Written Answers - Residential Institutions Redress Scheme.
Richard Bruton
Question:
123
Mr. R. Bruton
asked the
Minister for Finance
his Department's involvement in the negotiation of a deal with institutions in respect of their share of the costs of compensating victims of abuse while children in institutional care.
[5447/03]
Richard Bruton
Question:
270
Mr. R. Bruton
asked the
Minister for Finance
if he has satisfied himself with the basis on which the compensation settlement with religious congregations operating institutions was made, particularly in respect of the estimation of the likely cost of the settlement to the State; and if there is scope for renegotiation of this deal in the event that the costs of compensation prove considerably greater than were initially thought.
[5332/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 123 and 270 together.
I am satisfied with the basis on which the indemnity was given to religious congregations in return for a voluntary contribution of €128 million towards the overall cost of the residential institutions scheme.
I refer the Deputy to my earlier response to Deputy Burton. There are a few points I would like to emphasise. First, the Government had already approved proposals for a residential institutions redress scheme, which formed a major part of its general approach to try to bring some healing and closure to victims of child abuse and recognising its own responsibilities to those victims. It was considered by Government that the religious congregations should be asked to make a meaningful voluntary contribution towards the cost of the scheme. However, it should be emphasised that the Government had already decided to go ahead with a redress scheme even if the religious congregations were not to contribute to the scheme.
Second, as I also indicated earlier to the House, following the Government approval of the redress scheme a group of officials from the Department of Education and Science, my Department and the Office of the Attorney General met representatives of the religious congregations on a number of occasions during the period February 2001 to October 2001 to explore whether they would make a contribution. It was clear from the early stages of the negotiations with the congregations that they would not participate and contribute to the scheme, without a cap and an indemnity. The decision was taken, following earlier clearance at ministerial level, that the negotiators could propose an approach based on a 50:50 contribution with a cap of £100 million, €127 million, together with an agreement, in principle, to an indemnity to be subsequently drafted between the parties. This was put to the religious congregations at the meeting of 16 October 2001 but was not accepted by them at that stage.
Following further direct discussions between representatives of the congregations and the Minister for Education and Science during December 2001 and January 2002, the Minister announced, on 30 January 2002, that the Government had agreed, in principle, to a set of proposals whereby the congregations would contribute €128 million to the scheme in return for the indemnity by the State, the details of which had to be subsequently drafted.
As I mentioned in my earlier reply to Deputy Burton, my Department was represented at a meeting with representatives of the Department of Education and Science and the religious congregations in mid-March 2002 to advance matters. This was followed by meetings between officials from the Department of Education and Science and the Office of the Attorney General and representatives of the religious congregations on the detailed provisions of the indemnity agreement. My Department was not in attendance at those meetings. However, my Department was kept informed of developments generally and met officials from the Department of Education and Science and the Office of the Attorney General in mid-May with a view to concluding matters at official level so that the agreement could be formally submitted to Government.
As regards the overall costs of the redress scheme, when the Government agreed the indemnity agreement on 5 June 2002, the best information available from the Department of Education and Science was that the estimated cost could be in the range from £200 million to £400 million, €250 million to €500 million. The cost could be higher or lower depending on the actual number of cases and the awards made. The final cost will not be known until the redress board has completed its work, which will be at least three years hence.
In the event that the costs are considerably greater than originally estimated, I am informed that the agreement contains no renegotiation clause. However, I have no evidence which would indicate that the estimate provided by the Department of Education and Science of likely costs is unreasonable.
