This morning director general of the Conference of Religious of Ireland (Cori) Marie Ann O’Connor said the 18 congregations would prefer to “deal directly and to use all in their powers to channel whatever resources directly to the former residents” rather than reopen the terms of the deal.
The 2002 agreement between the congregations and the State indemnified the religious orders from all redress claims made by victims in exchange for payments and property transfers totalling €127 million.
The total bill for the redress scheme is likely to be about €1.3 billion.
Ms O’Connor said that the congregations’ refusal to revisit the deal is “not a blocking mechanism or a way of saying no”.
She said: “I think as the congregations view it, the redress [deal] is not the best vehicle to do what they want to do.”
She said reopening the deal would only serve to reimburse the State and not help the victims.
And she hinted more resources would be made available to victims but “the best way to give that has not been found”.
Last night the Catholic bishops pledged to “work closely with religious congregations and institutes in addressing the needs of survivors of abuse and in the healing process”
In a statement following a day-long meeting of the Standing Committee of the Irish Bishops’ Conference yesterday, they made no reference to the controversial 2002 church/State redress deal.
Earlier yesterday the Catholic primate Cardinal Seán Brady, Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin and Bishop of Killaloe Willie Walsh said the deal should be revisited and the 18 congregations concerned should contribute more.
Meanwhile, the Cabinet is to meet today to discuss the fallout from the publication of the Ryan commission report into institutional child abuse.
The Attorney General is expected to brief the Cabinet on the legal implications of the report.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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)