Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 19 February 2004
» ...
»
Tribunals of Inquiry.
64 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Education and Science the aspect of Ms Justice Laffoy’s recent findings he agrees with in terms of his Department’s dealings with the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse and the steps he plans to take to ensure that the commission’s work can continue to operate efficiently and quickly under Mr. Justice Ryan. [5228/04]
View answerThe Third Interim Report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse is very detailed. I thank Ms Justice Laffoy and the commission for its completion. It refers to the manner in which my Department dealt with the commission, as a sponsor and a respondent. I will comment on those issues and outline the steps that are being taken to ensure that the commission can continue to operate efficiently.
The resourcing delays to which the commission refers in its report primarily relate to the period from June 2002 onwards, when the commission sought a doubling of its resources. It was necessary that this request be considered by the Government, following which it was decided that a review of the operation of the investigation committee was necessary. I consider that this review has been justified and I am confident that the legislation that will emanate from the review will assist the commission in completing its remit in a timely fashion. Judge Ryan, in his report on the working of the commission that was undertaken prior to his becoming chairperson of the commission, recommended that an ad hoc group of senior officials be identified who could deal with resourcing issues quickly. The Government has accepted this suggestion. I am confident that this process will ensure that all future requests for resources are dealt with effectively and in a timely manner.
Regarding my Department's role as respondent, I have already accepted that some difficulties were encountered, especially in complying with a small number of the discovery directions. However, the commission's third interim report acknowledges that "some of the difficulties were caused, or contributed to by the Committee in that for example there was not sufficient clarity in the direction as to what was sought, or insufficient time was being allowed for compliance". In an effort to resolve the difficulties that had arisen, the Department reorganised the manner in which it dealt with the commission in early 2003. The residential institutions redress unit of the Department has acted as a focal point for dealing with all commission-related matters since then. This approach ensures that a single unit is aware of all issues relating to the commission. Consequently, the Department is in a position to respond more effectively to discovery directions and any other matters.
I also appointed the former chairperson of the Bar Council of England and Wales, Mr. Matthias Kelly QC, to conduct a review of the processes and procedures for making discovery to the commission by my Department. The process of meeting and interviewing persons relevant to the review has concluded and Mr. Kelly has returned to the UK to conclude his work on his report. Mr. Kelly has recently provided me with an interim report of his review. He has stated that he originally expected that his report could be completed within a matter of weeks but, given the sheer volume of documentation, it is not possible and he will report in full as soon as possible. I add, however, that in his interim report Mr. Kelly has reached the provisional conclusion that "the difficulties over discovery were not due to obstruction or concealment but rather due to poor historic record storage systems and misunderstandings as to what was required".
In his report, Judge Ryan stated that he would commence a consultation process with parties to the commission's work. Should this consultation process result in further recommendations from Judge Ryan or steps that could be taken to assist the commission, these will be considered.
