I thank the joint committee for the opportunity to speak on issues relating to the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, the ongoing review of the investigation committee of the commission and the announced resignation of Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, scheduled to take effect in November.
At the outset, let me say that I greatly regret that Ms Justice Laffoy reached the conclusion that she could no longer continue as chairperson of the commission. I have previously indicated that Ms Justice Laffoy's resignation was a matter of considerable surprise to me and to the Government. I have expressed my thanks for the commitment Ms Justice Laffoy has shown in carrying out her role as chairperson and I am happy to repeat that appreciation to the committee. I am sure this committee will want to explore further the background to Ms Justice Laffoy's resignation and I am happy to assist as far as I can.
Notwithstanding Ms Justice Laffoy's decision, I have to emphasise that there is still a commission and an investigation committee in place, complete with its full range of powers and functions. There are still many hundreds of people who suffered abuse in childhood who are looking for closure. I and my colleagues in Government are fully committed to ensuring that victims of abuse are helped to find peace and healing in their lives, that those responsible for abuse are held accountable and that we learn lessons from the past.
The Government's policy response to issues arising from abuse in childhood essentially comprises of three strands - a statutory Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, a nationwide programme of counselling, operated under the auspices of the health boards and providing a free counselling service to all victims of abuse in childhood and a redress scheme through which victims of abuse in residential care can get financial compensation. The Residential Institutions Redress Board administers this scheme.
The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse has a dual structure to meet the differing needs of victims. The investigation committee carries out detailed inquiries, similar to trials, with regard to allegations of abuse. This is the part of the commission that is currently being reviewed and about which I will speak at greater length later.
There is also the confidential committee which hears, in total confidence, the accounts of abuse from victims who did not wish to have inquiries into their allegations. It is for the victim of abuse to choose which committee he or she wishes to go to. The confidential committee continues to function and has at this stage heard the accounts of over 700 witnesses - approximately two-thirds of all those who applied to that committee. The nationwide counselling service, set up under the auspices of the health boards, continues to operate and has not been affected by recent developments. The work of the Residential Institutions Redress Board, chaired by Mr. Justice Seán O'Leary, continues.
It is important to reiterate that this work is completely separate from the work of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse and that the board operates under a separate statutory scheme to that of the commission. The board makes financial awards to victims of abuse. The recent developments arising from the resignation of Ms Justice Laffoy will not affect, in any way, the payment of compensation. The only developments in the Government's initiatives in redressing the damage caused by childhood abuse that is currently under review is the investigation committee of the commission.
The reason for this review is that when the commission was established in 2000, it was the Government's intention that it carry out its work free of the adversarial environment and legal formalities of the courts and that it would be able to deliver its final report within two years. This is what was promised to the survivors but, as time went on, it became increasingly obvious that this would not happen. There were many reasons, but primarily the issue rests with the fact that, far from being a relatively informal forum, the investigation committee assumed the formality of the High Court, complete with teams of lawyers.
Following the final deadline for receipt of statements in July 2002, the commission indicated that the total of applications to the investigation committee was 1,957. It then became apparent that, given the rate of progress at the committee, if all of these cases were to be heard individually, the commission would not be in a position to deliver its final report for at least a further eight to 11 years. This timeframe was provided to my Department by the commission and was based on the resources that it had at that time. A report by the commission in that timeframe would be far too late for many of those for whom it was established. Concern about the progress of the commission was shared by survivor support groups who urged my Department to take action to ensure that the report of the commission be delivered as soon as possible. They made the point that some of their members had already been waiting 30 to 40 years for validation.
In addition to the long delay and the consequences of this for survivors of abuse, there was also serious concern that publication of the final report would be challenged by alleged abusers claiming that they did not have due process in a court of law. The likely delays, the doubts about the ability to publish a full report and the real probability that the State would have to pay legal costs of the order of €200 million contributed to need to review the investigation committee.
There are those who say that cost should not be a concern, that seeing justice is done is beyond petty considerations of money. Cost has to be an issue and having regard to it does not prejudice having justice done. What has to be achieved is a process which delivers justice effectively, efficiently, without undue delay and without exorbitant legal costs.
Once I had concerns about the operation of the investigation committee, it was my public duty to bring them to the attention of the Government rather than allow the state of affairs, as I saw it, to go unchallenged. The commission is the creation of the Oireachtas following proposals from the Government. It is my and the Government's duty to return to the Oireachtas when we believe that reform is necessary in order to achieve the objectives of the original legislation. That is what the review of the commission is about. The purpose of the review is to find a way through which the mandate given to the investigation committee under the legislation can be carried out in a more efficient, cost effective and timely way. As part of that process, consideration was given to the issue of what additional powers could be given to the investigation committee to facilitate its operation.
The first phase of the review was completed and a report submitted to the Government. The recommendations are currently reflected in draft legislation being prepared by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. However, following on from that review, further amendments are being considered which are likely to result in further changes to the way in which the investigation committee operates. The Government also considers that, in the light of the Supreme Court judgment in the Meenan case and the current case taken by the Christian Brothers in the High Court, it is prudent to have regard to the judgments in framing amending legislation.
Consultations with the main survivor groups are also continuing. A number of meetings have been held with these groups, the latest of which took place on Thursday, 25 September. The meetings have been very constructive and useful to me in considering how best to proceed. There is a strong sense that we share a common objective in ensuring that the investigation committee can achieve its mandate in an effective and timely way. It is my intention that the revised remit of the investigation committee of the commission will be legislated for by the spring of 2004.
In the meantime, the Government has appointed Mr. Seán Ryan, senior counsel, as chairperson designate of the commission. Mr. Ryan comes with a wealth of experience from his practice in law. In addition, he comes with direct experience of the issues around past child abuse having chaired the compensation advisory committee. The committee drew up recommendations for financial awards to abuse victims under the residential institutions redress scheme. Mr. Ryan also acted as counsel to the Ferns inquiry.
I am sure you will join with me in wishing Mr. Ryan every success in this important post. For my part, I assure Mr. Ryan, and this committee, that my Department and I will continue to give every assistance to the commission in carrying out its mandate. The Government has also decided to introduce legislation to increase the number of High Court judges and, subject to statutory provisions, intends that Mr. Ryan shall be made a High Court Justice. This will ensure that Mr. Ryan will be separate and independent of the Executive and Legislature and ensure that the integrity of the independence of the chairperson will be maintained. The Government has requested Mr. Ryan to immediately undertake his own independent review of the operation of the investigation committee. This review is to be completed within a period of eight weeks.
The terms of reference of the review are to carry out a review of the working of the commission and to make all necessary recommendations having regard to the interests of the victims of abuse; the completion of the commission's work within a reasonable period of time and in a manner consistent with a proper investigation; and to achieve the above objectives without incurring exorbitant costs. Should this review identify a requirement for further amendments to the legislation, these will be considered by the Government. I am confident that the commission will give every assistance to Mr. Ryan in his role. I am also assured by the other members of the commission that they will give every assistance to Mr. Ryan in the transfer of the position of chairperson.
Chairman, I thank the Joint Committee on Education and Science for inviting me here today and I will be glad to deal with any questions it may have.