EIGHTEEN GROUPS that were involved with the running of residential
institutions for children investigated by the Ryan commission have
refused to contribute to the €1.36 billion costs incurred by the State
in compensating people who had been abused in the institutions.
These
management bodies are in addition to the 18 religious congregations
that ran the orphanages, industrial schools and reformatories.
They also
include bodies involved with running Protestant residential
institutions for children.
Included among these latter management
bodies contacted by the State for a contribution to redress costs, and
at the suggestion of the 18 religious congregations directly involved,
are the Dominican Order of Nuns, the Daughters of Liege, the Salesian
Fathers, the board of governors Baltimore Industrial School (the
Catholic Bishop of Cork and Ross).
Others involved included the
Daughters of Wisdom (Sisters of La Sagesse), Mrs Smyly’s Trust, Cottage
Home Child and Family Service, Miss Carr’s Children’s Services, Cope
Foundation, Sisters of Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Sisters of
Charity of Jesus and Mary, Kirwan House Charity,Enable Ireland,
Stewart’s Hospital Services Ltd, Traveller Family Care, Los Angeles
Society for Homeless Boys (now Home Alone), Tabor House, and the Bishop
of Raphoe (St Columba’s Industrial School, Killybegs).
The
Adelaide and Meath Hospital in Tallaght (Harcourt Street hospital) has
not been approached.
It is understood that this is because it is a State
facility and asking it to contribute to costs incurred by the State
would be absurd.
In his statement to religious congregations last
Friday, Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn said: “I understand that
when you met the taoiseach and other ministers last year you raised the
issue of seeking contributions from other management bodies, ie, outside
of the 18 [religious congregations]. That was done but I regret to say
that the response proved equally unsuccessful.”
At Friday’s
meeting the Minister said he proposed exploring “ways in which we might
obtain some indication of the relative involvement of different
institutions in the redress process perhaps by direct contact between
the redress board and congregations”.
He insisted there was “a moral responsibility on your congregations to significantly augment your contributions”.