Ivana Bacik
Dublin Bay South · Labour Party · Ireland
“Just today I and other local representatives got an email from the owner of two restaurants in Dublin city centre about this issue. The Minister of State’s brief includes not only the circular economy but also small business.”
“The Bill Deputy Sherlock and the Labour Party are proposing is not one we suggest is a silver bullet or a panacea but it offers one small, constructive mechanism to address the dysfunction in waste services.”
“In Dublin Bay South we have superb Tidy Towns organisations that I am proud to work with from Ringsend and Sandymount across to Portobello in my area to Rathgar, Rathmines, Terenure, Donnybrook and Ballsbridge. We see really important work being done by Tidy Towns organisations.”
“The owner says he no longer has space to accommodate additional recycling bins, cannot leave recyclable waste out for collection and cannot leave flattened cardboard outside for collection. Private waste companies must send a vehicle to collect this directly from premises. This is costly, inefficient and unnecessary.”
“I do not mean just in Dublin, though Deputy Sherlock and I are focusing on Dublin and most of the TDs present are Dublin ones, as clearly this has ramifications across the country and the dissatisfaction and the concerns Deputy Sherlock’s constituents and mine are expressing are ones felt across the board.”
“We want to see a move, as Deputy Sherlock has it in the Bill, from competition in the market to competition for the market and this Bill would represent an important positive step on that journey to quality public services provided by the State and to remunicipalisation. Deputy Sherlock has set out the detailed provisions in the Bill.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,196 lines we hold for Ivana Bacik, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 24.
“My deepest sympathies are with the family of Jamey Carney, the Killarney-based women into whose death local gardaí are preparing to open a murder investigation. We note that a man has been charged with the murder of Adina Raluca Constantin who died after an assault in Laois on Saturday. Our thoughts are with their families, friends and communities as they reel from that brutal and tragic news. As of yesterday, the number of women killed violently in Ireland this year has overtaken the figure for the whole of 2025 in just seven months. Rich, full lives have been extinguished. Families have been deprived of mothers, sisters and daughters. Communities have been deprived of family, friends, colleagues and neighbours.”
“They should not have to wait another six months before we can even see work resuming on this Bill. The work the Minister says remains to be done can continue while the Bill progresses through the Oireachtas on Committee Stage and Report Stage. Will the Government withdraw the delaying amendment and let the Bill progress through the Oireachtas to deliver justice for survivors?”
“My thoughts today are with the many victims of George Gibney following his conviction after many decades of evading justice for far too long. We are reminded of how many survivors of abuse are still awaiting justice. A timely vote takes place in the Dáil tomorrow evening on the Labour Party's Bill to enable survivors to pursue religious orders for redress in respect of abuse perpetrated upon them in childhood. The justice Minister has said the Bill aligns with Government policy but that he wants another six months to consider the Bill. The Minister has had almost two years. He referred this Bill to the Attorney General, I understand, two years ago. Survivors have been left carrying terrible trauma for decades, where they have experienced abuse in institutions as children.”
“We are asking him to make a different choice. Will he guarantee that vacant posts in the public sector will be filled, that public sector jobs will be saved from outsourcing and that pay increases will at least-----”
“-----the sort of meaningful engagement that people need. The reality is that far too many of the lowest paid public servants in this country are now being priced out of living in this country. They simply cannot afford to make ends meet. They cannot afford to buy their own homes. I am sure the Minister, like me, is meeting people in his own constituency who are telling him they cannot afford to buy or rent a home. Indeed, many people, particularly in a younger generation, cannot even see a way in their immediate future to aspire to own or even rent their own home. Far too many public servants are still living at home with their parents, well into their 20s and 30s. That is not sustainable and they are seeing that wrong-headed VAT cut the Minister announced. That is the choice the Minister made.”
“I am glad to hear the Minister say that he wants a new national pay agreement but it certainly does not sound as if his rhetoric is matching the reality. It sounds as if he has something against nurses, teachers and gardaí because we are not seeing-----”
“Will the Minister stop scapegoating the unions and, as Minister for public expenditure and reform, will he engage in good faith and use the public sector pay talks to back and support PAYE workers and to spend in a sustainable manner, to invest in quality public services, to invest in the delivery of social and affordable homes, and to build an active State that communities need?”
“Earlier in the year, the Minister announced measures to support sectors vulnerable to fuel hikes but nothing for the 500,000 households now in arrears on their electricity bills. The Minister must now reckon with the political choices he has made and he has new political choices ahead. If he makes the wrong choices, the people with least to give will pay the highest price again and will pay the price for the Minister's unsustainable management of the public finances.”
“They deserve fair pay, respect and meaningful engagement ..." Did the Minister forget about public sector workers or is this in keeping with this Government's attitude to PAYE workers, in general? We know the Minister is dealing with finite public resources but by creating uncertainty around agreeing a new public sector pay deal, he is risking public finances. He is projecting prudence but finding the money to spend where it suits in a profligate fashion. As the existing public sector agreement expired, the Minister's wrong-headed VAT cut for hospitality came into effect. At an annual cost of €681 million, the Government directly took money from the pockets of PAYE workers and put it in the hands of Supermac's and Burger King.”
“This is a move that nobody wants to take but public servants need to be able to make ends meet. This is DEFCON 1. The Minister needs to respond and to do so substantively. The Minister has already described the unions' course of action as a "surprise". Most people will be surprised by the Minister's surprise because thanks to the political choices made by the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael over the past decade, Ireland was already expensive before now and lacking in quality public services. However, now inflation is skyrocketing. The cost of living is crushing households and the Minister and his officials have known this was coming and knew the current agreement was expiring. As SIPTU general secretary John King has said: "Public sector workers have carried this country through crisis after crisis.”
“Last week, Ireland took on the Presidency of the Council of the European Union but we acquired another title, too. Ours is now the most expensive country in the EU for housing, healthcare and electricity. Housing costs are double those of the EU average and rising fast, as today's MyHome.ie report confirms. The cost of healthcare is a staggering 85% higher than EU averages. In that context, it is astonishing to see this Government’s inaction on pay talks for hardworking public servants. The last public sector pay agreement expired at the end of June. SIPTU tells us that exploratory talks on a replacement have provided zero basis for meaningful negotiations and so the unions representing public sector workers are consulting their members. Their next step will be to ballot for strike action.”
“At the weekend, the Government announced it will move on proposal for reproductive health leave but it will only be providing five days for women suffering the loss of a pregnancy early in term. The Taoiseach delayed further debate on the Labour Party Bill on the basis that the report from UCC would provide important information in drafting amendments. We want to see this Bill become law. The many women and couples who contacted me about this want to see reproductive health leave brought into effect. Will the Taoiseach say when that will be?”
“In 2019, I started working with the INTO to address the issue of the impact of early pregnancy loss and fertility challenges on their women members who told me about their experience of having to come into work after losing a pregnancy before 22 weeks or after going through rounds of IVF and not being able to take time off work. After hearing their stories, I drafted a Bill to provide for 20 days paid leave for early pregnancy loss, up to ten days of leave for reproductive healthcare - leave when it matters most. Our Bill passed all Stages in the Seanad. It was delayed by the Government in the Dáil, pending a report from UCC. Only now is our Bill going to an Oireachtas committee.”
“They and their families are paying a terrible price for this failure. We know that, for every period of time that a child is left without a place, it impacts negatively on their development. The Government already found hundreds of millions of euro for special education this year. Indeed, it had to bail out the Department of education earlier this year. Parents were told the resources would be there but we still do not know how many children, such as James and Kristian, are left without places. Can the Taoiseach guarantee those places will be available this September?”
“We certainly acknowledge that places have been found for many children. Of course that is welcome, but it should not be remarkable or something to boast about. There are still children, parents and families left waiting and left without certainty. I welcome the Taoiseach's commitment - I think he did give a commitment - that every child who needs a school place will have one this year, but parents are losing hope that the Government will fulfil these promises because they have heard this before and there is still no certainty. After February's debacle, when the NCSE told 200 schools that they would lose SNAs, we thought there might be progress and certainty for special education. We have been here every year. Every year, we have heard from parents that their children, such as Kristian and James, are being left without a place.”
“Many have had to become experts in advocacy and public policy because all they are getting are delays, confusion and copy-and-paste refusal letters. Many now say that they have no hope left. What can the Taoiseach say to someone who has lost the hope of providing their child with an education? When he knows there has been a shortage of places and that demand is rising, why are parents and children now entering the summer holidays without any certainty? Now that schools are closing for the summer, how many children are still without a school place for next year and when is the Government going to treat this as a national emergency? For many parents like Ali and many children like James, this is a personal emergency.”
“The family is banking on one last school, hoping for what Ali describes as a miracle. Families like Ali's should not need a miracle. What they are asking for is something that most children can take for granted. In a wealthy country in the 21st century, an education should be a given, but so many children have been abandoned by the State. I refer to children like six-year-old Kristian Walsh, who is autistic and non-verbal, and for whom this September will mark his third year without a primary school place. His mother says that most of her days are now spent fighting for a basic right that every child should enjoy. The Minister, Hildegarde Naughton, and the Taoiseach have repeatedly assured parents that every child will have a place. Is that true, though? Parents have heard these promises before.”
“I congratulate her, and I hope the Taoiseach will join me in congratulating her and, indeed, his own party colleague, the new Lord Mayor of Dublin, Daryl Barron. There is another running theme to Ali's social media posts. She has had to use her profile to highlight the ongoing failure of the State to provide her son James with a school place. Recently, James received rejections from two more schools. That brings the family's grand total up to 18. James, a vulnerable child, has been rejected 18 times, refused care and refused an education. In Ali's words, he has been on the Department's books since he was five. He is 12 now. The Department of education has had seven years to provide him with a secondary school place and to plan for this. Now, with mere weeks to go, his mother has again had to resort to social media to plead for answers.”
“For most children across the country, this is the first week of the summer holidays, an exciting and positive time. For hundreds of families, however, this is the first week of a final countdown they have long been dreading because, as of this week, far too many children with special educational needs are still officially without school places for this coming September. What a disgrace in a republic that claims to value education. In desperation, many parents have been forced to go public about their children's situations. One such parent is Labour Councillor Alison Field, who is in the Gallery today. On her Instagram account, one will find posts about her work providing support for people in her Dublin community every day. As of last night, one will also see posts about her work in her new role as Deputy Lord Mayor of Dublin city.”
“I urge the Minister to drop the six-month delay. We have to oppose it. We want to see this Bill pass into law as swiftly as possible to do right by survivors.”
“There were 884 alleged abusers in 42 religious orders. We only know what is the tip of the iceberg. We have relied so much on the bravery of individual survivors to come forward but clearly there is an enormous mountain of undisclosed trauma that is still there among many people who were abused. Listen to the accounts from Dunderrow and those women who are still reliving the trauma of being abused in a systematic, calculated fashion by Leo Hickey. That is the sort of trauma that we are now beginning to uncover. As the oppressive Catholic church doctrine is lifting from the laws of the State, and the Minister reminded us about that with the disregard law this week, which we welcome, we know now how much we have to do to do right by survivors. This Bill represents just one way that we can do right by survivors.”
“The report that others and I referenced earlier noted €1.3 billion of assets held in cash and property by eight religious orders. That is an enormous sum of money. It should be accessible to survivors of abuse and to State bodies that are seeking to do right now by survivors whom they failed for so long. This Bill is aligned with stated Government policy and priorities in seeking to pursue and make accountable religious orders that have escaped accountability for far too long. The scale of this is astounding. I welcomed earlier the movements made on the commission of investigation into abuse in schools but look at the scoping inquiry of 2024. What does it tell us? There were 2,400 allegations of abuse in 308 schools, with more than a quarter originating in facilities for children with special needs. It is absolutely shocking.”
“Others have referred rightly to the bigger picture here, that being, the immense power that the church and religious orders wielded for many decades through the State, and the sort of shadow welfare state that the Catholic church operated in running industrial schools, mother and baby homes, Magdalen institutions and many other institutions in which vulnerable persons, women and children primarily, were incarcerated for many shameful decades. The church and the religious orders continue to wield enormous power in our education system through the patronage model. Ninety percent of our primary schools are still under the patronage of the Catholic church and the religious orders, so that power remains. This Bill is one small attempt to get behind the power and the wealth, let us name it, of these religious institutions.”
“She asked what prospect there was for non-verbal children. That is a specific question and one of many that have been put to me. I submitted a parliamentary question on that particular issue. There are many heartbreaking stories of the distress, trauma, deep hurt and damage, and life-long consequences of abuse upon many survivors yet there is a failure to be able to secure accountability from the religious orders that were responsible in many cases.”
“I think the language used was “a mixed response” from religious orders when they were asked to make voluntary contributions to the State. It was mixed because the State has no sanction. The State cannot say to religious orders that if they do not pay up voluntarily, then it will compel them, as there is currently no power of compulsion. At its core, this Bill is simple. It is about trying to unblock the current obstructions that lie in the way of pursuing religious orders. It is about lifting an obstruction to justice for survivors. So many survivors have come forward and asked that this Bill be progressed and that we see a speedier and more urgent response from the Government. Just yesterday, I heard from a mother whose son, who is non-verbal, was physically and sexually abused while in the care of a particular religious order.”
“That is really important because it will mean that survivors will continue to face obstacles and obstructions in looking to pursue religious orders through the courts, because they will have to go through this crazy process where you have to name all the individuals, the orders may or may not provide the nominated name and so on. Survivors should not have to go to court. The other purpose of the Bill is to provide a leverage for the State in negotiating with the religious orders to get the fair share of redress paid. Currently, State bodies, and the Department of education in particular, are at a huge disadvantage in seeking orders to come forward and pay their share, as Sheila Nunan discovered. Deputy Sheehan referred to the difficulties and complexity in trying to get the religious orders to come forward.”
“That, of course, has consequences, but I am very happy along with Labour colleagues and, I think, colleagues across the Opposition to work with the Minister and the Attorney General’s office to address any issues in this regard on Committee Stage. The Minister proposes to defer this until Christmas Day, which Deputy Ahern described as the anti-Santa approach, although it is more like a Scrooge approach really. My concern is that that will delay our ability to confer with the Attorney General or move to Committee Stage. No doubt we will then be told to wait until May 2027 for the IDG report and then to wait until early 2028 for the Law Reform Commission report. That is just delaying justice and delaying redress for survivors.”
“Our Bill is very carefully drafted to make sure that it only applies in narrow circumstances. Under section 2, which sets out the circumstances where the legal curtain can be lifted, the wrongdoer is a member of the unincorporated association and the plaintiff was sexually abused as a child. Section 5 sets out how the court appoints the proper defendant. I thought the Minister quoted approvingly the device we put in here. We have set out very careful criteria for when an associated trust can be pursued. Therefore, the Bill is carefully drafted and narrowly focused. The Minister put particular focus on section 8 and the lifting of the proviso around the Statute of Limitations and indicated that that was particularly complex. I acknowledge that, and I acknowledge that we are looking to provide for a sort of retrospective effect.”
“Our Bill is a way of getting around that and lifting the veil, lifting the obstruction and making it easier to sue because, as the Minister said himself, and I made a note of his word, it is implausible currently that you have to sue every member of a religious order in order to pursue religious orders as unincorporated associations. I should say I have some experience: I was taken to the courts as a student union officer, indeed threatened with prison, many years ago for providing women with information on abortion but we were pursued as individuals through the courts because we were officers of an unincorporated association and the union could not be sued as a students' union at the time. Therefore, I am well aware of the mechanisms behind this.”
“I want to come back to that point of complexity. Yes, there are complex matters here, but, at its core, this is straightforward. We are talking about a mechanism or legal tactic being used by religious orders. I have referred to it previously as a sort of "developer's wife" tactic, where the religious order bears the liability, as typically a male developer would. It transfers its assets into the lay-run trust as the developer would have transferred assets to their spouse - in a gendered way, typically to the wife - and the owner of the assets is therefore beyond the reach of legal accountability, given that the spouse does not have the liability whereas the person liable no longer possesses the assets. That is the simplest way to describe what this mechanism is.”
“I was disappointed also to hear the Minister's reference to the likely publication date of that long-awaited Law Reform Commission report into unincorporated associations. I think the Minister said it is not due until early 2028. That will be six years after the consultation paper was published. My concern is that will then become another - the Minister was referencing it today - pre-emptive delaying device and that, in fact, the Minister will not be able to support any Bill until after that date. He did not indicate that the interdepartmental group report might be brought forward. The Taoiseach indicated on Tuesday in his response to me that this publication date would not be as late as May 2027 and that it might be earlier. I would welcome some clarity on that. I can speak to the Minister afterward about that.”
“The Christian Brothers, through the establishment of the lay-run trust, the Edmund Rice Schools Trust, divested a great deal of assets into that lay-run trust. That is precisely the mechanism that we are seeking to address in this Bill. I thank all of those survivors with whom I have spoken and who have been so courageous in coming forward over the years to disclose about the impact of abuse upon them. I thank the Minister for acknowledging the impact survivors can have on shaping policy. We are seeing that with the debate today on this Bill. It is important to acknowledge. Deputy O'Rourke commented that the Minister used the word "complex" quite a number of times. The Minister used it again in his response. I am disappointed that this is used as the device to justify the six-month delay.”
“In the first instance, I thank my own Labour colleagues, Deputies Ahern and Sheehan, and the representatives and speakers from other parties who supported this important Bill. I thank the Minister for his engagement on the Bill too. Listening carefully to what he said, he spoke in encouraging terms about the principle behind the Bill. He spoke about the need for people to be able to access the courts and secure redress in a readily accessible manner. He spoke earlier with great clarity about the current difficulties that arise for anyone who seeks to pursue an unincorporated association through the courts. Indeed, Deputy Cummins gave a pertinent example of somebody seeking to pursue the Christian Brothers. Deputy Ahern referred to the Christian Brothers too and having to name 120 individual members. That is the difficulty.”
“This will provide such a mechanism and that is why I speak of it as an unblocking mechanism. I am asking the Minister to do right by survivors and to pass this Bill rather than delaying it for a further six months.”
“Fortunately, we have reformed procedures and processes and Ireland and Irish schools and institutions are much safer now. We have made this society safer for children but we must accept there is unfinished business. One such piece of unfinished is the shortfall in compensation left unpaid by religious organisations that have cash and property assets running into the billions. We are asking the Minister to do the right thing and ensure we can see this Bill go through to the next Stage. We will work with him through Committee and Report Stages to get it into law. It aligns with Government priorities, will not cost the State a cent and will indeed facilitate leverage for the State in negotiations with the religious orders where currently there is no mechanism to ensure they can be made to pay compensation.”
“I mentioned the 19 women who have come forward in the past few days to speak about their abuse in Dunderrow National School. We have also recently heard other terrible accounts of abuse of children in the past. We were reminded of this with the death last week of the notorious abuser Bill Kenneally. We were reminded by the RTÉ documentary that highlighted the appalling decades perpetrated by Eamonn Cooke upon his victims and we heard this week of the conviction in the North of Jeffrey Donaldson. Again and again these stories of the abuse of power against children have exposed a deep trauma that exists in Irish society. We are all aware that when the commission of investigation reports - I think it is not due to until 2030 - it will provide another indication of the huge extent of the abuse that was perpetrated against children.”
“Survivors have spoken out to ensure that the State will confront the appalling abuse perpetrated against them and other children in schools and institutions, many of which were run by religious orders. We want to do more than praise and pay tribute to survivors. We want to ensure that they get justice. In many cases, survivors have tried to pursue justice through the courts but have found themselves thwarted by legal structures that frustrate accountability and that obstruct the taking of legal action through the use of unincorporated associations. There is no justification for seeking a further six-month delay. We simply cannot support that and we will be challenging that attempt, if indeed that is what the Minister will propose.”
“The report is still awaited, but we have used the consultation paper and what has been done already in drafting this Bill and can see no reason – legal or political – for the kind of can-kicking that a six-month delay represents. I return to the matter of the courage of survivors. Over decades, extraordinarily brave people have come forward to expose this dark chapter. That disclosure comes at a personal cost. Survivors should not have to go public with their stories in order to see action taken. They should not have to go public only to be told to wait longer for recognition. The Dunderrow women spoke of abuse in respect of which a conviction was secured in 1998, yet they are still waiting for redress.”
“We in the Labour Party are happy to work with the Minister and his team to scrutinise the Bill in order to make sure that it passes muster and that the mechanisms in it to ensure accountability of religious orders and associated trusts are watertight. We are happy to accept amendments and to work with the Minister to see the Bill become law, but we do not believe another six months will be required before it can move to the Committee Stage. I asked the Minister previously about bringing forward a Bill like this. He indicated that he would wait for recommendations from the Law Reform Commission. He will see that in the explanatory memorandum of our Bill, we refer to the consultation paper on unincorporated associations published previously by the Law Reform Commission.”
“That is why, while I welcomed the commitment by the Taoiseach to bring forward the date of the publication of the group's report, I was disappointed to hear him say that the Government will seek to impose a six-month delay on the Second Stage reading of this Bill. Not only am I disappointed, I do not understand it. I published this Bill years ago. It has been nearly two years since I was told that the previous Government had referred it to the Attorney General’s office for consideration. I introduced the Bill on First Stage in December, and the Taoiseach has said it aligns with Government priorities. The Tánaiste spoke just this week about the need to ensure that religious orders pay their share. Why does the Government need to delay the Second Stage reading for a further six months?”
“I welcome that the Government has established a high-level interdepartmental group to advise it in respect of the funding of future redress claims in the same way that I welcomed the establishment of the commission of investigation into abuse in schools. It will be quite a long process before the commission reports, and we have heard that the interdepartmental group's report is not due until May 2027. I welcomed the Taoiseach’s confirmation on Tuesday that he will make efforts to bring forward the date of the of the interdepartmental group’s report, because May 2027 is a long way off. Survivors who have waited decades for justice should not be kept waiting any longer than is absolutely necessary.”
“Meanwhile, EY compiled a recent study, which I understand was commissioned by the Minister's Department, which found that a sample of religious orders hold €1.3 billion in assets. The money is there and the assets are there, and we are talking about the most heinous of crimes perpetrated against children. It seems that religious orders are displaying more concern for their reputations and the bottom line than they are for victims. It is the job of the Government and legislators to make sure that religious orders cannot continue to deploy this indefensible practice. I brought forward this Bill - I have spoken about it in the House on several occasions - in an attempt to be constructive and to ensure we do our bit to make sure that religious orders pay their share.”
“One of the first moral lessons any of us teach our children, regardless of faith, relates to the need for honesty when we have done wrong and the need to step up, admit we have done wrong and ensure accountability. We cannot say the response of religious orders to historical sex abuse of children has embodied that principle. These are sneaky tactics being used by institutions that purport to show moral leadership in our society. Appeals to the moral duties of religious orders have clearly not worked. I refer to the processes we have seen over the years in which religious orders have not stepped up. A recent study in The Sunday Times estimated that €755 million in compensation to victims of abuse is still outstanding from religious orders.”
“Lay-run trusts that hold the assets bear no legal liability and, therefore, the State lacks leverage when it seeks to recover a proportion of redress from the religious orders. I spoke about the 2002 deal, but there have been numerous attempts since then by the State to recover a share of compensation or redress from the religious orders. There have been attempts to secure voluntary contributions from the religious orders. There was Sheila Nunan's process, but none of these processes have delivered anything like the share of redress we would expect from religious orders that are serious about meeting obligations. Religious orders must answer serious ethical questions about how they have engaged with the State and with survivors of abuse.”
“For many years, we have been aware of the practice whereby religious orders have shifted their assets into lay-run trusts that have no legal liability to survivors. The orders which have the liability have much fewer trusts that can be targeted. I hasten to add that the legislation I am proposing is not limited to religious orders. It would apply to all unincorporated bodies, including sports clubs, political parties and so on. Clearly, what we are seeking to address is the deployment of what we might refer to as lawfare, that is, legal tactics deployed with a detrimental effect. Such tactics are used by religious orders in particular. The orders are using the law to frustrate the efforts of those seeking redress for terrible damage inflicted on them in childhood.”
“We heard this week from 19 of the women who were abused by Leo Hickey in Dunderrow National School but who were excluded from redress schemes, so there is a great deal to do to ensure that the State’s response to the legacy of child abuse is survivor led and that the State is kind and compassionate in its approach to those who are now adults but who were abused as children. Much of the work to deliver justice has also been stymied by the religious orders by means of obfuscation, delaying tactics and the deployment of entirely legal but unethical devices which have the effect of them avoiding paying their share of redress. The Bill stems from my desire to do right by survivors. It is my belief and that of the Labour Party that no organisation, church or State, should be able to hide from or escape accountability.”
“I am also working with groups like the Residential Institutions Survivor's Network, which I have spoken about and on behalf of which I recently wrote to the Taoiseach and the Ministers for education and Social Protection. That group has identified a litany of flaws in current State redress schemes and schemes to support victims. Survivors are often retraumatised by their exclusion through application of apparently arbitrary rules, inadequate redress processes or simply by unduly bureaucratic and insufficiently compassionate responses such as a helpline that does not deal in a compassionate and kind way with survivors who contact it. That is the kind of basic thing the State should be getting right.”
“In the context of the 2002 Woods deal and subsequent attempts to secure contributions to redress from religious orders, we have seen successive Governments - the State - bearing the vast bulk of the cost of redress. Of course, the State remains responsible. Religious orders were also responsible, but they have got away with paying nothing like their fair share. The Woods deal applied a cap of €128 million. The total cost of the Residential Institutional Redress Board scheme is now estimated at €1.5 billion. I am working with a number of survivors groups to improve the State’s response to dealing with the awful legacy of church-State collusion against some of the most vulnerable members of Irish society, particularly children.”
“Individuals spoke to me of suicidal ideation as a result of their childhood experiences, of their ongoing difficulties in sustaining relationships and of their fears of passing on the effects of the trauma they had suffered to their children. At the time, it was important that the State made attempts to ensure redress. The Minister will recall, as I do, the difficulties with the Woods cap on the amount of redress to be paid by the religious orders in the 2002 deal. Quite apart from that cap, however, the scheme was also flawed in other ways, and victims were retraumatised by being dragged through lengthy and unnecessarily adversarial proceedings.”
“In a previous life as a practising barrister, I represented many survivors of abuse before what was then known as the Residential Institutions Redress Board, which operated in the 1990s into the 2000s, as the Minister will be aware. These were proceedings arising out of abuse perpetrated, in most cases, against children in industrial schools. I will never forget hearing about the experiences of the survivors I represented, the utterly chilling accounts of the terrible abuse they suffered at the hands of both religious and lay figures employed in industrial schools, many of which were run by religious orders. The experiences were shocking. Desperate damage, harm and hurt were caused to many people.”