It is time for us to acknowledge that Irish social policy relating to children has over the years been built on a bedrock of hypocrisy and deceit. The State, which constitutionally committed itself to cherishing the children of the nation equally has over the decades placed her most vulnerable and destitute children in institutions in which they are brutalised and sexually violated. Successive Governments, representative of the various political parties who are an integral part of our political system, have consistently failed to put in place essential structures to provide the maximum possible protection for children at risk and to ensure those taken into or placed in care are properly looked after.
Political soap box oratory about children's rights and their welfare has never been matched by the provision of the essential resources and comprehensive legislation required to provide our children with the protection to which they are entitled. I do not believe those who are politically responsible for the betrayal of our children and the destruction of their lives have acted out of malice. The crime is one of ignorance and neglect – a denial of the reality staring them in the face. The State, with its bureaucracy, must share the responsibility and blame for the scandalous events which took place within our institutions and have blighted the lives of so many placed in them during their childhood.
If all the files are opened, we will discover that for many years those who were dealing on a regular basis with the religious orders who administered our institutions were aware of the abuse to which children were being subjected. Programmes such as "Dear Daughter" and "States of Fear" have revealed to those directly involved in working in this area something they already knew. These programmes have shone the spotlight of publicity on events which some in authority would prefer to be covered up. Essentially they have cut through the wall of silence and provided public credibility to the casualties of institutional abuse which has given them the confidence to assert the truth of what occurred and to seek recompense.
The State, church authorities and religious orders stand accused of hypocrisy and deceit. We now know that many of those who were in a position of authority in the Catholic church in the early years when I was a Member of this House and who railed at the evils of contraception, divorce and abortion lacked similar concern for the young children who were being buggered and abused by men and women in religious orders. We now know that those who stood on moral platforms and lectured society were moving abusive priests from one parish to another like pieces on a chess board, ignoring the fact that their sexual proclivities posed a risk to every child with whom they came into contact.
Priests were moved from parishes, not for the purpose of protecting children, but to cover up abusive conduct already known to have taken place, in order to protect the church. Reports of abusive conduct by those in religious orders and those employed by them were covered up by the State because of a false sense of its duty to the church, in gross violation of its obligation to protect the rights of children.
The cover-up was continued until recently by distorted legalism which justified non-disclosure on the grounds that if the State, a Department or health board admitted the scandalous events which occurred, it would result in an inevitable claim for damages and a consequent loss of money to the Exchequer. Exchequer finances were wrongly given priority over our obligations to children abused in our institutions and their rights as citizens to protection and recompense from the State which bore responsibility for the destruction of their childhood.
In the past three years we have witnessed a parade of those guilty of child abuse passing through our courts system and being sentenced to terms of imprisonment. Each time a member of a religious order is sentenced, a member of the relevant order or a bishop publicly apologises for events which have occurred and expresses remorse. Help and counselling is offered to the victims. Last week the Taoiseach finally extended an apology for the State's failures to victims of abuse and, unlike the church authorities, pledged additional resources for counselling.
The commission which is to be set up is welcome and has been welcomed by many of the victims of abuse. However, social policy relating to children and that of the church remains with its foundations deeply rooted in hypocrisy and deceit. Can the apology of church authorities be taken seriously if they and religious orders continue in a legalistic way to contest liability for damages claimed by those who are the casualties of abuse for which they are responsible? How can we take seriously apologies issued for past events, when outside courts on the day fixed for the hearing of cases of alleged abuse, negotiations are undertaken by lawyers representing archbishops, bishops, or religious orders to settle such cases on the basis that a sum of money is paid, liability is denied and confidentiality agreements are entered into with plaintiffs seeking damages to ensure that the public is not made aware of the sum paid to them by way of compensation?
Can the State's apology be taken seriously when those responsible at Government level for the protection of children condone similar practices by health boards when the victims of abuse seek compensation due to a health board's failure to extend to them during their childhood the statutory protection to which they were entitled? Can it be taken seriously when we are told it will amend the Statute of Limitations to extend the time within which victims of sexual abuse may claim compensation, but is currently unwilling to similarly change the law in regard to physical abuse and wishes it examined by the Law Reform Commission?
Can the Taoiseach's acknowledgement that there is a need for a comprehensive policy to address the issues of child abuse be taken seriously when it is clear that a law which extends the time for bringing claims for compensation for sexual abuse will not immediately apply to physical abuse and will, as a consequence, be unworkable in the large number of instances in which children were both sexually and physically abused in years gone by? If both the State and church authorities are truly apologetic, the Statute of Limitations should immediately be reformed in its applications to both sexual and physical abuse. An announcement should be made that the statute will not be invoked by the State, the church or religious orders in any of the hundreds of cases pending before our courts in which the victims of abuse are claiming compensation. Immediate discussions should also take place with a view to the establishment of a tribunal which will facilitate the processing of such claims in a humane and expeditious manner with legal costs and expenses kept to a minimum.
The Government must move away from the hypocrisy and deceit for which the State properly stands accused. It must stop playing with this House a game of political charades by which a perception is created that the issue of child sexual and physical abuse is being comprehensively addressed and actually put in place all the measures that are genuinely required if the State's apology is to be taken seriously.
It is a disgrace that the last comprehensive child abuse guidelines to assist social workers working within health boards were published in 1988 and we still await the publication of new guidelines to reflect the provisions contained in the Child Care Act, 1991. We have learnt over the past decade about child abuse. We ask for a guarantee from Government that the new guidelines will be published within a month.
It is a further disgrace that approximately 280 offenders are currently serving sentences in our prisons for rape and sexual abuse offences and there are only facilities to extend treatment and therapy to ten such offenders. There is a need for a more extensive treatment and therapy programme but to date the Government has been silent on this issue. The State's apology does not deserve to be taken seriously when in the coming years offenders will be released back into the community who can be best described as "sexual exocets" and who will inevitably re-offend and destroy the lives and futures of many more young people.
Health boards, in particular the Eastern Health Board, have received reports naming hundreds of children believed to be at risk that remain uninvestigated and without family assessment being undertaken through lack of personnel and resources. It is not known how many children are suffering physical and sexual abuse to whom protection could be extended if health boards were able to respond quicker to reports received.
For almost two years the courts have been denied the assistance of the welfare service carrying out family and child assessments in family law cases in which our judges believe such assistance is required to ensure that when deciding disputes over children the right decision is made in the interest of their welfare. It is a disgrace that the social service inspectorate recommended by the Madonna House report more than three years ago is not yet properly in place and that the Government's original commitment to establish it by statute and guarantee its independence has been reneged upon. It is also a disgrace that many of the recommendations contained in the Kilkenny incest report and the report into the death of Kelly Fitzgerald remain unimplemented with those reports sitting on the shelves of the Department of Health and Children continuing to gather dust.
It is right that we acknowledge those who have taken heroic action to effect change. The courageous Sophia McColgan and her family exposed the incompetence and gross neglect of the North Western Health Board. The courageous Andrew Madden publicised a civil action brought by him against Fr. Ivor Payne which ultimately resulted in many victims of abuse coming forward and Fr. Payne's imprisonment. There are many other vic tims of similar courage and they have been seen in some of the recent television programmes.
There are also those who have become victims as a consequence of attempting to blow the whistle on child abuse at a time when the State was more interested in cover up and Government was more interested in protecting itself against legal actions for damages. Loretta Byrne, as a civil servant in the late 1980s, brought to the attention of officials in the Department of Education and, ultimately, to Members of this House on the Committee of Public Accounts serious abuse which she believed was being perpetrated in St. Lawrence's in Finglas. Her persistence cost her her job but today we know that at least one victim of abuse there has committed suicide and the Garda, which in 1994 only carried out a limited investigation has recently, having carried out a further investigation, sent files to the Director of Public Prosecutions in regard to allegations of abuse at the Finglas centre. It is time it was publicly acknowledged that Loretta Byrne got it right and those with whom she dealt in various Departments got it seriously wrong. She must be compensated for the fact that her persistence and courage cost her her job and substantially impaired her quality of life.
The State has apologised but still stands accused of failing to cherish the children of the nation equally and to date has failed to provide to our children the protection to which they are entitled. The Government must commit itself to take a more comprehensive approach than that announced by the Taoiseach last week within a specified timescale. If it does not do so the events of last week will in the coming years be seen to be just another tired move in a game of political charades played out in this House and outside by Government and politicians, one which for too long has been played with the lives of children.
