For example, persons have been told in Galway recently, I think, that they will be described as tutors and even when they are delivering lectures that they will be paid at a tutor rate. It is really important that we knock that on the head and that the Government leads in this. The Universities Act is very clear about the role of the HEA and the Government in terms of guiding and setting policy in this area. I do not think this is solely happening individually in institutions. There is a clear responsibility for th…

I move amendment No. 33: In page 14, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on adequacy of payment for health services to relevant persons not ordinarily resident in the State 19. The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the adequacy of the payment to relevant persons referred to in section 18(5) who are not ordinarily resident in the State, and options for expanding entitlements under section 18(5) to ensure that the cos…

While I believe six months is a reasonable period, it may be, of course, for this reason the amendments do not get accepted. I am sure others in the House may wish to seek to bring forth reports after 12 months, or another period, and this may prove more acceptable. I am sure this is something we may see proposed on Report Stage. I refer to amendments looking to different periods of time, if this is the problem. Again, I suggest the availability of certain officials and their work programme is not the central focus…

I will be very brief. This is a general payment in respect of days. It is not a payment designed in terms of experience. That is a choice that has been made. The issue of the waiver is concerning. The Minister indicated that he would come back to me in writing but what was then looked for, and not solely by me but indeed by Government Members and Senators, was for the whole House to hear clarity on this issue. I would suggest that we need to hear that before we move to Report Stage. It has been over a week since th…

I move amendment No. 34: In page 14, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “ Report on provision of additional payments to those who experienced forced family separation 19. The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the potential to make provision for supplementary payments, in addition to any entitlement under this section to a general payment or work-related payment under this Act, to relevant persons who experienced forced fam…

I move amendment No. 35: In page 14, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on top up payments for those in receipt of inadequate settlements 19. The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the potential to provide for supplementary payments for relevant persons referred to in section 18(6) who had previously received an award from a court or settlement in respect of an action arising out of any circumstances relating to a p…

I move amendment No. 36: In page 14, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on creation of support fund for those with additional needs 19. (1) The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the potential to make provision for a support fund for persons who developed additional needs as a direct or indirect result of time spent in a relevant institution. (2) The report under subsection (1) shall include analysis of legal option…

I move amendment No. 37: In page 14, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on extension of eligibility for general payment under Scheme 19. (1) The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the potential to extend eligibility under section 18(1) for a general payment to all relevant persons who were resident in a relevant institution for any period of time, including those who were resident for less than 180 days. (2) A repor…

By way of correction, amendments Nos. 37 and 38 do not require a full overhaul or examination of the whole scheme. They relate to specific provisions within the Bill and the specific provisions in the Schedule to the Bill in respect of the 180-day and 90-day requirements, respectively. I do not accept that the change proposed would be as substantial as the Minister suggests. I give notice that we reserve the right to introduce amendments on the next Stage dealing with the mechanisms for responding to any concerning…

I move amendment No. 1: In page 5, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following: “Report on operation of Scheme 2. (1) The Minister shall produce a report which will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas 12 months after the Scheme has commenced. (2) A report under this section shall consider the following matters: (a) whether and to what extent persons engaged in the management, administration or operation of relevant institutions should be permitted or required to contribute to the cost of making paymen…

I have some specific questions that need answering. I have been informed that amendments Nos. 8 to 10, inclusive, which were on the definition of "relevant person", have been ruled out of order. That makes these amendments, Nos. 1 and 15, which try to address who is included as a relevant person, all the more important in reviewing it. I have some questions for the Minister because these are the choices that are being made around what comes in. We have been told the relevant person in the legislation is meant to be…

I thank the Minister. I wish to speak on a number of matters and indicate areas whereby if the Minister is sincere in what he is discussing, there is scope for him to bring changes. We had hoped that perhaps the concerns that had been raised right across the House - I acknowledge the members of Government parties who raised their concerns - would mean that something different would be done in respect of the three-week gap. We are deeply disappointed in that regard. I had expected that the issues we have raised in t…

Is the Minister suggesting that the waiver will apply to issues that are not reflected in the redress scheme?

Yes, but as I said the scheme does not recognise or engage in circumstances such as, for example, racial abuse or forced family separation. Is the Minister saying the waiver applies to those issues? In that context, this does not look like a non-adversarial approach. If this were a blanket piece of a redress scheme being put forward, which the Minister was trying to slim down, surely the waiver should only apply to those matters covered by the scheme, and not to other matters explicitly not covered by the scheme.

If that is the case, I hope that something can be clarified, changed and amended on Report Stage.

I have the same question. We still have not received any justification. The justification has simply been that we can look back and see a worse proposal made by someone else and a worse decision before that as regards the failure of the commission to properly acknowledge the damage and abuse. We can look at worse decisions. We can go back to all the original decisions about the mother and baby homes. There was a cascade of bad decisions. None of the decisions previously made are a justification. In fairness, in cer…

I appeal to the Minister to go back and fight again. I hope and believe he probably has pushed on this, but I appeal to him to fight harder on the inclusion of all of those within that six-month period. If there is no rationale, it is good and useful to put that on the record today so that there is pressure collectively on all of the parties, including the parties of Government, to come back on Report Stage with a scheme that is somewhat closer to fit for purpose. We need details of the waiver scheme. We need to ha…

We have asked direct questions about the rationale for the six months and still have not heard a reply on that point.

I will speak briefly to the section. It is regrettable that these amendments, which are around definitions, have not been allowed to be discussed. I will signal some of the key questions involved because this is a crucial part of the Bill. Section 2 is where the definitions are set out. It is where the definitions for the phrases used later in the Bill are set. The Opposition has made some constructive proposals about how those definitions could be improved. I ask that thought and consideration are given to strengt…

To clarify, on Committee Stage it is not just about the amendments, it is about the sections. What happens on Committee Stage is that the Minister is bringing each section of the Bill to be discussed by the House. With absolute respect, it is not solely about the amendments, it is about each section. That is why we ask if each section is agreed. It would be appropriate that there are responses where there are questions on the section, whether or not amendments are proposed.