Victor Boyhan
Agricultural Panel · Independent · Ireland
“It also mentions the agrifood sector and the importance of diversification in agriculture, the maritime sector, coastal communities and fishing communities in terms of rural policy.”
“I know from my engagement with both the Department and the Minister that over 900 submissions to the consultation process were received. No Member or parliamentarian will have had the opportunity to consider the anonymised version of these consultations, which contain many good suggestions in favour of the regulations and many concerns in…”
“I welcome the Minister and the official to the Seanad. This is particularly important Private Members' business. I thank Senators Collins and Tully for setting out the background and the rationale behind their Private Members' motion. I acknowledge the Minister's exceptional commitment to rural Ireland and his Ministry.”
“I am conscious of the Minister's public consultation, and I acknowledge it and thank them for it, in relation to the Our Rural Future work programme in 2025. In fairness to him, he did not stop at that. I received a further update when I requested it from his office very recently.”
“This will come about through that process. It is for the Minister to decide. Maybe he will do so tomorrow when the regulations are dealt with. However, when Senators are in this Chamber discussing these regulations tomorrow, they will have no sight of any constituent who made a submission. That is my first item.”
“I am pleased to see Senator Byrne in the Leader’s chair. I wish him well in that job. I also wish him well in his new position as Government Whip. There are three items I wish to discuss today. First is the exempt development regulations, which are being covered extensively in the media.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,616 lines we hold for Victor Boyhan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 25 of 33.
“However, it is clear from Sage's work to date that it has made a significant and positive impact on the wellbeing of survivors with whom it has engaged, and I can assure you that the service provided by Sage Advocacy is a critical element of the overall package of supports being delivered to survivors. I would be happy to work with you and colleagues in the House to ensure that the survivors are aware of the assistance which Sage can provide to survivors. I look forward to engaging further with you in relation to this important matter. [Signed Helen McEntee, Minister] I am glad to be able to read that into the record because clarity is absolutely crucial to all of these issues.”
“It is also necessary to provide that such arrangements are reviewed from time to time to ensure that the funding provided is being utilised effectively and is achieving the purpose for which it has been allocated. The current grant agreement with Sage is effective until end 2026 and the arrangement will therefore be subject to review in the coming period. Because of this, and because the arrangement between the Department and Sage is non-statutory in nature, it is not possible to refer specifically to the arrangements in legislation or to include in the Bill a legally binding commitment to fund Sage Advocacy on an ongoing basis.”
“Sage has, since that time, developed and rolled out this service across the country and is supporting survivors in their engagement with existing mainstream services which are of relevance to them, including in areas such as health, housing and social protection. Sage currently employs 13 staff [that was all news to me] to provide this specific service for survivors, including regional advocates who are based around the country. My Department has, to date, provided approximately €1.7 million to Sage to support this work. All such grant funding arrangements are required to comply with the relevant rules and requirements, which are set out in DPER Circular 13/2014, including requirements relating to financial performance and reporting.”
“Unlike the health and education supports, the provision of advocacy supports to survivors does not require a legislative basis as it is not necessary to confirm survivors’ eligibility for that support. For that reason, my Department was able to engage with Sage Advocacy, an independent advocacy organisation with a strong track record in supporting vulnerable adults, healthcare patients and persons with disabilities, in relation to the provision of such a service, even in advance of the passage of legislation. Arising from this, the Department entered into a grant funding arrangement with Sage Advocacy in November 2023, which is underpinned by a detailed Grant Agreement.”
“Dear [Senator], Arising from our engagement on the passage of the Supports for Survivors of Residential Institutional Abuse Bill 2024, I am writing to you to outline the nature of my Department's arrangement with Sage Advocacy to provide crucial advocacy supports to survivors of abuse in residential institutions. As you are aware, in June 2023 Government approved the provision of a package of supports to survivors of abuse in institutions which had come within the scope of the Residential Institutions Redress Scheme, and who had received an award of redress or a similar court award or settlement. This package of supports includes the health and education supports which are provided for by the Bill, but also includes the provision of advocacy supports.”
“There are agencies I strongly commended and recommended a few years ago in the provision of housing services. I would not be doing so now in light of new arrangements, new discoveries and issues that were exposed about them. We therefore have to be careful about tying down in primary legislation a particular organisation that may very well not be in place in the future. I raised this issue with the Minister, and I will read into the record a letter I received from her about both Sage Advocacy and supports because it sets the context. I hope the Minister does not have any difficulty with that.”
“Amendment No. 3 seeks to create a new section after section 6, which is entitled "Educational service support for former residents" in Part 2, which is entitled "Supports". This is a repeat of what we just had. I engaged with the Minister on this issue. I will also speak about amendment No. 4 before I read into the record some correspondence from the Minister. Amendment No. 4 reads: "In page 9, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “Supports for the excluded" ". Perhaps before I move on to that, I will speak about amendment No. 3. I made the case strongly about advocacy. It is open to the Minister to correct my interpretation of our engagement, but my understanding is that she had an issue with naming a specific agency because agencies come and go. There are many setbacks.”
“I move amendment No. 3: 3. In page 9, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “Report on role of the Sage Advocacy 7. Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on how the Sage Advocacy can be supported, and resourced to assist individual survivors to access supports and provisions listed in this Act.”.”
“As a result, it is important that we use every medium and every opportunity to communicate the message about the education and training funding.”
“I am happy the clarification in respect of the review has been given by the Minister, but we also need to be assured that there will be a proactive commitment through the Irish clubs in the UK and everywhere else that we will continue to promote it. I go to the Citizens Information website online for loads of information. I am a Member of the Oireachtas. I find it a good source of information, as do many members of the public. We should, through our embassies, outreach programmes and diaspora programmes, wherever they are, be promoting the idea of this education and training because it is there to help and assist people. Clearly, many of the people involved are in the latter stages of their lives.”
“That was an important intervention. The clarification provided is that it applies to the review. I thank Senators Ruane and Stephenson for raising that because clarity is everything. I did not think about that immediately; it took a few days. I looked at the alternative, which was that last week we had proposed a review and that was not really under consideration. We have made progress. We have this review. That is important. However, in light of two interventions by Senators Stephenson and Ruane, it is important that whatever the advocacy group - it is currently Sage Advocacy or the Citizens' Information Board - it should be encouraged, resourced and funded to proactively promote the scheme. We should not have a situation where people do not know about the scheme. I put that down as a marker. I am happy to support this.”
“There will be no doubt about it. No one is saying that he or she might review the situation at some time in the future. The legislation was vague last week and contained ambiguity. We now have an absolute commitment that there will be a three-year review in respect of the educational supports. If that is the case, it is a positive. It is affirmative and definite, which is important.”
“We have come to an agreement with the House and with the support of the Minister. She will have an opportunity to respond. There will be a statutory review in three years. That is progress. We did not have that last week. We will have a review but it is still open to the Minister in office at any time to conduct a review in respect of education. I am not a hurler on a ditch and believe in being honest and proactive, and seeing what best we can achieve. This is a reasonable compromise and I am happy, with the consent of the House, to withdraw my amendment in favour of amendment No. 2, proposed by the Minister. She will want to share her view on that amendment. She might confirm my clear understanding that the Minister will now have the power to review the situation within three years. That will be on a statutory basis.”
“I recognise that the Minister gave thought to the issue. Her suggestion was to submit an amendment to section 6 on educational support and services for residents. The amendment will create a new subsection within section 6 in Part 2 of the Bill, under "supports". She suggests that the Minister, who is Deputy McEntee for her time in office but it will also apply to subsequent Ministers in the future, "shall review the criteria determined under subsection (3) on a regular basis and may amend the criteria following any such review". The review under paragraph (a) of the amendment "shall be carried out not later than 3 years from the date on which the criteria under subsection (3) are first published". The Minister has also clearly indicated that she, as Minister, can review it at any time. She has set in statute a case that I tried to make.”
“I suggested it the last time the Minister was before the House and I submitted the amendment again to keep a focus on the debate. The amendment proposes on page 9, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: "The payments for educational services and supports shall be subject to review on an annual basis." The Minister made a strong case and committed to engaging with me. I acknowledge that she did that. I appreciate her and her staff. Subsequently, the Minister has proposed amendment No. 2, which I will go into now. When I spoke to the Minister, she clearly set out the rationale for concerns about an annual review. A year is not a long time. I am by nature a pragmatist. I am a reasonable person and want to achieve results. Quite frankly, I do not care who is the proposer or proponent of successful outcomes.”
“Although not everything will be addressed in this legislation, we must continue to focus on and retain our commitment to the diaspora and the measures to which the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, has committed. We must remember that we have Irish people - our people - all over the Continent and the world. Many of them, though not all, have been excluded. We must work out a mechanism for the terms of support. I just wanted to say that. I will go straight to the amendments. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are being taken together in this grouping. I and my colleague, Senator Craughwell, have proposed and seconded one of those two amendments, and I will speak to them together. Amendment No. 1 is to section 6 of the Bill and applies to educational services and supports for residents. This amendment will add a sentence to the Bill.”
“I was invited to speak and I know others share the concern about the Irish diaspora, particularly in the UK. I opened my comments by saying that while some people left by choice, many left because they had no choice. Many people felt excluded and felt they had to run away. The rich Irish diaspora covers arts, culture, heritage and a load of other issues. Any strategy must also recognise the forgotten Irish, including the undocumented Irish in America and other parts of the world, and why they left. We know that many of them left in very sad circumstances. Their own families many times washed their hands of them. We also know that too many of those who are overseas want to come back. Some may never want to come back. Many were, through no fault of their own, excluded from redress measures. Recurring themes will, we hope, start today.”
“It raises a number of issues about the commitment to survivors of institutional abuse, mother and baby homes, and the bits that dovetail with her Department as opposed to Deputy McEntee's Department, the Department of Education and Youth. I acknowledge that. It is a measure of the momentum of the Government. Clearly, there has been a lot of media interest in the past few days. The media have engaged strongly with me. There will be a number of media interviews on this issue in the next few days. There is a key focus on the issue, which is not a bad thing. I, the Cathaoirleach and many other Members of the Seanad received an invitation from the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, relating to the Irish diaspora. We had an opportunity to contribute to the new strategy. The current strategy expires at the end of the year.”
“One great aspect of the Library and Research Service is that it gives us a sort of independence of Government, independence of the Minister's office and a critical and honest assessment of the Bill, and it raises a number of challenges and issues. I have referenced those challenges and issues and I do not intend referencing them today. I am also conscious today that we need to get the business done. Most of us who contributed last week to many of the key issues and the recurring themes, and I do not intend to go into great length on those. We all know where we stand within it. Suffice it to say, in the context of this amendment, I acknowledge and welcome a statement issued today from the Minister, Deputy Foley, on her commitment in relation to her Department, which, of course, is clearly separate from the Minister, Deputy McEntee's.”
“I move amendment No. 1: In page 9, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: "(iii) the payments for educational services and supports shall be subject to a review on an annual basis.". I, too, welcome every visitor to the Gallery here today. It is great to see them all here. Also, I am conscious there are a lot of people tuning in to this important debate. I also welcome the Minister. I particularly welcome her officials, whom I have engaged with, as I have with the Minister, since we last met in the Seanad. To provide the context here, we are dealing with the Supports for Survivors of Residential Institutional Abuse Bill 2024. I thank the Library and Research Service for its detailed analysis of this Bill. It clearly has made it easy for us to navigate and it is important we acknowledge it.”
“I only have two more Senators on the list. If any other Senators wish to speak, they might pop up here and let me know. Senators O'Donovan and Boyle wish to contribute. We will come back about the timing in a few moments but I have taken their names.”
“I thank Senator Kyne scheme for setting out his stall. Before we go on, I welcome Deputy Richard O'Donoghue and his guests, Mary Angela Downes and friends, who travelled here from Limerick. I hope they have a most enjoyable day in the Oireachtas.”
“Before I call Senator Kyne, I welcome the students from Gorey Educate Together Secondary School who are guests of Senator Imelda Goldsboro. I also warmly welcome Deputy Michael Cahill from Kerry and his guests, who are in the Distinguished Visitors Gallery.”
“I call for a debate and engagement with the Minister of State and I thank him and his officials for receiving us in Iveagh House this morning.”
“It occurred to me as I was walking back from Iveagh House this morning that it would be helpful, as the Minister of State did today, if he gave the House a walk through of his ideas and suggestions. It is better to feed into and make contributions on this side of a strategy rather than to be at the end of one. I want to acknowledge the important and significant contribution the Cathaoirleach made to the proceedings in Iveagh House this morning and believe it is important to set aside some time to hear about the Minister of State's vision and plan. We could also learn about some of the outgoing issues of the current strategy, which runs out at the end of this year. We should work together on a cross-party basis to feed into the strategy for the Irish diaspora.”
“I contributed to that debate and engaged on the basis that many of the people who left this country did so in the hope of returning, many people were forced out of this country in the hope of never returning, and many who left hoped that one day they would have a new opportunity. That was one leg of our debate and discussion. We also touched on the rich tapestry of sport, the GAA, our culture and arts, which unites a lot of people. The GAA in particular and the arts and cultural sectors have done a lot for the Irish diaspora. That is the really positive side. The Minister of State is engaging on a tour and is committed to travelling around Europe, Canada, America and Australia to promote this strategy.”
“I call for a debate on the diaspora. This morning, a number of Senators, including the Cathaoirleach, attended Iveagh House at the invitation of the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond. It was a very important exchange and dialogue with the Secretary General and a number of officials from his Department in relation to the Irish diaspora in its very broadest sense. The current strategy runs out at the end of this year and the Minister of State impressed upon us all that we should tap into our own political, business and personal networks and talk about the Irish diaspora.”
“Fianna Fáil colleagues – it may have been Senator Mary Fitzpatrick - invited many people from the 1916 Relatives Association, who wholly endorsed and strongly recommended this proposal. I ask all Members of this House to use their connections in politics and with the Government to push and advocate for the naming of this wonderful new hospital, when it eventually opens, after Dr. Kathleen Lynn. I also ask for a debate on this matter some time in the near future because there are many sides to this. Many people have experiences and knowledge of her that they would like to bring to this debate. It would be a good thing to have a debate on this issue and invite the Minister for Health, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, to the House. I appeal to the Leader to facilitate an early debate on this particular issue.”
“She was elected as a TD in Dublin in 1923, although she never took her seat. What am I saying? I am saying this is a woman of substance who was hugely committed to health, children's health in particular. Never in her time did she see her real ambition realised, which was to have a dedicated children's hospital. Of course, she crossed swords with the one and only Archbishop of Dublin at the time, Dr. John Charles McQuaid, who opposed her idea and aspiration for a hospital because he said a children's hospital should be run exclusively for Catholics. McQuaid succeeded at that time. What am I saying now? We have a new national children's hospital. What more befitting and greater way to honour the legacy of Dr. Kathleen Lynn than to name the hospital after her.”
“She was conscious that there was no infant hospital in Dublin. She opened a private GP practice in Rathmines where she became radicalised and mobilised through her engagement with the lived experience of her patients and children during that time. She was involved in the revolutionary movement from which the Irish Free State emerged. She established soup kitchens and hospitals and dealt with information and health issues. She later became the chief medical officer at St. James’s Hospital and served with the Irish Citizen Army. During the 1916 Rising, Dr. Lynn was the national medical officer and treated many of the wounded casualties. I could go on at great length about her. Everyone knows, or should know, about her. There is a lot of information about her in the public domain.”
“I want to raise the naming of the new children's hospital. I do not know if it was discussed in the Cabinet but there was media coverage of suggestions that the Cabinet had actually made, or was going to make, a decision about the name of the hospital. My colleague, Senator Sharon Keogan, and I brought forward a Private Members' motion, as did Fianna Fáil, in the names of Senators Lorraine Clifford-Lee and Mary Fitzpatrick. Both motions were welcomed with open arms across the House. That is important. The motions proposed that the hospital be called after Kathleen Lynn, a nurse who subsequently became a doctor. Kathleen Lynn was born on 28 January 1874 near Killala, County Mayo, and grew up in the aftermath of the Famine. Clearly, through her interactions with people, she dealt with disease and death.”
“Before we continue, I welcome guests of Senator Rabbitte, namely the students from St. Ita's Primary School, Loughrea, who are visiting Leinster House. I ask the Acting Leader to propose that we suspend because a vote has been called in the Dáil. We will come back immediately after it is held. Is that agreed? Agreed.”
“We should think of them. I bump into so many religious people at various opportunities and note they are deeply hurting and embarrassed and nearly afraid to talk about it. There is a veil of silence around them. I want to think of them also. Many of them are victims of a system that allowed the abuses to take place.”
“We have to travel the journey with them and support them in every way we can. I commend Senator Tully on what is a really important amendment. It is not about having a go at the religious. I would not support that. We must acknowledge the great support offered by the religious to Irish society through care and education. When I talk about victimhood and hurt, I could tell the House about many religious people I got to know who have been deeply hurt and traumatised by this experience. Many have asked why they did not put their heads up, why what happened occurred on their watch and in their congregations and why they were not empowered to do something about it. They, too, were trapped in a system and it is important that we acknowledge that. We must always be fair. We cannot argue with people who are fair. Let us not forget them.”
“It might not be a matter of hard cash but it may be a matter of property or other assets that will help us to compensate the State, which has paid out very substantial amounts of money, which I acknowledge. We should also consider those who escaped and kept their heads down. Too many kept their heads down. It was not about what we did but about what we did not do. That is really important, too. We talked earlier about another case coming down the tracks. I could state ten organisations whose cases are coming the Minister's way. These are in the education sector alone and that is not to talk about health. Whatever processes we put in place now will be there for a long time. They have to be in place. We cannot put a value on justice, care, support and enabling people.”
“These are brave people who put their lives in the public domain and spoke of their journey and lived experience. They are brave and courageous, and what they have done was not easy. Each of us has to go back to our homes and loved ones and be asked why we continue to be so much on fire about and advocates in this area. It is critical to people who have the lived experience, and it is important that we continue to stick with them. I thank the Minister and her officials, because it is important that we all have a role to play. We all have a job to do, although we come from different perspectives. Following up not on the pursuit of additional money but on commitments made in an indemnity scheme of which we are all aware must be done. We have to pursue this in a respectable way.”
“When we discussed this Bill last week, I spoke about the great heroes: Mary Raftery of "States of Fear"; Christine Buckley from Goldenbridge; Michael O'Brien, a former mayor of Clonmel, who was passionate and who gave testimony on RTÉ; Philomena Lee, whom we talked about here today in referring to the legislation going through Westminster; Catherine Corless, who raised the matter of the Tuam babies, whom we think of this very day along with what is going on down in Tuam; Damian O’Farrell; Conrad Bryan from the Association of Mixed Irish Race, an advocate for equality and the many babies who were shipped out of this country illegally, about whom no one knows; and, of course, Colm O’Gorman of One in Four. I must also mention our own Samantha Long, a Leinster House employee who partook in the documentary "No Country for Women".”
“John Ambulance Brigade, within the Scout Association of Ireland or at Westbank, which I spoke about by way of a Commencement matter this morning. They will simply have to pay up. We owe it to ourselves. We entered into an indemnity scheme and it has not been altogether delivered upon. If the organisations do not have the money, they may have land. We have a housing crisis. Assets are valuable and potentially in great locations for homes. We have to be imaginative in determining how to get some support. The people would expect nothing less. I am aware that the Minister is absolutely committed to this.”
“Somehow, they are washed out in the narrative of abuse in this State. As a member of the Church of Ireland by birth, and still by choice, I also want to mention the religious of my denomination because they too have fallen short. Many will be aware of major scandals within the Church of Ireland and Protestant communities. We must not forget these because suddenly in the narrative on the religious, the focus seems to be on Irish Catholic and not Irish Protestant. I am not interested in what denomination people are, but we have to be fair. I join the Minister in saying that we need to call on the religious superiors and non-religious superiors regarding the schools, religious and non-religious, and institutions where abuse was perpetrated, be it at St.”
“At the core of this is redress and acknowledgement of a wrong. Earlier, I referred to the indemnity scheme of this State that was signed at Merrion Square, Dublin 2, on 5 June 2002 by the then Ministers for Finance and Education and Science, predecessors of the Minister present. I have in front of me copies of the signatures, the seals of office on the Government's legal advice and the commitments given. I am sure all this is still available on a website. It is interesting that many of the religious organisations are still in operation and offering care services and education services. I stated last week that it would be wholly wrong not to acknowledge the significant role of the religious in health services, social services and education in Irish society. A very high proportion, 99%, of them were excellent people.”
“He is part of the unit that will deal with this in Sage Advocacy. It is important and goes to what we said earlier about assisting people at various stages of coping and moving on with their lives. It is never easy to move on. You do not forget, certainly. The more we know about this area, the more we can assist. It means Government is slightly stepping back. It may be supporting it but it is stepping back from direct interventions. We have heard from survivors and affected people of the importance of independence and support that treats them with dignity and respect. I am happy that we will work something out here.”
“I move amendment No. 24: In page 9, between lines 28 and 29 to insert the following: “Supports for the excluded 7. Sage Advocacy shall be able to make recommendations to Government so that health services and education supports can be allocated to former residents who’ve been excluded from this Bill and previous redress schemes. The Minister shall have the ability to approve the recommendations made by a Sage Advocacy on a case-by-case basis.”. We have covered this pretty well. I thank the Minister for reaching out. We will work something out together, I hope, in relation to Sage Advocacy. It does amazing work. It will expand and grow. Many of us will know Damian O'Farrell because he was formerly a councillor on Dublin City Council. He is a survivor and has an amazing back story.”
“I move amendment No. 23: In page 9, between lines 28 and 29 to insert the following: “Report on increased supports for all former residents and survivors of institutional, industrial and reformatory schools 7. Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall, lay a report before the Houses of the Oireachtas detailing how all the supports, services and entitlements provided by Health (Amendment) Act Card (HAA Card) can be made available to all former residents and survivors of Institutional, Industrial and Reformatory schools.”.”
“I move amendment No. 22: In page 9, between lines 28 and 29 to insert the following: “Report on the role of the Sage Advocacy 7. Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on how the Sage Advocacy can be empowered, supported, and resourced to assist individual survivors to access supports and provisions listed in this Act.”. The Minister and I said we would collaborate and work together on this amendment. Will the Minister clarify that?”
“To clarify, I never said Sage Advocacy would make the recommendations; I said the Minister would make them. The amendment states, "Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall lay" not Sage Advocacy.”
“I move amendment No. 21: In page 9, between lines 28 and 29 to insert the following: “Sage Advocacy 7. Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall lay a report before the Houses of the Oireachtas on the range of supports that will be provided by Sage Advocacy for survivors of institutional abuse.”. For clarity, the Minister and I will collaborate in regard to Sage Advocacy.”
“I move amendment No. 20: In page 9, between lines 28 and 29 to insert the following: “Report on The Special Advocate (for survivors of institutional abuse) 7. Within nine months of the commencement of this Act, the Minister shall, lay a report before the Houses of the Oireachtas on the range of supports that can be provided by the Special Advocate for survivors of institutional abuse.”. For clarity, does this amendment relate to Sage Advocacy or is that amendment No. 21? I ask the Minister to respond if she wishes to.”
“I move amendment No. 19: In page 9, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: “(iii) the payments for educational services shall be subject to a review on an annual basis.”. In light of the Minister's agreement that we will collaborate and work together on Report Stage, I will withdraw the amendment.”
“Perfect. Amendment No. 21 concerns compensation. The Minister talks about Sage and other advocacy groups. She will again collaborate with me, and will do so with her, to work on some sort of scheme she thinks is proportionate, right and appropriate. I presume that is based on what we have said. I am open to hear back what she is saying, but I want to confirm that she will come back with some proposal on that for Report Stage. That is important. Could we clarify that? We will not be calling votes on those. It was my intention to call votes on these two items. She might clarify her position on amendments Nos. 6, 19 and 21. I am more than happy to work with her on them.”
“I will recap on three things. I am encouraged by the Minister's favourable response, but I want to be clear about something. On amendment No. 16, she is not in a position to change that in terms of a review. On amendment No. 19, she stated she will work collaboratively with me, and I will do so with her. I give her that commitment. She will come up with some suggestion for Report Stage. Is that correct?”