I wish to thank the Government for providing time to debate this very important legislation which is a central part of the collective response that must be forthcoming from us, the political community, and the community as a whole, to the horrifying facts with which we have had to come to terms, namely, that our society was based on a sham and that the image we had of ourselves as a people who care for and love children hid so much horrible abuse beneath the surface – an abuse of the most vulnerable of our children.
This is a much worse blow to our concept of ourselves than all the financial scandals that have been unveiled because it is a much more fundamental abuse of power. While the golden circles of power and influence which are the subject of tribunals of inquiry forged their profitable bonds at the centre of Irish society, different circles, circles of cold stone, went unnoticed at the far fringes of the social sphere. If it is important, and it is, to throw light on circles of privilege and self-interest involving politicians, developers, big business and financial institutions, it is more important to throw light on the other extreme of social influence, namely, those with no power.
Imprisoned in those stone circles were hundreds, perhaps thousands, of children who were in the so-called care of the State, religious institutions or warped and abusive parents. Windows of light were rare and when they did exist those who looked in did not seem to see what was happening inside. Those diametrically different experiences of life in Ireland in the not so distant past, perhaps even in the present, represent, in their different ways, gross abuse of power. From my perspective, the physical and sexual abuse of helpless children is the most gross and the most deserving of investigation.
Much investigative reporting, many column inches and a great deal of Dáil time have been devoted to questioning the activities of the socially and economically powerful. We want to know what happened, and rightly so. Let us be just as rigorous in pursuing those who wielded power in less prestigious circles but with more destructive results in the lives of individuals. The television series "States of Fear", Susan McKay's book about Sophia McColgan, Paddy Doyle's The God Squad, Annie Ryan's Walls of Silence and the personal testimonies of many brave survivors compel the urge to find retrospective justice or, at the very least, an acknowledgement of the enormity of the harm that was done.
Anyone who has spoken to a survivor of child abuse, particularly sexual abuse, will know how important it is to them to have confirmation from someone outside the circle of abuse that what happened actually took place, that it was wrong and that it was not their fault. There is a compelling need to tell their story so that they can move on and reconstruct their lives. There is also a compelling need to see justice done. For many justice is not available.
This Bill seeks to make it possible for some of those who are now restricted from seeking justice by the statute of limitations to do so.
The RTE series, "States of Fear" has brought the appalling hidden history of abuse in State-financed institutions to public notice in an unprecedented fashion. Mary Raftery and her team are to be congratulated for the service they have done. A comprehensive response is essential and has to focus on four broad areas. First, individual experience, hurt, needs and recovery of those who were abused.
In answer to a parliamentary question which I tabled on 3 March 1999, the Minister for Education and Science informed me that proceedings had been initiated in 145 cases relating to his Department, involving allegations of sexual or other physical abuse of children in institutions which were operated by or on behalf of the State or which were funded from public funds. I have no doubt the number has grown since. A large number of cases has also been initiated against religious orders who ran institutions, school teachers and individuals, some fathers, who have perpetrated sexual and physical abuse on their own children. An article in Magill magazine in February 1999 estimated that at that time 560 child abuse victims were suing the State and the Catholic church. Only this week, media reports indicated that the Garda is investigating 230 complaints against 75 Christian Brothers at Artane boys' school. The sheer scale of abuse in this institution alone is hard to comprehend.
The second response is the requirement to thoroughly and rigorously examine why it happened and what were the factors that allowed it to happen without effective intervention.
The third requirement is to ensure that all children who were placed in industrial schools and other care are given access to their records and that the State and the institutions concerned adopt a rigorous and open approach to searching out these records and to making them available to the people concerned. I, and I am sure other Members, have received letters from people who are extremely anxious to secure this information. I ask the Minister to include that in the various measures being adopted.
The fourth requirement is to put structures in place to facilitate meting out whatever justice can be made available. No recompense can go near to compensating for the appalling abuses perpetrated, the childhoods taken away, the process of growing and developing that is the right of every child warped and destroyed, but we must provide whatever recompense is possible. This Bill is central to that process and it will cost the State money. It will allow people to seek legal retribution from the State and from others. How could anyone justify not doing so? How could anyone suggest that victims of child abuse should be free to go to court if they are 20 years of age but not if they are 22?
Sophia McColgan's story makes it clear how unfair that statute is in terms of the effect of child abuse on the victim. Susan McKay's book takes us painstakingly through the years of abuse that took place within the McColgan family. Despite Sophia and her brother taking every chance that arose to tell what was going on to anyone they came in contact with, particularly in the health service, there was not any intervention. Sophia had to literally construct a life for herself before she could take the enormous and terrifying step of challenging her father who had destroyed her childhood and that of her brothers and sisters.
She could not develop to adulthood in the normal, gradual way of other children. She con structed a survival technique of taking her consciousness out of her own body when she was being sexually abused by her father. She quite simply would have been unable to stand up to him without first making a persona for herself that would be taken seriously by the outside world. She and her brother never succeeded in getting themselves taken seriously when they were children, despite broken limbs and other clear evidence of abuse. Sophia got a degree to give herself standing and self-respect. Her childhood experience would suggest she did right.
When Sophia McColgan sought legal redress against the North Western Health Board and the family GP for their failure to intervene in her and her siblings' case, they put forward the Statute of Limitations as part of their defence. Because she had allowed more than three years to elapse after her 18th birthday before initiating proceedings, they claimed she was statute barred. Since the case was settled out of court it did not become the subject of a legal precedent.
Media reports indicate there is every reason to believe the insurance company which represents the health boards will be willing to use the Statute of Limitations in current cases if it remains unchanged. Therefore, there is an urgency to complete this amending legislation. A case before Mr. Justice Kelly, prior to his resignation, which dealt with Madonna House and involved the Statute of Limitations, will have to be reheard. That case may have involved a legal judgment but, if so, it is not available to us.
The Bill before the House, which I published last year, had its genesis in the difficulties encountered by Sophia McColgan in her search for justice. Recent revelations have again highlighted the obstacles the statutes present. In this Bill I am seeking to remove the restriction of the statutes in cases of childhood abuse.
The statutes of limitation set out certain deadlines within which actions for damages must be brought. Generally, an action for personal injuries must be initiated within three years of the occurrence of the act complained of. There is, however, provision in the legislation that time does not run while the potential plaintiff is under a "disability". Being under a disability is generally understood to mean either that the plaintiff is under the age of majority – 18 years of age – or that he or she is of unsound mind. If neither of these two criteria apply, a plaintiff has no excuse for not initiating proceedings within the strict statutory period.
The purpose of the Bill is to allow for an extended definition of disability, so as to accommodate circumstances of childhood abuse. It is a short and targeted Bill. Section 1 contains a standard provision relating to the Bill's short title, collective citation and construction.
Section 2 provides that a person shall, for the purposes of the Statutes of Limitation, be regarded as under a disability where, by reason of significant emotional or mental injury suffered by that person and attributable to the act complained of – being an act of physical or sexual abuse committed against that person when he or she was a child – the ability of that person to make reasoned decisions to bring an action in respect thereof is substantially impaired. Effectively, an extended definition is given to "disability", to include persons who, although of entirely sound mind, may not have been in a position, as a result of the injuries which they have suffered, to have taken appropriate action against those who have assaulted them.
Section 3 provides a saver clause, in line with current judicial practice, which retains the power of a court to stay an action in circumstances where, given the passage of time since the acts complained of, the initiation of proceedings would be fundamentally unfair to a defendant. I thank Finbar O'Malley for his expert help in drafting this Bill.
The Bill, as drafted, encompasses physical abuse, including sexual abuse. Non-sexual abuse should be addressed in this context rather than be referred to the Law Reform Commission, as indicated in the Taoiseach's speech on 11 May when he announced the measures relating to childhood abuse following the "States of Fear" programmes.
I do not believe victims of severe physical attacks, some of which were graphically described on television, should have to wait again. Broken teeth, broken limbs and head injuries add up to serious assaults and gross abuses of power. Sexual and physical abuse have often been perpetrated at the same time. I urge the Minister to retain the integrity of the legislation in this regard.
While on the surface this Bill may appear to be aimed at securing monetary compensation for victims of child abuse, it has a more significant intent. We have all learned the importance to victims of coming to terms with their personal histories. Court action in these cases has far more to do with the public acknowledgement of injustice done and the vindication of rights than with financial compensation. The commission which was announced by the Government, in response to the exposures regarding industrial schools, may recommend the setting up of a compensation tribunal. That may happen, but I would not be opposed to it. This amending legislation and the court process would provide a back up and an alternative to those who wish to take that route.
I just received a report relating to the Canadian experience; other Members may also have received it. A commission was set up there to deal with institutional child abuse and the report contains much detail about how the issue was approached. We could probably learn much from it. Research was commissioned on how the issue of redress and the broader issues in relation to compensation and coming to terms with child abuse should be dealt with by society as a whole. I hope to read the report in more detail before Committee Stage. We probably have much to learn from countries such as Canada.
I thank the Government for facilitating this debate. By removing legalistic obstacles to justice, we are taking a small but important step in facing up to what was done to so many children. We must not let this issue drift out of the limelight. We must put in place the necessary measures to ensure that there is no hiding place for abusers. The social services inspectorate, which was recently announced, the register of sex offenders and an ombudsman for children are some of the special measures on which I ask the Minister and his colleagues to give a definite timeframe. I look forward to the publication of the White Paper on mandatory reporting to which the Taoiseach referred when he announced the measures. I am interested to know when that White Paper will be published and the entire issue debated.
The Labour Party is determined to ensure that the Children (Juvenile Justice) Bill and the constitutional matters relating to the rights of the child are addressed. The shortage of trained child care staff is causing concern to health boards and this must also be urgently addressed if we are to be in a position to put procedures into practice. When announcing the various measures, the Taoiseach said £4 million would be allocated to the establishment of a counselling service. He indicated that this funding would have to be phased because of the shortage of trained and appropriate staff in the counselling area.
This issue is important and members of health boards – Deputy Neville is also a member of the Mid-Western Health Board – have become aware of the difficulty in recruiting child care staff. Educational establishments must be urgently approached to ensure that appropriate staff are available to health boards and other organisations to deal with this matter. If that is not done, it will be difficult to put all our plans into practice.
There is still evidence of homeless children begging on the streets. Given such facts, we cannot say that all the neglect is in the past. Many speakers mentioned during the recent debates the need to deal with the present as well as the past. The Bill is a major part of the Labour Party's legislative programme and I hope it is the first of many Bills which will be accepted by the Government. There is no more important issue confronting us as a society than the protection of children. The Bill is part of the necessary process of confronting our shameful past in this regard and I commend it to the House.