Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Oct 2023

General Scheme of the Education (Supports for Survivors of Residential Institutional Abuse) Bill 2023: Discussion

An Cathaoirleach

We will now meet relevant stakeholders for our pre-legislative scrutiny of the education (supports for survivors of residential institutional abuse) Bill. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Mr. Patrick Rodgers, regional manager at Fréa in the north of England, who has come from the UK to join us today; Ms Maeve Lewis, CEO of One in Four; Ms Siobhán Byrne, regional outreach officer at Right of Place Second Chance; and Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne, board member and co-founder of the Christine Buckley Centre for Education and Support. The Alliance Victim Support Group could not attend, as its chair and secretary are both in hospital. We wish them well. The London Irish Centre was also invited to attend and its contribution is contained in the opening statement from Fréa. Mr. Rodgers will speak on behalf of the centre.

I welcome Ms Deirdre Kenny. From the Christine Buckley Centre for Education and Support, I welcome Ms Joan Burton. I also welcome Ms Helen Guinan from Right of Place Second Chance. They are in the Public Gallery. Staff from Fréa and the London Irish Centre are joining us virtually via Microsoft Teams as observers. They are all welcome.

The format of the meeting is that I will invite each witness to make a brief opening statement of five minutes in the following order: Mr. Rodgers, Ms Lewis, Ms Byrne and Ms McDonnell Byrne. This will be followed by questions from members, each of whom will have a six-minute slot to ask questions and for witnesses to respond. As witnesses are probably aware, the committee will publish their opening statements on its website following the meeting.

Before we begin, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed by the Chair to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I will ask Mr. Rodgers to make his opening statement, followed by the other witnesses. There are clocks under each of the screens, so I ask that they watch those and stick to their five minutes as much as possible.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

Fréa is a partnership between three leading Irish charities in the north of England. The Fréa mother and baby and county home institution programme aims to promote and facilitate access so as to ensure that former residents are aware of and can access the various strands of the Irish Government’s action plan. This includes the payment scheme and access to health-related payments. Fréa works closely with colleagues at the survivors project at the London Irish Centre as well as the Coventry Irish Society.

While we broadly welcome that former residents of mother and baby or county home institutions will be able to avail of a payment to help them to access healthcare, we are concerned that it may cause problems for those who receive means-tested benefits and are living in the UK.

Means-tested benefits from the Department for Work and Pensions in the UK are universal credit, pension credit, jobseeker's allowance, employment support allowance, housing benefit and council tax support. In order to access means-tested benefits, certain criteria regarding capital have to be met. These can be broken down into two parts, namely, capital and income.

To deal first with capital, the lower capital limits for benefits in Britain are £6,000 for benefits claimed by people aged under 66 and £10,000 for people aged over 66. After a person’s capital exceeds this amount, the benefit is reduced by £1 for every £500 the person has in savings. A person with capital in excess of £16,000 is no longer entitled to means-tested benefits, with certain exceptions. Any large one-off payment can adversely affect claimants as it has the effect of bringing them over the capital savings limits. There is scope to disregard certain income for the purposes of capital but it does not appear that these disregards apply to capital accrued as a result of mother and baby and county home payments. According to the Department for Work and Pensions, payments relating to capital can be indefinitely disregarded for persons who have been subject to historical institutional child abuse in the United Kingdom, among other reasons. Obviously, that would apply to the historical institutional abuse, HIA, payments.

We have examined alternatives such as setting up trust funds, but we have concerns this would not be eligible for a disregard. The rules on disregarding capital accrued through large payments and held in trust funds state that capital can be disregarded where a person has been awarded a sum in consequence of a personal injury to that person and the sum is held in trust, the amount shall be disregarded from the calculation of the person’s capital. Payments only come within this disregard where a claimant or partner for whom the payment was made suffered a physical and-or psychological injury. If there is any doubt regarding for what the payment was awarded, the decision maker should request sight of the papers awarding the amount. These should specify the basis on which the award was made.

Our concern is that any payment in this instance would be not regarded as the result of personal injury and would be counted as capital. Further, setting up a trust can be an expensive process, costing a minimum of £1,000. As a result, many of our clients would lose significant amounts money that should be used to address health needs as a result of their time in a mother and baby or county home.

Means-tested benefits also take income into account. In some cases, a one-off payment can affect a benefit claim. Where excess income is received, a claim can be stopped or no payment may be made for the following payment period. Income up to a certain level is allowable, although this is still taken into account and may reduce the amount of means-tested benefit.

To illustrate this point, we ask the committee to consider the situation of persons receiving universal credit. They have a monthly payment period. The amount a claimant of universal credit receives each month is based on numerous factors, including any income received during that monthly period. Where the claimant receives income, this will be taken into account when working out the monthly amount the claimant receives. Where a claimant receives a one-off payment of €3,000, or approximately £2,600 at current exchange rates, this would wipe out any payment the claimant would receive for a monthly period.

To put that into context, universal credit payments cover both day-to-day expenses and housing payments. In effect, receiving a one-off payment for health costs could negatively impact claimants as they would not receive a universal credit payment and they would need to use a healthcare payment to cover day-to-day living expenses and rent. There is scope for this income to be disregarded but it is unclear whether it can be disregarded as income. The payment does not appear to be covered as unearned income under British Government regulation. If it is covered as such, it may be that it can be disregarded for the individual payment periods and as such would not affect a claimant’s benefit payment.

However, this needs to be clarified with the Department for Work and Pensions prior to any payments being made. Furthermore, if this is the case, then it is essential that such information be communicated to the staff of the Department for Work and Pensions so they do not stop payments in error. To properly advise claimants, we need this to be clarified by the Department for Work and Pensions as a matter of the utmost urgency to facilitate a smooth process of accessing payment schemes.

We welcome the committee's support in liaising with the Department for Work and Pensions. This will ensure that there is equitable access to any payment scheme for all former residents and that those accessing welfare benefits entitlements in Britain will not be penalised in any way.

Ms Maeve Lewis

I thank the committee. At One in Four, we provide psychotherapy and advocacy support to men and women who have experienced childhood sexual abuse and to their families. We also offer a prevention programme to those who have caused sexual harm to children. Working with an average of 700 clients per annum, we have a deep understanding of the long-term impact of childhood trauma on the individual. We recognise that a particular set of supports is needed by survivors, who may be very vulnerable as a result of their childhood experiences.

One in Four broadly welcomes the proposed Bill and believes that, if enacted, it will provide a structured support system to survivors of residential abuse. We welcome, in particular, the provision of health services without charge, including a free nursing service, free home help, free dental, ophthalmic and aural services, a free counselling service, a free chiropody service and a free physiotherapy service.

However, we have identified several omissions in the proposed legislation. In the absence of a designated support agency, many survivors will have difficulty in accessing information about their entitlements, negotiating any roadblocks they may encounter and identifying appropriate services. Some survivors have a low educational attainment and may be suffering from chronic complex post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD. Some will not have the confidence to be assertive in claiming their entitlement. Thus, there is a vital need to provide for a professional advocacy service to assist survivors in availing of the proposed supports.

While it is very welcome that counselling services are identified as a necessary support, the reality is that all the specialised counselling suffers from long waiting lists. For example, at One in Four, our waiting list is now over one year and the same is true for other services. Survivors of institutional abuse deserve to have timely access to well-trained, experienced trauma psychotherapists and counsellors and no provision is made for this in the Bill.

Many survivors still experience shame and stigma associated with their childhood experiences and will not always feel able to identify themselves as survivors to front-facing staff in the health services. All medical and public service staff working in front-line roles, therefore, should be afforded trauma-informed practice training so they can identify survivors and be aware of the different specialist supports they may need.

Regarding survivors overseas, it seems to us that the €3,000 allowance is a relatively small sum and may not cover the costs of the health services in other jurisdictions. It also will reduce in value over the coming years due to inflation. The sum of this allowance should not be specified in legislation and should be awarded through a needs-based assessment.

Turning to the use of data, privacy concerns are very salient for survivors and every thought needs to be given to the security of sensitive data as they move from agency to agency.

We have always understood that many survivors dread the possibility of ending their lives in a care home, provoking, as it might, traumatic memories of their childhoods in institutions. It would be useful if the Bill could include a section stressing that every effort would be made to ensure that, insofar as possible, home help and nursing care would be provided for survivors in their own homes.

No provision is made in the Bill for the provision of professional support for survivors who may be engaging with criminal or civil justice processes in relation to their alleged abuser.

To conclude, this Bill is a welcome development in providing ongoing support to survivors of institutional abuse, enshrining in law their right of access to a variety of vital services. However, we consider that the Bill could be improved if the concerns we have raised here were to be considered. Survivors of abuse in institutional care were abysmally failed by the Irish State in their early years.

It is incumbent now on us as a society to ensure as they age, that they are afforded the highest quality appropriate services they so richly deserve.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Right of Place Second Chance was founded to support those persons who were placed into the religious industrial schools and who suffered physical, mental, and sexual abuse over many decades. We are Ireland's largest organisation that offers support to survivors and their families following the 1999 apology by the State and its acknowledgement that such abuse of innocent children took place and that thousands suffered that abuse at the hands of those religious orders tasked with managing those institutions. We provide support and advocacy across Ireland, the UK, and further afield through our dedicated volunteers and professional staff. Our aim is to help improve the lives of those who suffered in institutions as children, and many who continue to suffer in adult life.

Right of Place Second Chance welcomes the general scheme of supports for survivors of residential institutional abuse Bill 2023, which aims to provide for the provision of new supports to survivors. Several of the reports and detailed documents have been commissioned by the organisation over the past 25 years. The voices of survivors recorded the views of individual survivors pertaining to their long-term needs. The Right of Place Second Chance vision document was compiled in 2015, which enabled our organisation to present to the Government, its views and learnt experiences of what survivors and their families required by way of supports at that time. Given the general recognition, acceptance, and understanding of the adverse effects that institutional childhood abuse has had on the lives of survivors, the amount of existing academic literature exploring the survivor-specific community remains whole inadequate. One of our key findings established over the years of offering support services is the urgent requirement of a robust and fully comprehensive review of the long-term care afforded to survivors.

We have called on the Government over many years to implement policy change and to make a genuine commitment to improving the lives of such survivors of institutional abuse and their families through meaningful long-term intervention as a way of ensuring the commitment to the State's response and promises to this cohort of survivors. In 2020, at a conference in Trinity College Dublin, we, along with all other stakeholders attending, presented our vision to what had changed in the 20 years since the State apology and what remained to be done by Government to meet its commitments and fulfil its promise to survivors. One of the key recommendations of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse stated that educational supports for survivors and their families should continue to help address many of the disadvantages suffered.

In line with all stakeholders, State agencies, leading academics, and the other survivor groups, we are calling on the Government to implement the following provisions. Regarding healthcare, the granting of the medical card under the Health (Amendment) Act 1996 will recognise the ongoing medical challenges facing survivors today. This will recognise the life-long effects of institutional abuse and afford survivors the opportunity to live their remaining years with assured healthcare, particularly considering their age profile. We request that the Government make available to survivors the automatic entitlement to the contributory State pension upon reaching pensionable age. Also, prioritising social housing and giving precedence to survivors regarding its allocation would recognise the adverse effects of their institutionalisation and abuse as children, which has led to low levels of home ownership and homelessness. The housing inequality experienced by survivors must be recognised and amended. Regarding education, we request that the State provide access to funding for education, training, and supports which would enable families of survivors, many of whom are typically from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, to break the cycle of poverty which was in part, caused by institutionalisation.

What survivors seek and deserve is justice, recognition of their long-standing pain and suffering, and not merely the implementation of wholly ineffective short-term measures. It is of critical importance to survivors that the life-long negative impact, which institutionalisation has had on their lives and the lives of their families, is fully recognised. Their healthcare, housing, and pensionable needs have not currently been guaranteed for the remainder of their lives. We acknowledge that no Government can change what happened to the survivors of industrial schools, but it can help to change what the future of survivors and that of their families will be. Sufferers continue to feel their needs are being overlooked. We had previously called on the Government to introduce life-long measures as a final way of affirming the recognition of the wrongs committed against survivors, and to display genuine commitment to justice and healing. We now look forward to helping survivors access these new supports and entitlements.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I thank the committee for the invitation to come before it. I am a survivor of institutional abuse and I am one of the co-founders of the Christine Buckley Centre for Education and Support, formerly known as the Aislinn Centre. Over the past 27 years my life's work has been dedicated to advocating for, and providing support to, fellow survivors of institutional abuse. Today, I am here to shed light on the ongoing challenges that survivors face, even years after receiving redress.

Despite progress, there are still critical areas where survivors continue to struggle on a daily basis. These areas include housing, health, education, counselling and access to trauma-informed services. At the Christine Buckley Centre, we witness these challenges first-hand every single day. For instance, we often find ourselves writing letters of support for our clients who are seeking adaptation grants for their homes. In doing so, we are compelled to delve into the painful details of the trauma they have endured. This, in itself, should not be necessary. It should be self-evident that survivors of institutional abuse require additional support, without the need to regurgitate their painful experiences.

Additionally, there is a big problem when it comes to health expenses. Survivors with a regular medical card often have to pay for things like important blood tests and extra medical treatments that are not covered by their regular GP. Survivors, who often deal with poor health, end up being further disadvantaged. Sometimes, they cannot even afford all of the costs of their medical needs. A simple fix could be to create a Health (Amendment) Act card designed just for survivors of institutional abuse, Magdalen laundries and mother and baby homes. These survivors have already been through immense hardship and it is our duty to ensure that they receive the care, assistance and respect they deserve without having to continually rehash their past trauma.

This was one of the areas discussed at the Facing the Future Together conference on Ireland's responsibility to survivors of institutional abuse, which was held in Trinity College on 11 May 2019. It was a collaboration of seven organisations, including One in Four, Right of Place Second Chance, the Christine Buckley Centre, Caranua, Towards Healing and Barnardos. Its recommendations are evidence based and derived from qualitative research from respected academics, input from survivors and knowledge sharing from service providers with years of experience.

It is of paramount importance that we continue to deal with the trauma and help survivors progress on their journey of healing. I reiterate that we should all do our best to ensure they are fully nurtured, supported and respected. Today I beg committee members to consider the pressing needs of survivors in these vital areas and work towards a more compassionate and empathetic support system for all. We need a State-run advocacy service exclusively for survivors, similar to the national advocacy service model for people with disabilities. Survivors should be able to access an advocate service solely designed to support them.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank all of the witnesses for their opening statements and for keeping within the time limits. It is much appreciated. I have some housekeeping matters. Apologies have been received from Senators Pauline O'Reilly and Eileen Flynn and Deputies Cathal Crowe, Carol Nolan and Marc Ó Cathasaigh. I welcome Joan Burton who is in the Gallery. She is a former Tánaiste, Minister and distinguished Member of the Dáil for many years and is very welcome.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

I thank all of our guests and witnesses, particularly those who have had a significant journey. It is very important they are in this room to discuss the Bill. It is very important that the voices and experiences of survivors are included and addressed fully in the Bill. For far too long the history of the State has been one of abuse, neglect, pain and trauma for countless people. This is wrong. The Bill goes some way to address this. It does not go all the way because the abuse will never be undone to the people who have survived it.

My first question is for Mr. Rodgers, who has raised some very important points. The Department of Education estimates that 33% of those eligible live in the UK.

The concern I have with the issues that have been raised is that we could almost inadvertently be putting up a barrier for people to apply for and benefit from this scheme if they are going to lose their state entitlements in the UK. That would be both counterproductive and counterintuitive. It would further compound the pain and the hurt. I do not have any specific questions other than to say that I will be raising this issue with the Department. If Mr. Rodgers knows of a mechanism that has been introduced in the UK that can reduce the bureaucracy relating to people receiving the supports, I ask him to let us know. He spoke about personal injury funds and universal credit. Is any such mechanism available?

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

Yes. The Department for Work and Pensions decision-maker guidance refers to trust funds. If people put the money in trust funds, it will not be regarded as income or capital in that way.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

Essentially, it is parked.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

It is parked, but there are a few points to note about trust funds. The trust fund has to be set up as a result of a personal injury. Obviously, a health-related payment scheme would definitely qualify as being the result of a personal injury. The way the decision-maker guidance is worded hints at a kind of no win no fee personal injury court case, but it is not definitive in that. We would like that to be cleared up. What we would really like to see is clarification on whether unearned income is taken into account for means-tested benefits and whether it will be taken into account with regard to capital. There may be some latitude within the decision-maker guidance whereby it does not have to be taken into account. The second problem is that it is unclear whether decision-makers know about that. It is not just about getting a clarification from the Department for Work and Pensions. We want that information to be disseminated to decision-makers so that if they ever ask for capital details from someone who has received money, they know that that money should be disregarded.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

That is a very valid point. Ms Lewis raised a very important point in her statement about the lack of supports for people who have experienced abuse to potentially pursue an alleged abuser through court. The State should be encouraging and standing behind that pursuit of justice. The idea of an advocate is fantastic. It is going to be essential. In terms of what One in Four needs, this is where we run into difficulties. Telling a person they are entitled to something does not mean that service or resource will materialise. It just gives a person an entitlement. It does not mean they are going to receive the support in a timely manner. In terms of the psychotherapy and counselling that One in Four supports, what does the organisation actually need to be able to meet the requirements of the service users or those who will benefit from the Bill?

Ms Maeve Lewis

It is not just One in Four; it is all the services working with sexual trauma in particular and, indeed, the National Counselling Service. We are all under-resourced and we all have very long waiting lists. When somebody plucks up the courage to pick up the phone and ring One in Four, for example, they should be met with the expectation that they will be offered an appointment with a psychotherapist within a short period. Instead, we have to tell people it is great that they have called us but it will be over a year before they can get an appointment. It is all down to resourcing. It is a perennial problem in the sexual violence sector.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

I am conscious of the time. My questions are primarily for Ms McDonnell Byrne and Ms Byrne, who both mentioned health and housing. Ms McDonnell Byrne spoke of those that she works with not being able to afford blood tests that are not covered by the GP card or other medical expenses. We all know that the price of everything in chemists is increasing exponentially.

How would the health (amendment) Act card address those concerns or those gaps?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

That is a very good question. My God, that would alleviate so much stress for so many survivors. They constantly tell me things like they could not get their bloods done because they did not have €30 to pay for it. Even though they have a medical card that €30 is paying for fuel or something else. As a result, their disability becomes worse. We cannot really support them in this because we do not have the funding.

Quite a number of our people have osteoporosis. Many need an injection of Prolia twice year. This costs €35 for a GP or nurse to administer. People need bloods done and the injection within four weeks of each other.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

That is €70 in a month.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

It is a considerable sum for some of our survivors. I know that they are neglecting themselves because they have no other option. The health (amendment) Act card would alleviate those kinds of issues. Our people have been marginalised enough and have suffered enough and there are huge health issues among our people. To be quite honest, I do not know of any survivors who are in good health. I am 68 and I have many medical conditions, but I mind myself. People are constantly asking me for help and telling me that if they had this it could make such a difference to their lives. It would allow them to get on with business, travelling, going to classes and doing whatever else they need to do. It would also enable them to attend their GP and be looked after properly. They do not tell the GP why they cannot pay because it is private. When they had to attend GPs during the Caranua applications process because they needed recommendations and referrals, they felt it was hugely traumatic because it was an invasion of their privacy. They had never disclosed to doctors or GPs that they had come from an institution. Even in 2023, we have survivors in our centre who still have not told their spouse or have not told their children. That is how ashamed they feel. It is time we shifted away from that to try to make their quality of life better.

I have figures here from the applicants. There were 6,182 applicants to Caranua. Of that number, 385 people died up to the end of March 2020. That is a large cohort of our people. That is only the people we know of. I do not know what the numbers were like in England, but I am sure they were similar. We do not have longevity on our side. The biggest worry many have, and one which I share, is that they will be institutionalised again and will not be allowed to stay at home. The health (amendment) Act card could help with having systems in place that would enable us to live out our lives. Some people who have had their redress are terrified to touch it because of that fear. They want to keep that little bit of money. We know what institutional life was like. We do not know whether it will be the same but we have that fear. All the counselling that we had done would go out the window just thinking about it.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

The memory is back to being as raw as it ever was. That was very well put.

Ms Byrne mentioned in her statement about the housing inequality experienced by survivors. Given the chronic lack of availability of any housing at the moment, whether it is social or affordable, how would she like to see the relationship between survivors and the likes of local authorities and the Housing Agency improve in order to best meet the needs of survivors?

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Survivors have a lot of medical issues. I do a lot of work with survivors to get them on the priority list of housing. Depending on where a person lives, there are different priority lists. In my work I advocate to get survivors on medical priority one, which is the top of the list. It is still an issue that people can be waiting a really long time to receive an offer of a place. The issue is homelessness and that all comes down to people's mental health as well. What they suffered as children has affected them all their lives.

It is mostly men who are having difficulties with homelessness. I believe the council should prioritise survivors regardless of their medical needs and they be given top priority because of their age.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

Will Ms Byrne give the committee a brief overview of the type of medical conditions that Right of Place Second Chance is lobbying to have recognised as a category 1?

Ms Siobhán Byrne

It is physical and mental. A lot of it would be mental with trauma they experienced as children from which they have never really healed. This would possibly lead into alcoholism. Many of our clients just do not have the skills to look after themselves so they end up getting long-term illnesses such as diabetes. Many get cancer and then are homeless with cancer. I have to fight and advocate with the council to try to get them somewhere to live. It is just a battle on a daily basis with the housing. It really is. We must keep on at the services and try to highlight that these people suffered as children but they do not seem to take it seriously and these cases are not prioritised.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

Will the witnesses each give us an idea of the age profiles of the people they are working with and supporting?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

It is probably from the age of 50 and then we have somebody who is nearly 90, and very proud of it. She has only recently gone into a home. We tried but just could not avoid it.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

We have a similar age range. We have one or two younger people who had been homed later but certainly the majority would be 70 plus.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Our age range is from 50 to 80 years of age.

Ms Maeve Lewis

The institutional survivors would all be over the age of 50.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

I welcome all the guests before the committee and I thank them for the opening statements they prepared. Along with the Chair, I also want to welcome former Tánaiste Joan Burton to the committee. Ms Burton has done excellent work in the area.

Mr. Rodgers's concern deals with head No. 5 of the general scheme of the Bill, which is payments to people who are ordinarily resident outside the State. It is a difficult issue and I thank him for bringing it to the attention of the committee. My assessment is that we probably require an amendment of legislation in the UK to ensure with certainty that people who receive the payment are not going to be affected. Would Mr. Rodgers agree with that and does he believe there is a possibility of that?

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

The advice I got from speaking with someone who works at quite a high level in training benefits there is a suggestion that secondary level change to legislation would not necessarily be as difficult or as complex as people think it might be. We could certainly have a look at that. Obviously, that may be a bit more time consuming so clarification would be the first step we look at. Once we have clarification then we can review what we want to do, including speaking to MPs about what is going on and what the Irish Government can do to liaise with their British counterparts in dealing with that.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

I suppose that in the first instance - and I do not know if that would be the Minister for Education here - there would be the need to contact with somebody in the Department for Work and Pensions in the UK.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

Yes, essentially to look at requesting clarification at first and explaining what the scheme is about and how it came about, and then asking how they take this into account. Under what would be regarded as income there is a long list of what can be disregarded and what can be regarded as income. Obviously, this scheme is not really alluded to. There are specific payment schemes that can be disregarded but they are all pretty much to do with emergencies that happened in Britain such as the 7/7 bombers or the Grenfell Tower fire. There is no specific mention of anything from outside the country. The only income that is disregarded from outside the country would be foreign pensions or income such as that.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

In the UK, can a person disregard any capital he or she receives in respect of historical institutional child abuse in the UK?

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

Yes, in the UK. Essentially one would look at the health impact assessment, HIA, or something like that.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Perhaps that can be changed by statutory instrument at secondary level as opposed to having to change primary legislation. That is something we can certainly bring to the attention of the Department of Education.

In respect of the professional advocacy service, and I believe this was an issue that was also raised by Ms McDonnell Byrne at the end of her piece, can I ask Ms Lewis if that is something she feels should be put on a statutory basis. How does she believe we as legislators should ensure there is provision of a professional advocacy service for survivors? Would Ms Lewis like to say how she would like to see it?

Ms Maeve Lewis

Yes, we believe there should be statutory provision of an advocacy service and, as Ms McDonnell Byrne mentioned, a service exists for people with disability. Something along that model would be desirable. Our very big concern is that the very positive provisions of this Bill will not even be known by many survivors unless they are in contact with organisations to inform them.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

If there is not a provision within the legislation establishing a statutory body, will the responsibility then vest in organisations such as Ms Lewis's to try to inform people that these provisions are available?

Ms Maeve Lewis

Indeed, and we have an advocacy service, mainly concerned with supporting people through the criminal justice system, the child protection system, and so on. Again, it is a resourcing issue. I do not believe any of the organisations represented here this morning would have the resources or the capacity to provide that service and, indeed, to disseminate information about the provisions of this Bill.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Will Ms McDonnell Byrne comment on that, please, since she raised it at the end of her opening contribution?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes, I would have to agree exactly with what Ms Lewis has said. It is very important, and the fact we have a template which is already there means it would not be so difficult to put something in place, or even to merge services with the disability services, because many of our clients have disabilities in any event. It could be important to be trauma informed.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Ms Lewis mentioned in her opening statement the provision of professional support for survivors who are engaging with the criminal or civil justice processes. Are there not some supports there already for people under the criminal process with regard to victims groups or is she looking for this support to be provided more on a statutory basis?

Ms Maeve Lewis

There are, because we in One in Four support people through 60 or 70 criminal trials a year. That support is there and it is a growing need. On the volume of people involved with regard to institutional survivors, the advocacy support we have been talking about could, perhaps, also support people through these processes because, inevitably, all the clients we support through the criminal justice trial find that process shaming, demeaning, dehumanising and retraumatising. I could go on all morning on this description. Indeed, I believe Deputy O'Callaghan himself is a barrister; am I correct in that?

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Yes.

Ms Maeve Lewis

The very arcane procedures which go on-----

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Can be intimidating for people.

Ms Maeve Lewis

Our advocacy workers end up almost interpreting or acting as interpreters for people about what is actually going on. It is a very important issue.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

That is very interesting. I will mention an issue raised by Ms Byrne which I do not know if it is expressly referred to in the general scheme, although there is the issue to deal with the records of the fund. She mentioned something about the absence of academic research in the area of community supports for people who are survivors. Is there anything the State can do to encourage academic support or research in this area? I would have thought that would have been quite important.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

I believe people are doing that and it is an ongoing thing but perhaps a little more could be done.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Head 12 deals with the records of the fund, which is the statutory body which will be dissolved. Has Ms Byrne any concerns or issues about the records being preserved? I would have thought that they would be quite useful for academic research in years to come in that some academics could have access to those records.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Absolutely, yes. It is very important the records are made available, not just to academics but for everybody to know the history.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Yes, for anybody who wants to research it. I thank all of our witnesses and the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy Ó Ríordáin now, please.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Like others, I want to recognise my former boss, Joan Burton, in the Gallery. It is great to have her here. We are anxious to get this right. In this space, we have done well as a collective and Oireachtas. However, that has led to difficulties and added stress upon stress for those who feel the political system is not adequately reflecting in legislation what is needed. This is one of the greatest stains on the 100-year history of the State. The witnesses have all mentioned that what happened disproportionately affected people from more disadvantaged backgrounds and who had fewer resources available to them. Ms McDonnell Byrne spoke about people she deals with not even being able to talk to their spouses and children about what took place. There is an intergenerational issue here in terms of how trauma passes down through the generations. It does not just stop with one person. Those who work in an area of acute disadvantage know trauma is filtered down, and is unaddressed and has not been addressed. Will the witnesses speak about the intergenerational nature of what we are dealing with? Will they outline the potential supports that could be put in place, not just for the individuals directly affected but also those around them? Is that something the witnesses have thought about or something they would welcome? Is it something that should be fitted into the Bill or is that a bit of a reach?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I agree. We have different generations attending our centre. We can see where the problem is between the parent and child because they have not disclosed too much about their experience. There is shame and they do not want to go into the detail because once you regurgitate it, it becomes very real and live. We also have survivors who just want it gone. Unfortunately, when people leave an institution, it haunts and stalks them for the rest of their lives. It often catches people off guard. A film or something could bring back a memory and people are then thrown back into what happened to them. It affects the people around them. We have thought about the best way to go forward. We need to continue with services similar to what we have in the centre. We are offering education, because that was important to the late Christine Buckley.

In the early days when our centre was operational just down the road in Jervis House, people had difficulty with prescriptions. Their children were marginalised and not encouraged to progress in the education system, which meant they could not read and write. Things went further down. We encouraged those children to come into the centre and to take up some of these-----

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Did they have a resistance towards formal education?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I think it is a learned behaviour and they need to unlearn it. We certainly see evidence that some of them have gone on and done really well because they gain confidence. I remember the very first person saying to me, "Oh my God, that is my name. You do not have to tell me. I recognise those letters." I remember crying because it was a young person.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Can that embed itself into the experience of a person if what they experienced as a child is so negative and abusive that a family member, including a grandchild, is attending school with a reluctance to enjoy the experience because of what they have gone through? Do previous experiences embed a level of educational disadvantage?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

I thank Ms McDonnell Byrne. I do not know if anybody else wants to talk about the wider impacts of trauma in the family setting.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

It is not a major issue I have come across. However, I am aware that Séan and Katie from the London Irish Centre, whom we have worked with, are also on a Teams call. At some point we could provide something in writing to ask whether they have come across anything.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Okay. Is it fair to say the witnesses broadly welcome the proposed legislation but feel elements of it need to be amended or improved, rather than us having to start from scratch? I think Ms Lewis spoke to this.

Ms Maeve Lewis

We broadly welcome the proposed legislation and it contains many positive aspects but, from different perspectives, we have all raised issues that could perhaps be addressed or amended, rather than us going back to the drawing board. Amending the legislation could make a huge difference to how it is implemented when it is finally enacted.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I might come in there. As part of the Bill, it is important we are inclusive of all survivors of abuse, whether they be Magdelen ladies or other survivors of institutional abuse such as those in mother and baby homes. They were all institutions and they were not pleasant places. Furthermore, we have to be mindful not to exclude people who did not apply for redress. We discovered after the redress closing date that a lot of survivors had thought the redress was just to do with sexual abuse and not emotional or physical abuse. They could not apply to Caranua, for example, for some of the excellent services that were being provided or to the Education Finance Board. It is important they all be included and we should not separate the individual groups, because we are all institutionalised and we have to be mindful of that all the time.

An Cathaoirleach

I might pick up on a point Ms McDonnell Byrne made about people who did not apply for redress. How many people does that apply to?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I do not have those numbers to hand.

An Cathaoirleach

Are there many?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

No, it is not a huge cohort, but they should be included. It was very easy for someone to prove, when they were applying for the service, that they were in an institution-----

An Cathaoirleach

Absolutely. I can understand why some people, for many different reasons, do not want to revisit the past.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus lenár n-aíonna as teacht os comhair an chomhchoiste seo. It has been powerful for us to hear the witnesses' views and experiences in the context of the proposed Bill. Ms Lewis mentioned the designated support service. What form should that take? Obviously, we have heard loud and clear during the meeting that that kind of support service is needed, but could she give more detail on that?

Ms Maeve Lewis

I believe it needs to be a statutory service, perhaps, as Ms McDonnell Byrne said, modelled on the advocacy service for people with disabilities. It needs to be staffed by people who have had trauma-informed training and be able to disseminate information widely. Ms McDonnell Byrne spoke about people who did not apply for redress. How are we going to reach all the people who will now be eligible for the many wonderful services that will be available to them? Many survivors still carry great shame and stigma and may not want to identify themselves as survivors. They may need support to do that in order that they can access services or entitlements. If they run into roadblocks - let us face it, the health service is a bureaucratic system - who is going to speak for them? That would be the major function of an advocacy service and I think Ms McDonnell Byrne would agree with that.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Absolutely.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Ms McDonnell Byrne mentioned that some people have not been able to tell their children or spouses about their past. Is there anything in the proposed Bill that would assist people in that regard or is there something we as a Oireachtas or a committee could put into the Bill to assist people in dealing with the shame she said people still feel?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I think there should be a little more emphasis on shame and stigma. We did get the then Taoiseach's apology, but that was more than 20 years ago.

As a result of Covid-19, it has unfortunately shifted back on people because they felt so isolated, so lost, even though we were doing classes on Zoom. They missed coming in to mix with people who came from the same institutions. There was a huge void for them and they felt unwanted, unloved and almost felt as though they were back in an institution again, but this time the institution of their own homes. We would like even a few sentences just to say that our people did nothing wrong. We actually did nothing wrong but we are paying a huge price. It never goes away. Counselling is a fantastic service. I highly recommend it. However, in a situation like that where people have been isolated for three years, when you try to get them back in you realise they have gone back further than we ever thought they would. That is what heightened my concern for people ending up in the care system again. I can see exactly what is going to happen. They will die very quickly.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

That is interesting for us to hear, especially when we are considering this Bill, that it could be of great benefit to have a few sentences that make it clear that people did not do anything wrong. An emphasis on that is something we can definitely take back. Obviously, many people struggled during Covid-19, being isolated in their homes, but with that greater difficulty for survivors, does Ms McDonnell Byrne believe there was a need to put in more supports post-Covid-19? Are any additional supports needed in relation to that?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes, extra funding because we only have one manager on five days, an assistant manager on two days and two part-time workers and that is it. I do a lot of the outreach, so I go all around the country. I am 68 years of age and should not be doing this. I have done 27 years of voluntary work and I feel it is time for me to sit back but I cannot until I know proper services are in place.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

In regard to that additional health (amendment) Act health card, what exactly would that look like? What does Ms McDonnell Byrne believe that would need to look like? The son of a woman who is in her mid-80s recently came into my local office. She was in hospital and had that health card. She had been in one of the mother and baby homes. He felt that she was let down in regard to healthcare. I would be interested to hear what that health card would look like.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

What I mean is the health (amendment) Act card that was given to the haemophiliacs because it covers much more. There is much more involvement. It is divided into so many counties. Advocates represent each area. We are not covering the areas. Many people are stuck in the middle of nowhere and do not even know about the Christine Buckley centre. They have heard of Christine Buckley but they do not know how they can access anything. Counselling is covered by that and there is a liaison officer. That is hugely important to our people particularly with literacy problems. I am mindful that when they get prescriptions, they are afraid to ask the doctor what they have been told. They would come in and we used to colour-code their prescriptions. It is as basic as that. These are the kinds of things that could be included. It is one umbrella for all survivors of these institutions.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

I agree totally. In regard to the sum of €3,000, Ms Lewis was clear that it should not be put into legislation and should depend on the needs of the person. That is quite intuitive. Are there precedents for that? Has it been done previously?

Ms Maeve Lewis

I do not know. I believe it would be a mistake to designate a particular sum. Apart from anything else, given the rate of inflation, €3,000 will be worth very little in a few years' time.

I was not aware of the difficulties raised this morning by Mr. Rodgers. It could be needs based. Imagine the situation of survivors living in the US, Australia or places with poor health services. It is a mistake to nominate the sum of €3,000.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Ms Byrne mentioned short-term needs. That is also interesting. There is also the HMD 1 form in terms of housing. At the moment I find it does very little. I deal with constituents every day on housing, because the situation is so acute. It obviously assists, but the way things are at the moment it cannot guarantee anything in any space of time. Is there anything specific needed to address housing? I know Ms McDonnell Byrne mentioned adaptation grants and things like that. However, Ms Byrne was talking more about people who are already in emergency accommodation.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Survivors felt that redress was given to them, and they were basically told that it should be enough to survive on. A lot of the redress did not afford the option to be able to buy houses and so on. I think survivors should be given priority, especially considering their age and medical issues. It seems they are disregarded and treated like anyone else on the social housing list or who is homeless. There is total disregard for their history, and what they deal with daily. It is not a priority and it should be.

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

I apologise. I will come in for a moment as I have another committee sitting at the same time as this one. I saw the statements, but did not have an opportunity to listen to the opening. One of my main concerns is the 40% of survivors who do not live in Ireland. Approximately 33% of those are in the UK. There are obviously also some in Canada, the US and Australia. How can those survivors be reached and how can we support them? That may have been asked already. I also have a question about the lack of a dedicated agency to support survivors.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

It is something we wrestle with all of the time. The Coventry Irish Society and the London Irish Centre manage to reach people. My experience is that there are people who are relatively confident at the moment, and who will make applications and come to us. We are looking at people who may have suffered severe trauma. They may have withdrawn from wider Irish society in the UK. Our concern is how they are getting information. We are trying to get the message out through radio and television. We are holding an event next Friday on Zoom, which is part of the Liverpool Irish festival. It will publicise the scheme and give context to it by including testimony from a former resident of a mother and baby home, who was there as a child and adult. We can reach people that way. I feel that the wider Irish community in Britain does not understand that it can have a role to play too, even if it is just a matter of knowing someone from down the road who was in a home. They can be told to come see me at Fréa, or go to see Katie in Coventry, so that people in the wider Irish community are aware. I wonder if the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for international development and diaspora, and the Department, could get involved in promoting it among Comhaltas groups, the GAA and other organisations to tell people there is a scheme. If you know someone or meet someone in two years' time who was in a home, tell them there is somewhere to go and someone to speak to and they will get confidential advice.

An Cathaoirleach

I have just a couple of questions. We will have the Department officials before us tomorrow evening. Are there any specific or pertinent questions the witnesses would like us to put to the Department? If they had Department officials in front of them now, what are the big questions they would like answered?

Ms Maeve Lewis

There are so many questions, but the priority questions are how people will know about their entitlements and who will act as an advocate to make sure they have access to their entitlements. Now that Caranua is gone, the Department needs to consider very carefully who will take on that role and how they will manage it.

An Cathaoirleach

Are the three witnesses on the same page or is there any-----

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes, and it has to be a simple transition - no complicated language around it, just simple.

An Cathaoirleach

Ms McDonnell Byrne mentioned the people who did not apply for redress. How can they be reached out to? Did she say she has 27 years' experience? That is a career. Fair play to her. How can the Department reach out, or how can the organisations reach out now, to the people who did not apply to make them aware as to what is available to them now?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

It could probably be advertised through GP practices and places like that. The advertisement could read, "Were you in an institution?" or "You may qualify for this.". They might see that because that is how they found out about redress. As I said, though, everything has to be kept simple because of the language skills and the processing. Many GPs know now about their service users because of Caranua and because people had to divulge a lot, so that shame has shifted a little, particularly if they have nice GPs. Yes, I think it could be advertised.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator O'Loughlin raised the issue of people living abroad and survivors living in Australia, Canada and other countries. Have the embassies or the Department of Foreign Affairs been of assistance, or can they be of assistance, to the witnesses' organisations to spread the net a little wider, such as in advertising in Irish newspapers in the likes of Australia and Canada? I am not saying everybody buys such newspapers, but what about Facebook or whatever else? There are many different ways and means of spreading the net and reaching out to survivors. Has Ms McDonnell Byrne been in contact with embassies or the Department of Foreign Affairs-----

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

No.

An Cathaoirleach

-----or can she see, once this legislation is passed, that people will be able to play a key role in assisting her in reaching out to survivors?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes, I would think so. There are probably some people who are in places illegally, so it might present a difficulty, but they can see it from Facebook and other forms of media. It is important, however, that it is inclusive once and for all and for everybody.

An Cathaoirleach

And that everybody is recognised.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

Yes. A person can be recognised but still be private.

An Cathaoirleach

Yes.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

One of our concerns was always, because of people's experience in Ireland, that those who have come to the UK may not be part of the wider Irish community.

An Cathaoirleach

That was the next question I was going to ask Mr. Rodgers. Just before he answers that, I will add a question to it. There are many people in Birmingham, London and other cities in the UK and there are many Irish centres in the UK. Does he believe there are many survivors living in the UK who have spent their lives there just to get away from the experience they had on the island of Ireland in these institutions? He will understand the question I am asking.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

They might not even want to go near an Irish centre.

Mr. Patrick Rodgers

That is something we are really conscious of. We are looking to service-map local areas in order to go beyond the bounds of the wider Irish community and to contact mental health services, GPs and probation services so they are aware this scheme exists. We can leave leaflets and information so people can make an informed decision about what they want to do going forward, whether it is coming to, normally, an Irish organisation to make an application or, if they do not want to do that, there is advice out there and maybe they can make the application themselves. That is something we need to look at and may be something embassies and consulates can look at in terms of getting information out to local charities and statutory sectoral organisations, as well as us. That goes across the world.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

I was going to ask about the embassies but I think that question has been answered. I have a general broad question, not specifically for anyone. On the intergenerational nature of trauma and survived abuse, has enough been done by legislators? Is there scope in this legislation to address the gaps that exist in that area?

Ms Maeve Lewis

As a practising psychotherapist, I see the impact of childhood trauma on a person’s parenting skills. Very often people struggle despite their best efforts. They have issues with attachment or physical contact with their children and may be terrified that a hug could be abusive - what is abuse and so on and so forth. That has an ongoing impact on their children’s lives. I believe profoundly that with good trauma therapy those issues can be overcome to some extent but not totally. The provision of expert trauma psychotherapy would address that issue in the Bill.

An Cathaoirleach

Joan Burton is not here but I recall I was Government Whip when Enda Kenny apologised to those in the Magdalen laundries and I saw what that apology meant to a huge number of survivors. I and everybody in the Chamber was very moved by the survivors and their families. Only in the years prior to the apology had survivors opened up to their own families. There is a huge pride among many who do not open up to their families. I am not saying they are too proud but they do not want to visit that or put that past history on their sons, daughters or whatever.

Ms Lewis spoke of the Department making this simple and inclusive without big language, so that everybody can understand it. That will get us to a point where everybody is happy.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

I still have my doubts about the Bill because two years after that apology funding was stopped from Sally Mulready’s whispering hope group in England. Everybody was shocked at the time. We should not have to keep asking for funding. It is a given now. I look at HSE offices and think "My God, they are fantastic-looking", while we have had to move several times because we need to reduce rent and cuts costs so we can have staff.

We could have stayed where we were but we could not afford our staff, so we had to move again. It is not fair to the survivors because we are having to uproot them all of the time. I ask that funding is looked at for the organisations that are out there, trying their best to keep people.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want to sound patronising, but what level of funding is the centre getting? Is Ms McDonnell Byrne talking about thousands? I am interested to know. We have departmental officials in front of us tomorrow evening, and these are the questions that we would like to have answered. I know that there are different Departments and that it is across sections of Departments. If the organisations were dealing with one Department, it might be easier, but they are dealing with different Departments.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

We should actually come under the Department of Justice as well because we were put in place through the judicial system. We get funding of €227,000 and our staff costs are €106,000. Our rent was €62,448 per year but is now €50,730, so we have saved over €11,000. We have had to move from the centre of the city, which was convenient for many, given that people come from the North of Ireland to our centre. We have now moved to Dundrum, which is further away from the city and is more of an effort for people because they have to get an extra Luas to Dundrum. When we look at those figures, it does not leave us much money to run a centre. I really need to retire for health reasons. I cannot go on indefinitely.

Ms Maeve Lewis

I am shocked at the low level of funding that the Christine Buckley Centre is getting. At One in Four, it costs about €1.6 million per year to run the service; about 75% of that is covered by a mix of the HSE, Tusla and the Department of Justice and the rest we have to raise through fundraising and so on. Some 90% of that €1.6 million is staff costs.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

We cannot even do fundraising because we just do not have the people.

Ms Siobhán Byrne

I also wish that they looked at Right of Place Second Chance’s funding. Although I do not have the figures, it is not very much. That would be a big issue for us. We are running a very tight ship but, to be honest, we could do with more staff.

An Cathaoirleach

Are the organisations getting funding for their rent from the Department of Health?

Ms Siobhán Byrne

Yes.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

We are actually meeting with them today.

An Cathaoirleach

It is the Department of Education that we have before us tomorrow evening. On foot of the witnesses’ appearance here, I believe they should write to the Joint Committee on Health in respect of those specific issues. I am not trying to pass the buck. We will write to the health committee as well, if that is agreed by the members, to say that this issue was raised at the committee. To further strengthen the case of the organisations, they might write to the Chairman or the secretariat of the health committee. The members are often not informed of this.

Has there ever been an interdepartmental group with all of the agencies working together instead of separately?

Ms Maeve Lewis

Not to my knowledge. On to sexual violence, the Chairman is probably aware that a new statutory agency, the domestic, sexual and gender-based violence agency, will be established in January under the auspices of the Department of Justice. We are hoping that it will bring together funding from Tusla, the HSE and the Department of Justice all in one place so we are not continually making grant applications to different people.

An Cathaoirleach

That is where the Department of Justice is.

Ms Maeve Lewis

Yes, that would be the Department of Justice.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

Can the witnesses outline the potential benefit of that new agency to survivors?

Ms Maeve Lewis

It is going to be of huge benefit because a big part of its work will be policy, in particular in regard to the justice system and access to criminal justice processes. It will also be a funding agency for agencies like One in Four, the Rape Crisis Centres and so on that are working with sexual and domestic violence. It will improve standards and it will be looking at standards of service provision. As the Department of Justice got an extra €12 million in the recent budget with regard to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, we are hoping funding will be a little freer than it is, for example, in the Department of Health.

An Cathaoirleach

On the rental issue, we can mention that recommendation to the Department when we compile our report. It is an opportunity for us. We will also write to the Joint Committee on Health. I encourage the witnesses to also write to that committee on foot of their appearance here. Do they wish to put anything else on the record before we wrap up?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

For a number of years, I have felt sad because survivors were highly neglected. As far as I was concerned, there was never any happy ending and no resolutions or commitments, but I feel a little more enlightened today. I hope that feeling will not be broken.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms McDonnell Byrne for saying that.

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

As a survivor, I wish to say that it is hugely important that we are heard and looked after in our declining years.

An Cathaoirleach

I listened to the representatives of the survivors of the Magdalen laundries and the Government at the time. Are there many family members of survivors who have passed who carry that mantle, represent their loved ones and fight on their behalf?

Ms Carmel McDonnell Byrne

There is a small cohort. They are waiting in the background and have left it to us, as agencies, to advocate for them.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank all of our guests for coming here today and sharing their knowledge and insights with the committee. This is an issue of fundamental importance. I thank them for their words in respect of it. I commend our guests on all of their efforts to support survivors and family members over a long number of years. For many years, nobody listened to their voices. However, I am of the view that the situation has changed in recent years and that the Government is listening. As a former member of Government, I know it is very difficult to meet everybody's needs. I respect the work that the witnesses are putting in and have put in for many years. They have given a huge amount of survivors a chance to continue with their lives because I have no doubt that survivors, for many years, have left this life as a result of not being able to deal with the situation. The organisations represented here have given survivors hope to carry on. They should be very proud of that work. One of the organisations that I am most familiar with is One in Four because of sexual abuse in the church - in my own diocese and right across the country. One in Four is the organisation that I am most connected with. I would have known an awful lot of people who would have contacted the organisation. I appreciate the work done by all of the organisations. I am sure that members concur with what I have said.

Deputy Sorca Clarke

I concur with the sentiments expressed by the Chairman. The area in which I grew up is synonymous with an institution. The indelible mark it left on the community is still very much felt today. The survivors of that institution and others further afield have fought for far too long before their voices were heard and their asks were recognised but the State has gone some way to addressing both of them. We cannot undo what happened in the past but we can sure as hell make sure that the trauma is not compounded any further from here on in.

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

I thank the Chairman for his summation of the situation. In the past few decades - even up to a few years ago - shame was, sadly, something that was associated with being a survivor.

This committee previously had a lot of protracted debate with Caranua, and that came across quite strongly from the survivors we met at that time. However, I really think that has changed. There is renewed dignity, but it is because of that recognition from the Government. I have to mention one person who did great work. I pay tribute to Enda Kenny. What he did at the time was so important and so heart-felt. I also have to mention Norah Casey and what she did in terms of bringing all the survivors together for that very memorable weekend, seeing women coming back to their capital city. They had left under a huge cloud and some of them had not been back. To see them owning their place, their city, was one of the most moving testaments I have ever seen to survivors. As the Cathaoirleach said, and so long after it should have happened, we have entered that new era of dignity, recognition and recompense.

An Cathaoirleach

It is important to recognise that while there are a lot of people who have done a huge amount of good work, there were some very bad people out there as well. It would be a shame not to mention the good people, within the Church as well, who did absolutely fantastic work, but there were bad ones also. I will say no more. People understand what I mean. Just to identify the good as well.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.41 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 18 October 2023.