suffered because they were of mixed race. That was the mother and baby homes redress, and this is the latest one. We ignored the survivors, the special advocate and the women and men who came forward and put aside their disbelief and scepticism for one last chance for the system to listen to them. In the overall scheme of things, we are talking about a limited number of people.”
“The religious orders have not come forward at all. They have got away with holy murder. I have never blamed the religious orders because successive Governments and politicians colluded. The middle classes benefited from workers from the Magdalen laundries and mother and baby homes. There is blame on the religious orders, who have a higher duty, because they practice Christianity. They were forced to come forward through being given an indemnity. Can one imagine that? If we fast forward, they then gave €125 million. We have survivors struggling and then we bring in the mother and baby homes redress scheme, but we exclude all babies under six months on the basis that babies under six months do not feel or see anything – they are a tabula rasa . One can let one's baby cry.”
“They never had to worry again about a single case being taken against them because the State gave them an indemnity. The €12 million for the superb education fund was taken out of the €128 million. The only drawback was that the amount involved was limited to €12 million. The finding of the Comptroller and Auditor General is that the Government paid a total of €1.25 billion for redress. If we fast forward to 2009 when the Ryan report was published, some of the religious orders were embarrassed to come forward again. The Christian Brothers reneged on it. The religious orders gave another €125 million or thereabouts. That is all that has ever been given. The previous Government told us that it had a negotiator talking to the religious orders to see if they would make further contributions. That has not been mentioned here today.”
“In fact, the CEO went out on paid leave because of something she said that I will not repeat. Her comments about survivors indicate that she was clearly not fit for the job. The comments she made were absolutely appalling. The sum of €15,000 was given out. Then, in the middle of the scheme, Caranua felt it was running out of money and stopped the payments. There were arguments over white fridges and so on. The point I make is that Caranua was defective, just like the Magdalen scheme had been defective. Before I finish, I wish to refer to the religious orders. After the apology and the Ryan report, some of the findings of which I read out, the religious orders were forced to give €128 million. In return, they were given an indemnity.”
“The latter provided limited funds of €12 million, which quickly ran out. The €12 million came from two tranches of money from the religious orders. I will come back to that. I have heard no complaint about the Department of Education in regard to that scheme. It gave money to provide some redress and to help people return to education, but it also did it for the children, grandchildren and stepchildren. That element is completely absent from this legislation. We did not learn from the good schemes and we continue to perpetuate the bad schemes. We can fast forward to Caranua, which means new friend, but really it was the old enemy in disguise. I have said that about five times now in different speeches. Its board was set up without proper regulation.”
“The Government has never been proactive in coming forward, despite its apologies. The report on the mother and baby homes was not made public until January 2021, after the Zoom call to which I referred. I remember speaking about it in the convention centre. I did my best to read the executive summary over an afternoon and a night with the help of my staff. It turns out that I was the only TD who got a copy of it. I stood up the following day thinking all TDs had it. We had a discussion on the mother and baby homes report without anyone but me having it. I pay tribute to the researchers who did the work in respect of the report. The executive summary, with its particular narrative, is appalling. Nothing was learned. One good scheme was set up by the Department of Education.”
“Those women had to fight the whole way to the High Court. The Ombudsman issued a damning report on the scheme the Government had gone to all the trouble to ask Mr. Justice Quirke about. Although he set out clearly what should happen, what he said was ignored. Then we go forward to the report on the mother and baby homes, which the Government got in October 2020 but did not disclose until the following January. It was only afterwards that the Government told survivors on a Zoom call what was in the report. The narrative was shaped, just like the executive summary. I am using the time available because this might be the last time I get a chance to speak on this subject. It is extremely important to put this on the record now in a new Dáil with many new TDs. There is a whole background to this Bill.”
“That letter was put to the applicants by way of cross-examination, with nobody there to assist them. That is what happened with the redress scheme. In all of this consultation, survivors and their families tell us that it was more abuse. We are now putting a scheme through based on that utterly flawed system. If we move to the Magdalen laundries legislation, we can see that, if nothing else, it sets out clearly that the Government and the State had a duty to inspect and they did not do so. Then a scheme was set up. We asked Mr. Justice Quirke to set out the criteria for the scheme. One of the things he said was that, at the very least, those involved should get the Health (Amendment) Act medical card, but that did not happen. Subsequently, it was found that quite a number of women and institutions had been left out.”
“If we go forward from the apology in 1999, we got more apologies. We got an apology for the mother and baby homes and we got an apology for the Magdalen laundries. The UN committee said that the apologies were good but were undermined by subsequent actions of the Government and subsequent schemes. We look at them and ask what schemes were set up. As regards the 15,000 survivors of the redress scheme, I was there in a professional capacity. It remains a crime for me to say what the settlement was. It remains a crime for the person who got an award to say so. That is what we did in the 20th and 21st centuries. We are making it a crime to disclose. Survivors were subjected to an adversarial system. They were subjected to letters coming from religious orders that did not have the courage to turn up but sent their legal teams in with a letter.”
“Sexual abuse was not systemic in girls' institutions but they were subjected to predatory sexual abuse by male employees, visitors and in outside placements, which we have not dealt with at all. The report noted that sexual abuse by religious staff tended to be dealt with using internal disciplinary procedures of canon law. Gardaí were not informed. On the rare occasions that the Department of Education was informed, it colluded in the silence; it colluded in the abuse of innocent children. All children are innocent. This is the Ryan report. Prior to that, we were fully aware of what was going on because we were told. Fr. Flanagan, the founder of Boys Town, back in the mid-20th century was disgusted by what was going on and set it out. We had the Kennedy report in the 1970s and the Cussen report in the 1930s. We knew what was going on.”
“Justice Ryan went on to note a systemic use of corporal punishment and a climate of fear created by pervasive, excessive and arbitrary punishment, permeated most institutions and all of those run for boys. Complaints to the Department were not properly investigated. Mr. Justice Ryan noted that sexual abuse was endemic in boys' institutions and referred to predatory sexual abuse against girls. I have difficulty reading the fact that sexual abuse was endemic in boys' institutions but I have a duty to read it out. Sexual abuse was endemic in boys' institutions and I will come back to the religious orders that have failed to live up to their responsibilities.”
“The system of funding through capitation grants led to demands by Managers for children to be committed to Industrial Schools for reasons of economic viability of the institutions. This was not for the children's sake but for the economic viability of the schools. Mr. Justice Ryan mentioned a fundamentally flawed system of inspection by the Government. He also noted that the Department of Education's deferential and submissive attitude towards the religious congregations compromised its ability to fulfil its statutory duty of inspection. He noted that the inspectors lacked the power to insist on changes. I will not read it all out but it is on page 16 in the digest. It is worth reading the summary. Mr.”
“Let us look at the apologies. In 1999, this apology did not come from a proactive Government but rather from some of the work by Mary Raftery and Donal O'Flaherty subsequently, in the book States of Fear, and all the other books and documentaries. Finally, in 1999, we got an apology, after a century and more of incarceration. In May 1999, the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern apologised on behalf of the State to survivors of child abuse in institutions. Following that, the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was set up. This was chaired by Mr. Justice Seán Ryan. He published his report in 2009. I will read out what he said. It is really important because we forget: ... an outdated system enabled by the funding model.”
“The Government says things like "We are doing this and it is very important that we put it through for the survivors". Nothing was to happen like this without the survivors being involved. Despite the scepticism of the survivors, the special advocate, on their behalf, produced a report, as I have said already. I am allergic to repetition, but it is really important. This was the scheme that was going to be different. In this scheme, we were going to listen to the survivors and the advocate and have an inclusive scheme, because that is what they asked for. Really, in the scheme of things, it is very limited. I accept the Minister's bona fides but I cannot accept what she is saying, because the system is failing to learn. It is just perpetuating the injustice over and over again to save a few pennies. I find that unacceptable.”
“Can I speak on this? I was not sure what the format was. I want to support any Bill that gives supports to survivors. I am now in a dilemma as I cannot support this Bill. I will outline why this is the case. I will go back over 22 years of apologies. As usual, I thank the staff in the library for their wonderful work setting this out. I recommend it to any new TD. The library can set out the whole background to a topic. I have been here for some of that background. I am no expert but, I repeat, I have both personal and professional experience. The Minister says that other schemes have done this and we are staying with the other schemes. All of the other schemes have been found to be badly defective in many ways. Let us start with the apologies. We have had 22 years of apologies. It is very important to remind people of this.”
“If I read it one way, it is a good amendment in the sense that it seems to be opening up possibilities by changing the assessments of need on behalf of the Health Service Executive and taking out the reference to who specifically will do it. Why is that necessary? Does the Minister wish to broaden it out to allow other people to carry out the assessment? The Minister might clarify and explain this further.”
“I will speak specifically on the amendment but first, regarding what the Deputy Ó Muirí just said, the Ombudsman's report on the Magdalen scheme was utterly scathing. It is worth reading what was said. While I am not going to read it again, it was utterly scathing of the way the scheme was administered. Prior to that, Mr. Justice Quirke, a High Court judge, had recommended that the special medical card be given to the Magdalen survivors. That was not done either. On the amendment, I had not spotted the issue but I am glad the Deputy raised it. It would be helpful if the Minister clarified the matter. As it reads, I do not know whether it is good or bad.”
“We are here today doing the exact same thing, telling survivors we have listened to them and then absolutely ignoring them, and ignoring the special advocate the Minister put in place to tell us what survivors want, all to save a few euro. It would have been much simpler all along just to give a payment to every survivor and their families in terms of education.”
“I have tried to work the parliamentary system but all of my amendments were ruled out of order. The Department of Education commissioned a report in 2019. It was published and utterly ignored. The special advocate refers to this report. In the final report the top two priority issues for survivors were a request for the HAA card and prioritisation of housing needs of survivors. Neither of these two requests, nor the other requests, have been included. I speak as somebody with personal and professional experience of institutions. I have watched 22 years of apologies and there has been more than 100 years of institutionalisation. I will come back to this. Each scheme has been defective. The Magdalen scheme led to the Ombudsman absolutely castigating its discriminatory nature and maladministration.”
“She states the very limited and less-than-effective impact of the proposed enhanced card has been consistently raised over the past 12 months by the Magdalen survivors and those receiving the medical card under the mother and baby homes scheme. That is another unjust discriminatory scheme. The HAA card is the required card for all institutional abuse survivors, as it guarantees their rights to full and speedy access to health provisions and support for an ageing and marginalised group. May I say, they are marginalised by what was done to them by the State. Often they are vulnerable groups. With regard to the health needs of those overseas, they ask specifically that the payment to them be increased to at least €10,000. We have tabled amendments for a figure higher than that. All of my amendments have been ruled out of order.”
“I would be asking for more but that is what is being asked for. Then we go on to housing needs. The special advocate proposes a novel, innovative and cost-neutral initiative. I do not know whether she is being ironic. Imagine, to reassure the Minister she is describing as novel, innovative and cost-neutral the request that survivors be given additional weighting on the social housing waiting list. It is something as simple as that. The health service has been mentioned already. Let us stop calling it an enhanced medical card. The survivors are asking for the HAA card, introduced in legislation for another vulnerable group. The special advocate states that in her role she has spoken to more than 1,200 survivors and affected persons.”