The Shame of Ireland
As you can see below they are starting to debate issues Close to Our heart!
The link below is form this week in the Dail.
If you live in the Republic then you should write, email, Telephone or Meet You "Elected Representative"?
Below is an email sent to Kathleen Lynch; she was speaking up for the Magdalene's!!
From: Robert Northall [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: 18 October 2010 18:09
Subject: Your Support?
I have today read your contribution to the Dáil debate; Thursday, 7 October 2010 via http://www.kildarestreet.com/debate/?id=2010-10-07.155.0&c=297#c297
I can only commend you for your support of the “Maggies”! They have a worthy and just cause!
The Consultation Mary Coughlan Refers to is with Government Paid Representatives of Survivors Right of Place "Et All" I understand that Noel Barry is no longer in residence however the Per Capita Funding that they Use as their mandate is still in Place?
This I believe is part of the Moral Bankruptcy of the Government; I hope that you don’t think that I am making Light but the Magdalene’s are in quite a strong position The R.IR.B. Act took advantage of the situation at the time and paid lip service to Compensation, Michael Woods assured his place in Heaven by protecting the Catholic Churches Breach of Contact over the care of Children! (Had the Irish Government sued on this alone and had ALL the Monies Refunded
there might have been a better Deal for Survivors of the Industrial School System?).
It is a matter of time before they will have to admit culpability!
The depravation of the Human Rights of the Maggies in the European Court of Human Rights would be an excellent Publicity Vehicle? And may bring additional pressure to bear?
The only reason that they started investigating the Industrial Schools is because they wanted to join Europe! Other than this
who knows; the institutions may still be running??
The Survivors of the Industrial Schools have 2 problems
These People hold lists that I cannot access; we are under 50 in membership at the moment but growing slowly?
All the Support organisations are “Jealously Guarding” their Government Cash, WE are divided by what unites US! The Government have used their funding Wisely!!
God Bless the Struggle of the Maggies!
I hope that will not make the same mistakes that have befallen the Survivors of the Industrial Schools?
It leaves such a bitter taste!
The Shame of Ireland is currently under development; we are testing “Live Voting” The first “Live Vote” is
I Agree with Adding the Survivors of the Magdalene Laundries to the Shame Of Ireland Objectives?
When I first started on YahooGroups they were not included, when I moved to Facebook I added them; now we have our own site I need the Members to vote to accept the change and to ”VOTE” adopt the Aims and Objective I have foisted uponthem!
Democracy is hard work, But we will get there!
I gave Fergus O’Dowd the opportunity to embarrass Brian Cowen and Mary Coughlan over unanswered correspondence from Survivors; As far as I am aware he has not taken this opportunity?
If you feel that you would like to step where “Angels Fear to Tread” I can forward you Correspondence that will show them for what they are; it also shows so called “Survivors Groups” in their true light!
If you would like to know anymore about the “Shame of Ireland” or embarrass Brian Cowen (not that he needs any help)?
Please let me know?
Founder of the “Shame of Ireland”
I do not represent anyone as we can not vote on “Spokes people” until we have a core membership worthy of not (i.e. 100).
When we do we will have what no other group can deliver “Representation Without Leadership”!
I appologise for the abreviation of the Magdalenes as I now understand it is Offensive? but felt that to edit something that had already been sent would lack "Transparency"!
Kathleen Lynch is the Labour TD for Cork, if you are a constituent of hers feel free to contact her in regards to this email (she has sent a read reciept with regard to this).
If you Do write feel free to sign as a Member of the Shame of Ireland, but as I did please state that you do not Represent any one!
In future I will be signing Corespondence in this manner (but will drop the "Founder" Part; it sounds a bit to Egotistical for my liking!
More responses appear bellow my reply I hope you take the opportunity to contact them?
From: Sinead NiBhroin [mailto:Sinead.NiBhroin@Oireachtas.ie] On Behalf Of Mary Lou McDonald
Sent: 02 April 2012 02:47 PM
To: Rob. Northall
Subject: Re: Update on Statutory Trust Fund
Many thanks for sending on links Rob and please keep in touch.
Mary Lou McDonald TD
Sinn Féin Deputy Leader
Spokesperson for Public Expenditure and Reform
Tel: +353 1 6183230
From: Joanna Tuffy [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 02 April 2012 02:19 PM
To: Rob. Northall
Subject: Re: Update on Statutory Trust Fund
We've got a good few emails from this guy. Can you put a very general PQ about what is up to date position.
From: Michael Healy-Rae [mailto:Michael.Healy-Rae@oireachtas.ie]
Sent: 20 March 2012 05:49 PM
To: Rob. Northall
Subject: Re: Survivor Groups and the Statutory Trust Fund
I will put down a pq to the minister re this matter ml healy rae
Sent from my iPhone
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4909 - Release Date: 04/01/12
From: Celine Mullen [mailto:Celine.Mullen@Oireachtas.ie] On Behalf Of Brendan Smith
Sent: 28 March 2012 04:41 PM
To: Rob. Northall
I have been pursuing with the Minister for Education and Skills the need to progress the legislation to establish the Statutory Trust Fund.
Yesterday in Dáil Éireann on the Order of Business I raised this particular issue with An Tánaiste and you will note my question and his reply.
I have tabled further Parliamentary Questions to the Minister for Education and Skills and as soon as I receive replies I will be in touch with you again.
With kindest regards.
Deputy Brendan Smith: When is it expected that the residential institutions statutory fund Bill will be published? Will the Tánaiste give the House an assurance that the concerns of many of the representative groups of victims will be given further consideration before the legislation is finalised? These concerns relate to the range of services to be provided and to the exclusion of persons who have not availed of assistance from the redress board. The Tánaiste will know this is an urgent matter.
The Tánaiste: That Bill is being worked on at present. The heads were approved by Government and it is expected to be published during this session.
BRENDAN SMITH T.D.
Same old wiffle waffle from The Minister for Education and Skills, Mr Ruairí Quinn, TD
PLEASE QUOTE REF NUMBER ON ALL CORRESPONDENCE
Our Ref: 1102130 RG
4th April, 2012
Dear Mr. Northall,
The Minister for Education and Skills, Mr Ruairí Quinn, TD, has asked me to respond to your e-mail of 25 March 2012 in regard to the proposed Residential Institutions Statutory Fund.
As you are aware this office has replied to a number of previous e-mails from you in relation to the Statutory Fund. The Government agreed to the drafting of the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Bill to provide for the establishment of a Statutory Fund to support the needs of victims of residential institutional abuse, as endorsed by Dáil Éireann in the aftermath of the publication of the Ryan Report in 2009. The legislative proposals followed extensive consultations with survivors of residential abuse and the groups which support them, together with a public consultation process.
The Minister is fully aware that some former residents advocated a simple distribution of the available money rather than the establishment of the Statutory Fund. However, the Minister believes that the Fund should target resources at services to support former residents’ needs, such as counselling, psychological support services and mental health services, health and personal social services, educational services and housing services.
The report on the Consultation Process in relation to the Statutory Fund, undertaken by this Department in 2010, which is available on this Department’s website sets out the range of views received in relation to the proposed Fund. The report acknowledges that there was a diversity of opinion among groups representing former residents and noted that many groups strongly objected to the establishment of the proposed Fund. In coming to the decision to proceed with the establishment of the Fund the Minister had regard to the range of views received.
The Minister expects to be in a position to publish the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Bill shortly.
Yours sincerely,Ronnie Ryan
The legislative proposals followed extensive consultations with survivors ofresidential abuse and the groups which support them, together with a public consultation process.
must be code for groups!
the Minister believes that the Fund should target resources at services to support former residents’ needs, such as counselling, psychological support services and mental health services, health and personal social services, educational services and housing services.
sounds like welfare. how is that compensation?
would a court award welfare to a victim of STATE child abuse?
The report acknowledges that there was a diversity of opinion among groups representing former residents and noted that many groups strongly objected to the establishment of the proposed Fund. In coming to the decision to proceed with the establishment of the Fund the Minister had regard to the range of views received.
GROUPS GROUPS GROUPS GROUPS GROUPS
consulted groups consulted groups leaders
NOT CONSULTED: THE VICTIMS OF STATE CHILD ABUSE
The Minister expects to be in a position to publish the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Bill shortly.
we are going to do what we are going to do anyway
the consultations were a mere slight of hand
It is TIME to Make YOURSELF HEARD? Before it is TOO Late?
I have just forwarded the above letter to EVERY TD with the Acompanying email, Please do the same?
Bellow is a copy of a letter that turned up in my personal email account today!
All I can do is to endorse this and recommend it to you?
I ask that you vote down the Statutory Trust Fund Bill?
and that you Demand full Consultation with Survivors, their Carers that Includes their Children?
The consultation Process was a farce the Redress Unit has contact details of every Survivor a proper full Consultation can take place? Excluding the “White Elephant” that are Survivors Groups.
How many millions over how many years and not one Case Study to prove the money was well spent?
Survivors Groups have been a very expensive “Sign Post”? They provide No Advocacy Service?
The Damage done has Repercussions on Spouses, and Children, and can affect the next Generation.
I have been listening to Survivors for over 2 Years now.
I hear their anguish.
To use a trusted bulk emailer that will send your emails to all TD'...
I am sad to have to say it has already effected the next generation, The Government have and are still abuseing survivors ,they are STEALING the Compansation that is ment for SURVIVORS, THOSE WHO SOMEHOW SURVIVED THE MOST BRUTAL REGIME IN THOSE CHILD PRISONS >for that's what they were. The way the cowardly Corupt Government and Head's of the Religious Orders carried this out from the start IS A SHAM. The Dept of Education (by the way was also responsable for the brutiality IN INDUSTRIAL PRISONS FOR CHILDREN) keep insisting survivors could avail of a bit of education ??? ( TELL THAT TO SURVIVORS WHO HAVE CANCER )WHO HAVE HAD MAJOR HEART SURGURY ) WHO HAVE HEART ATTACKS) AMONG OTHER ILLNESS'S )WHO ARE ELDERLY ) ,WHO LIVE IN MANY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AROUND THIS WORLD. > THE GOVERNMENT STILL CARRY ON INSULTING SURVIVORS insisting we need an education, MOST DON'T BELONG TO ANY GROUP AND DON'T WISH TO EITHER .
Bellow is a copy of an email sent to every TD’s on Monday 7th May
Have been Tweeting and Sharing this on Twitter and Face book
Will update you on the Number of Clicks to the bulk emailer 44 since I create the Link (So Far).
Dear John Lyons,
I write not for myself but for my wife and 14,000 others who need to see Justice done! I believe now you understand my trepidation!
Irelands Industrial Schools have blighted many Generations, and I find it difficult to believe that there isn’t a family in Ireland that hasn’t been affected by the Industrial Schools, Magdalene Laundries and Bethany Home?
After the Publication of the Ryan Report the Irish Government revisited the Indemnity Deal 2002 made between themselves and The Congregations Of Religious Ireland Demanding More than the Agreed 128 Million Euros; circa 650 Million Euros;
Which C.O.R.I. publicly announced as “Extra Compensation” Survivors Groups in February 2010 announced this far and wide!
This got the hopes up of Many Survivors and they rightly thought that this was Just and Fair?
The Government has seen this as “compensation” to the Government (their Justification is the “Redress Board”) and is to establish a ”Statutory Fund” that survivors can apply to; this is untenable as Survivors should not have to go cap in hand to their abusers in times of need!
The Government also promised to investigate the “Total Assets” (including Overseas) of C.O.R.I. which they failed to do?
Survivor Groups where instrumental in the “Consultation” for the Statutory Trust Fund, a take it or leave it deal; there has been a lot of posturing about being against the Statutory Trust Fund but given the fact that this is where Survivor Group Funding is going to come from (and they have always known this?) It is no more than Political Posturing!
You do not bite the hand that feeds you?
After all the Millions of Euros paid to Survivor Groups, not one positive case study has been published?
Survivor Groups have been a very expensive “Sign Post” ever, as the have No Advocacy Service?
Their Accounting records are very poor but have never properly been investigated?
Rauiri Quinn dismissed 713 Signatures against the Statutory Trust Fund (Monitored Links to Websites omitted) When the responses to the Consultation process are fewer?
Many of the things Survivor asked for in the Consultation Process have been ignored!
Children and Grand Children of Survivors have been removed from the NEW Fund but where included in the “Education Finance Board”
The original Indemnity Deal was negotiated in secret and was never debated in the Irish Parliament; and was announced after a year!
It stops Child Sex Abusers from being Prosecuted! Named or being Tracked!
This “Endowment” of Indemnity is Unconstitutional, No other Child Abusers have this Indemnity and this is Endowed because of their Religious Connection
It is unconstitutional under Clause 44.2.2 of the Constitution, states quite clearly that “the State guarantees not to endow any religion”.
The Following Clause also States clearly that the State shall not discriminate against any Religion; Discrimination can be Positive as well as Negative!
The Redress Act Originally Restricted the Financial Liability of C.O.R.I. to 128 Million Euros!
The finances of C.O.R.I. and the Holy See are inextricably linked!
The State has already revisited the Redress Act and it needs to be Revisited for the benefit of Survivors or Repealed!
The Irish Government established the “Redress Board” in its own words” to pay compensation on a par with the High Court”
The Redress Board instead of paying out Compensation; became protectors of the “Public Purse”.
The Irish Government now want compensating for the money they paid out averaging 69,000 Euros per individual; this is not comparable with awards in the High Court!
Why they are all so aggrieved is that the Government put the Cart before the Horse; i.e. the Redress Board and the Indemnity Deal before the Ryan Report
Not one Single Survivor will Benefit directly from the Statutory Trust Fund? Only Service Providers; These Service Providers could be members of C.O.R.I.?
In 2009 Ruari Quinn introduced his “Private Members Bill” and was in favour of Survivors of the Industrial Schools he went so far as to say "Either officials in the Department are members of secret societies such as the Knights of St. Columbanus and Opus Dei and have taken it upon themselves to protect the interests of these clerical orders at this point in time in this year of 2009” Source – (Monitored Link to Website omitted)
Since taking Office Mr Quinn has had a “Change of Heart”?
I am asking that you put “Party Politics” aside, and vote down the “Statutory Fund Bill” and demand an Investigation into the links of the H.S.E. and Religious Orders who have a strangle hold over Irelands Health Service; and reopen real and meaningful dialogue with Survivors about their Grievances and bring Justice and Closure to Survivors?
PS I have tried to keep this brief and to the point but there are other issues relating to Justice that need to be addressed!
 Responses Received to Public Consultation
2.1 The public consultation process elicited 258 individual responses, received as follows:
·Telephone Responses: 135
·Written/e-mail submissions from individuals: 103
·Written/e-mail submissions from organisations: 20
 en·dow (n-dou)
tr.v. en·dowed, en·dow·ing, en·dows
1. To provide with property, income, or a source of income.
a. To equip or supply with a talent or quality.
b. To imagine as having a usually favorable trait or quality.
3. Obsolete To provide with a dower.
Speech made in the Dail on Statutory Trust Fund
Mary Lou McDonald TD
Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Bill 2012
Tues, 8 May 2012
It is important to say at the outset that the State and the Government continue to fail the women and children of the Magdalene Laundries and Bethany Home. It is to the great shame of the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party that they have done nothing to right the wrong perpetrated against these women and children despite having been so critical of the previous Government's inaction when in opposition.
The current Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, said in 2010 that former residents of the Magdalene Laundries and Bethany Home must be included in the redress scheme. She went on to criticise the then Minister for Education and Skills for failing to allow these institutions to be included in the list of qualifying institutions for redress. She went on to say that for her, and I quote, it "was becoming clearer and clearer that these institutions were, to all intents and purposes places of detention, and that as such, "residents" were effectively sentenced by servants of the state, to periods of confinement therein". The Labour Party Minister of State, when in opposition at the time, concluded her outrage with a demand for Government to do the right thing. She was correct to do so.
If we go further back to 2005, the Minister's party colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sulliven, rightly described the scandal surrounding Bethany Home as a matter of national importance. In the same year the Minister of State, Deputy Joe Costello, called on the Government to include Bethany Home in the redress scheme. All three of those Labour Party Deputies are now Ministers of State - they are part and parcel of this Government. During their years on the opposition benches they all shouted loudly against the decision by the Fianna Fáil led Government to exclude the Magdalene Laundries and Bethany Home from the redress scheme. They were right to do so, but I have to ask where are they today? What is the point of being in Government if one does not act against the very injustices that so exercised one when in opposition?
Just yesterday the Justice for Magdalene’s group released new evidence of 38 women and children having been committed to the Magdalene Laundries by the State. In one case, a girl - a child - of just 14 years of age was sent to High Park for two years in 1930 for perjury. As recently as 1983 an unnamed girl - a child - of 15 years of age was committed to the Good Shepherd Convent in Cork for theft. I could go on.
Over the last week criticism has been correctly levelled at the Roman Catholic Church by people on Government and Opposition benches. It is important in the course of this debate to remind ourselves that the State equally has a case to answer. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, said when in opposition that there was irrefutable evidence that the State was, as he put it, "directly complicit" in the confinement of these women and children. The evidence is there - we all know this - and it should not be the case that groups like Justice for Magdalenes or Bethany Home survivor, Derek Leinster, have to keep fighting this fight. Religious orders fundamentally abused their position within Irish society but the State was culpable too. Both must step up, accept responsibility and provide survivors and their families with the redress, supports and services that they now need.
The Bill legislates for the provision of support to people who suffered the most grievous abuse within State and church-run institutions. These institutions, instead of providing a safe haven and secure environment for children and young people, were often places where the most sadistic cruelty was inflicted. The legacy of the religious orders in these institutions is one of sexual, physical and mental abuse. The State compounded the pain and damage to our most vulnerable children by its decision to turn a blind eye to what was happening.
There are differing views on what are the best ways to compensate and support victims of church and State institutional abuse. Each opinion must be listened to and considered. The State must be humble in its response. It failed these people before and it cannot do so again. The Government needs to do much more than provide a sympathetic ear for those who have raised concerns about aspects of the Bill. Everything possible must be done to ensure the victims of abuse receive just recompense.
It seems wrong to have to reduce this debate so quickly to pennies and pence. I do not know that any of us can put a price on assisting survivors and their families to put their lives back together. Last week, a gentleman on the radio spoke about the need to move on. He spoke of wanting to apologise to his former partners for the difficulties in their relationships due to the abuse perpetrated against him as a child while in State care. My heart broke for this man. How can we put a price on giving him whatever support or redress he needs to move on?
The cost of redress is expected to reach €1.36 billion, and the religious orders need to pay up. Holding back on these moneys is creating additional hurt among victims and this is a situation the Government must address firmly and clearly. I have very serious concerns about the fund's eligibility criteria, which is to be confined to those who received an award from the redress board or compensation following a court decision or settlement. Those who have not received redress to date will be blocked from accessing the fund and as a consequence the State will have failed them yet again.
It is important to note that 40% of the applications made to the redress scheme were by former residents living outside the State. The implications of the abuse they suffered impacted on their education, leaving many illiterate and some destitute. Far too often we hear of now elderly former residents of these institutions who have struggled to integrate themselves into their communities and now live a life of poverty, some in Britain or the US. All they want in life is to return home to Ireland to live out what remains of their lives. However, no provision has been made for them. In this context we are concerned about the Government's intention to end funding outreach services once the statutory fund is established. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider this. Medical insurance is a real problem for survivors living in the US and Canada, as are nursing and residential care. In what way does the Government and the State intend to support their needs? Consideration must also be given to the views of some former residents who believe the distribution of the available money should be paid directly to survivors in lump sums.
Campaigner Paddy Doyle has noted the vast majority of former residents posting comments on his website are opposed to the statutory fund. Unlike the redress scheme, which provided financial compensation, the new fund will provide for a range of services instead. When we consider how the State failed survivors as children it is understandable they would now not trust the Government to decide on their behalf what their wants and needs are. It cannot go unsaid that the redress scheme itself was for many a truly awful experience. Sean Leonard of Justice and Healing for Institutional Abuse has noted the legal fraternity made a fortune out of the redress scheme. He states survivors were poorly treated when interacting with Departments. We must learn from this.
There has been, rightly, collective outrage against Cardinal Seán Brady's failure to tell parents that their children were being abused by, or in danger of being abused by, Fr. Brendan Smyth. Many of us have read with horror the questioning by the church that survivor Brendan Boland had to endure at just 14 years of age. For many the redress board process was an equally cold and harsh experience. Lessons must be learned from this.
Councillor Sally Mulready, chair of the London Irish Women's Survivors Support Group has said applicants to the redress board who were rejected on the grounds of being late should not be excluded and I agree with her. We have been told the funds supports will include access to counselling services, health care provision, housing needs and education. We need to ensure these services and supports will be adequately resourced and delivered. The Minister has also said the fund will promote understanding of the effects of abuse on former residents among service providers and will evaluate the effectiveness of the approved services in meeting the needs of former residents. In all honesty I question the capacity of the Government to deliver on this commitment, and I feel very sure that many survivors equally question it.
Child victims of sexual abuse whose cases have been taken up by the State can wait several months before even the most basic counselling services are provided. Often their families receive no counselling whatsoever. Last month the HSE revealed that approximately 178,000 people are on outpatient waiting lists to be seen by a consultant after referral by a GP. Tens of thousands of citizens have been waiting years for housing and may never in their lifetime move off the housing waiting list. The Government plans to cut a further 37,000 public sector jobs, so how can we guarantee and reassure victims and survivors that their needs will be met?
Christine Buckley of the Aislinn Centre has noted enhanced access to counselling services and education have greatly reduced recidivism but so much more is needed. Access is important but, in equal measure, so also is the time involved in accessing the supports and services. In many instances we are dealing with very elderly people who require urgent assistance. There is the reasonably held view that many of these services are already available to people as a matter of right, meaning the benefits of the statutory fund will be minimal. This is a point that should be made. Paddy Doyle, whom I mentioned earlier, has also noted that as survivors get older, their needs change, particularly when their levels of mental health and mobility deteriorate. As a result, some survivors will have greater needs than others yet it is unclear how the board will deal with these changing needs and, in some cases, imbalances.
The fund should have provision to pay for the education requirements of children whose parents were the victims of abuse. This can be an important step in breaking the cycle of inter-generation hardship that can be directly attributed to institutionalised abuse. John Kelly of the Irish branch of Survivors of Child Abuse, SOCA, has suggested the introduction of a universal card scheme whereby each survivor would get credits and these could be conferred to a family member.
The legislation must also examine how the awarding of assistance will affect residents of the Six Counties and Britain whose benefits are means tested and must be protected. Children of survivors will be excluded from accessing services as provided for in the Bill. This is a mistake.
Full access to education and counselling are critical components to breaking a cycle that began with the State's failure to protect our vulnerable children.
A former resident of an industrial school in County Kerry wrote last month in a letter to The Irish Times of wanting to give her children what she had been denied, an education. This woman's right to education was denied by the State. Her father was also a survivor of an industrial school and both her parents were illiterate. She described how her son has achieved 11 honours in his junior certificate - a bright lad - but now she worries that the family will not be in a financial position to send him to college. Perhaps, in an even worse indictment against this Government, the young lad is considering leaving school so he can help support his family, as his mother's community employment Scheme will end in November and the family's income will be reduced. The letter concluded by saying that education is the passport to ensuring that the family's cycle of deprivation and social welfare dependency does not continue. This is a position of common sense and dignity, and I urge the Government to adopt it and listen to the words and needs of this woman.
Speaking in the Dáil in 2009, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, said: "No words of mine or of anybody else in the House can undo the damage, harm or hurt caused to and which continues for those people. However, the actions that we take can make some redress to them, their children and their children's children". He went on to charge the then Fianna Fáil Government for having "let free the horrendous record of the Department of Education and Science that continues to the present day". He put it to the Minister that there was a continuing culture of deferment and obedience to the Roman Catholic Church and its religious orders in the then Department of Education and Science that had frustrated getting answers to the most simple questions.
I believe the Minister spoke with integrity on that occasion. Now, he is in charge and is making the decisions. He cannot afford to get it wrong. Of all the matters raised in the course of this debate and on Committee Stage, the issues of eligibility and ensuring the State, in the most fulsome way, recognises the damage done to victims and survivors and compensates them in the fullest way must be clearly guaranteed and underwritten in the legislation. I do not believe that is yet the case. The issue of means testing the provision of services to any of the victims or survivors must be clarified. Survivors must have the comfort of knowing that they will have access to properly resourced services, with no impediment put in their way by the State.
Now that he is in the Government, does the Minister have the same courage he displayed when he was in the Opposition? I hope he does. The victims, survivors, their families and their communities need a full resolution from the Minister. That is the least all of us owe them. I commend them for their efforts. I hope the Minister has listened to our words and that we can constructively fashion the legislation to meet all those needs.
To Read the Short Debate on the Statutory Trust Fund please Click the Link Below?
I have today Sent an email to the 19 TD's that Voted Against the Statutory Trust Fund a copy of Which appears Bellow
Dear Clare Daly,
I am writing to you to thank you for doing the right thing for Survivors on the Statutory Fund Bill.
You are one of the Brave 19 that understand that the Government forcing their ideas on Survivors just won’t work.
This Bill and the ensuing legislation will not work!
The Administration is already top heavy carrying those from the Redress Unit and the Education and Finance Board forward into Secure Employment along with their Pensions!
The Employees of the Education Board have failed Survivors and the Redress Unit are Responsible for ignoring the wishes of Survivors during the Consultation Process at the direct request of the Minister for Education; and are Responsible for drafting the Current Statutory Fund Bill. Neither seems Qualified to be involved in “What is Best For Survivors?”
In the Draft proposals there is already an element of unwillingness to pay, buy the inclusion of the Appeals Officer/Unit!
If there was a willingness to be inclusive of Survivors Real Needs there would be an Applications Unit to enable the Vulnerable, Distressed and Illiterate to apply, and ensure their applications would be given Priority and Approval.
If Redress had been Just there would be no Need for this Statutory Trust Fund?
Redress was Protector of the Public Purse!
Prior to Redress I had a small business where I was trading on Markets and Shows, my wife’s Mental Health was not good but we got by.
With the Advent of Redress Board my wife was so traumatised by having to recount the Suppressed Memories of her Childhood that I was unable to focus on my business and it eventually ceased trading.
My wife was so traumatised that she could not attend the Redress Hearing, and submitted a Psychiatrists letter to excuse here.
The current situation is that we are living on Benefits in the UK and at the moment I cannot see our situation changing?
I am telling you this, looking for Sympathy; it is a situation that I feel is quite common; as my experience of Survivors is either that of myself & my wife or; Survivors because of their Trauma are living a lonely and isolated existence!
I am asking; as I am unfamiliar with the working of the Irish Political System; is there any way to reverse this Legislation?
Regards Rob Northall
Bellow is a List of those with enough compassion and understanding to realise that the Statutory Fund is NOT in the Best interests of Survivors, I hope you can work together and reverse this Legislation?
Boyd Barrett, Richard.
Flanagan, Luke ‘Ming’
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
McDonald, Mary Lou.
Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
Here is Clare Daly's Reply
From: Clare Daly [mailto:Clare.Daly@Oireachtas.ie]
Sent: 24 June 2012 03:49 PM
To: Rob. Northall
Subject: Re: Thank You! Your Help is Still Needed
Thanks for the email. We will be battling on the issue at committee stage this week, where we can table amendments and we have. After that it still has to go back to the Dail to be ratified. The problem is that the government has a very strong majority and seem to be pushing on with it. I would suggest that you encourage as many survivors as possible to target the Fine Gael and Labour TDs over the next couple of weeks.
All the best,