Fine Gael has today called for a review of the 2002 deal granting religious congregations indemnity against child-abuse claims. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse yesterday released a report that found endemic abuse in State institutions.
The Cabinet will discuss the commission's recommendations next week, and the report is to be debated in the Dáil.
Under the 2002 indemnity agreement between the State and the congregations, the religious orders were awarded indemnity against all future claims if they paid €128 million in cash and property.
Fine Gael education spokesman Brian Hayes said today a review of the entire deal was necessary "if legally possible".
"When the deal was done initially in 2002, without any public scrutiny, I have to say, it was done on the basis that the total liability would be somewhere in excess of €300 million.
"Now, the total liability that we know about currently is about €1.2 billion, and I think it's only fair at this stage from the victims and taxpayers' perspective, that if at all possible to renegotiate this, we should do it."
Mr Hayes said some of the properties involved in the deal had still not been handed over to the State, adding: "The crucial point is that when the deal was done, it was done on the basis of an asset value that has significantly depleted now due to the reduction in property prices.
"The current cost of €128 million is a total misnomer," Mr Hayes said.
He said there were still "substantial question marks" over the 2002 deal between the State and religious orders that was done "in the dying days" of that government.
"The Department of Finance clearly expressed reservations over the deal. We know that the PAC [Public Accounts Committee] some years later asked huge questions about the deal, and to this day, we still do not know exactly why that deal was struck by the-then minister for education and his government."
Fine Gael has called for "a number of days" to be set aside in the Dáil to debate the report's findings.
Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland earlier today, Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin said the Government was "considering comprehensively" issues surrounding the indemnity deal. But he refused to be drawn directly on whether the Government would move to redraw its terms.
He said yesterday's commission report was "very clear" about the State's responsibilities.
"The State could not attempt to escape from its responsibilities . . . and the advice would have very much been that people may have gone after the church, the church may have pleaded inability to pay - inevitably those who would be suing would have gone after the State. I think we can look at that again, and in my view the issue is how both the orders and the State continue to support the survivors.
"The Government are considering this comprehensively," Mr Martin said.
"As far as I'm concerned, the key point is the survivors, and the focus should be on the survivors in terms of education provision, all of the various supports the State can give people, and that's something that has been lost sight of terms of all the litigation and so forth," the Minister said.
"I think that sometimes people get into the deal and as if that's the paramount issue. The paramount issue for me has to be the survivors."
"Compared to other countries across the globe . . . what this entire episode represents is that this State, belatedly yes, but did lift the lid on a very dark period of our history where children were committed wrongly in the first instance to institutions," Mr Martin said.
Speaking on the same programme, Mr Hayes also said the notion that €2 million could be cut in the budget of the Residential Institutions Redress Board was "scandalous".
In a statement today, however, the Department of Education and Science said it has "no control or influence" over the Redress Board awards and that the State pays whatever award the board determines.
The department said that money is allocated based on an estimate of the level and number of awards being made, and that the amount set aside this year was reduced because of reduced award patterns.
It added the Redress Board is not constrained by the amount set aside.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to us or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that we agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Source (IT)
SV (3)