Skip to main content
Normal View

Residential Institutions Redress Scheme.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 4 May 2005

Wednesday, 4 May 2005

Questions (451, 452)

Jan O'Sullivan

Question:

478 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in deciding to provide by order for additional institutions in respect of which former residents are entitled to make applications under the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002, she has confined herself to considering only those institutions owned and managed by religious congregations that had made contributions to the special account established under that Act and were party to an indemnity agreement with the State in respect of civil liability for child abuse in those institutions; if so, the reasons for that decision; if she has sought or received legal advice on such an approach; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14361/05]

View answer

Jan O'Sullivan

Question:

480 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in deciding to provide by order for additional institutions in respect of which former residents are entitled to make applications under the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002, she has confined herself to considering only those institutions owned and managed by religious congregations that had made contributions to the special account established under that Act and were party to an indemnity agreement with the State in respect of civil liability for child abuse in those institutions; if so, the reasons for that decision; if she sought or received legal advice on such an approach; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14450/05]

View answer

Written answers

I propose to take Questions Nos. 478 and 480 together.

Section 4 of the Residential Institutions Redress Act 2002 enables additional institutions, in which children were placed and resident and in respect of which a public body had a regulatory or inspection function, to be added to the Schedule to the Act.

Since the enactment of the legislation, my Department has received correspondence from both individuals and survivor groups identifying a number of additional institutions that may be eligible for inclusion in the Schedule. Accordingly, consultations have taken place between my Department and other Departments which may have provided a regulatory function in the operation of these facilities in order to ascertain the case for their inclusion under the Act.

While inquiries have not yet been completed in respect of all institutions, I signed an order on 9 November 2004 which provided for the inclusion of 13 additional institutions in the Schedule.

Further consultations are taking place on a number of institutions and I will consider the position of these institutions when this process has been completed. As part of that consultation process my Department is exploring with the trustees-management of some institutions the possibility of a contribution being made by them towards the redress scheme.

I can assure the Deputy, however, that any decision to include an additional institution will not be made conditional on a contribution being forthcoming and the question of obtaining legal advice on such a condition does not therefore arise. Nonetheless, it is desirable to explore the issue before a final decision is made.

Top
Share