Bernard Allen
Question:30 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation whether the Government has decided to place a limit on the expenses being allowed to witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [6243/98]
Other Questions. - Child Abuse Inquiry.
John Browne
Question:39 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reason a financial limit has been placed on the legal expenses incurred by witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [7238/98]
Michael Creed
Question:40 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reason a financial limit has been placed on the legal expenses incurred by witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [7241/98]
Liam Burke
Question:41 Mr. L. Burke asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reason a financial limit has been placed on the legal expenses incurred by witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [7239/98]
Olivia Mitchell
Question:42 Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reason a financial limit has been placed on the legal expenses incurred by witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [7138/98]
Michael Ferris
Question:43 Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if his attention has been drawn to the fact that no provisions have been put in place for legal fees for the senior counsel, junior counsel or solicitors or persons, who by virtue of their membership of the Irish Amateur Swimming Association, will be required to co-operate fully with the independent inquiry into sexual abuse in swimming; his views on whether the absence of provision of legal fees or the ability to be similarly legally represented constitutes a denial of justice to Irish Amateur Swimming Association members and deprives the independent inquiry of necessary witnesses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7268/98]
P. J. Sheehan
Question:53 Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reason a financial limit has been placed on the legal expenses incurred by witnesses appearing before the inquiry into abuse in swimming. [7240/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 30, 39 to 43, inclusive, and 53 together.
The Government appointed Dr. Roderick Murphy, SC, on 10 February to Chair an independent inquiry, currently under way, into the following matters relating to the incidence of child sexual abuse in swimming: the arrangements which the IASA, the Leinster Branch and affiliated clubs, had in place since 1975 for the detection and prevention of child sexual abuse; the procedures, including functional responsibility, which the IASA, the Leinster Branch and affiliated clubs had in place for securing compliance with these arrangements; the manner in which complaints in relation to sexual abuse made to the IASA, the Leinster Branch, affiliated clubs and a named school were dealt with over that period; the manner in which any complaints in relation to two named coaches reported to the IASA, their Leinster Branch, affiliated clubs and a named school were handled by them over that period; the arrangements which the IASA, their branches and affiliated clubs now have in place to detect and prevent child sexual abuse, including arrangements while complaints are being investigated, and sanctions; and the adequacy of arrangements now in place for the protection of children in swimming.
Participation in the inquiry is by way of written submission and-or interview, all of which are being dealt with in strict confidence. Given the private and factual nature of the inquiry and its procedures, it is not normal practice, I understand, in such circumstances for the State to offer assistance for legal representation for participants.
However, a strong wish was expressed by some victims that they be accompanied by their legal adviser when attending for interview because without such presence they would be reluctant to participate in the inquiry. Having considered the matter, the Government decided, as an exceptional measure, to offer assistance towards legal costs incurred by the victims, involved in incidents covered by the terms of reference, in arranging for the attendance of their legal advisers at interviews. Government set a maximum of £500 for the State's contribution towards such costs, having regard to the nature of the inquiry and of the role required of victims' legal advisers.
In relation to the Irish Amateur Swimming Association, IASA, Dr. Murphy has indicated that he has already received considerable co-operation from the association and its Leinster branch, including interviews with coaches and officials, written submissions and documentation in relation to its organisation in general and to its procedures for dealing with complaints in particular.
Dr. Murphy expects to complete his report by the end of March by which time he expects to have sufficient material available to him from submissions and interviews to address the matters raised in the terms of reference of the inquiry.
This issue does not involve big business or the serious problem of misappropriation of funds. It is the more sensitive and serious issue of child abuse. The Minister in his Scrooge-like and insensitive approach to the matter of legal representation is giving the wrong signals and the Government's decision is a deterrent to some people coming forward. In view of the other defects in the inquiry, will the Minister consider removing the cap on legal expenses so that everybody who wishes to come forward and give evidence is encouraged to do so and people are not deterred by the risk of incurring heavy legal expenses?
The Government made its decision in the interests of the victims, the parents of victims and in the interests of children. The inquiry has been a tremendous success with regard to the number of people coming forward. On previous occasions, accusations were made that I was compelling people to come forward but the only people we sought to compel were those who wished to come forward in confidence.
With regard to the cap on the amount of money being made available for the victims' legal expenses, such a decision was not considered in the context of any other inquiry. It was never previously offered. The Government made this proposal because there are exceptional circumstances. It does not prevent people coming forward. Dr. Murphy indicated he would accept people coming forward whether they do so in a private capacity or are accompanied by their legal advisers. Some people prefer to be accompanied by their legal advisers.
In certain instances, this matter has been abused by certain people in the legal profession. There were advertisements encouraging people to come forward to what was virtually a seminar for advice. It was a self-marketing, profile generating exercise. Nobody need feel put out by the fact that a cap has been imposed on legal expenses. It is a generous offer and, to date, it has not prevented anybody coming forward to give their evidence.
Some people, by virtue of their positions in the Irish Amateur Swimming Association, will be obliged or expected to give evidence. Does the Minister not agree that the cap is a disincentive to some of them, particularly because of their stated views on this subject and the evidence they have already given to the media? If they are to be facilitated and to ensure that Dr. Murphy is given the most extensive information possible, there should be no preclusion, whether it be legal fees or otherwise, on their coming forward, without fear of repercussions with regard to their evidence. Some of these people carried out individual internal inquiries in contravention of the code of ethics and they now realise it was the wrong thing to do. Nevertheless, they are expected to give that evidence to this confidential committee but if they are precluded from being properly represented it will be a disincentive.
I am not sure that I understand the Deputy. Nobody has been precluded from coming forward by the cap on the fees. Everybody was invited to come forward and Dr. Murphy allowed people to come forward on their own initiative. However, in the case of the officials and coaches, he approached the people he considered necessary for submissions. He made direct approaches to certain people but it was left up to the victims and the parents of victims to come forward should they decide to do so. He did not feel he should intervene in their private decisions.
The Minister said everybody was invited to come forward. Is he satisfied that no material witness will be precluded from coming forward as a result of the cap on legal fees? What is his best estimate of the likely costs to the Exchequer arising from the inquiry?
The costs to the Exchequer are a matter for the Attorney General. I cannot answer the Deputy's question in that regard. I do not believe anybody should feel precluded from coming forward because of the cap on the legal fees.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.