First of all, I thank my colleague and party leader, Deputy Bacik, for bringing this Bill forward. I also welcome the visitors to the Gallery. This Bill is timely for two reasons. It is timely because it addresses one of the most disgusting and hideous aspects of our shameful past, namely, the abuse perpetuated by religious orders and facilitated by the State. Many religious orders hold substantial wealth, particularly in terms of property and land, yet many refuse to engage and refuse to pay compensation for the horrendous damage they inflicted on poor innocent undeserving people. This Bill is also timely because in the week in which it has come up for debate, we have seen the conviction of two vile paedophiles who were two men in positions of authority and influence - Leo Hickey and Jeffrey Donaldson. For decades, the State has grappled with the dark, painful and deeply stained legacy of institutional abuse. We have sat in this Chamber and listened to statements. We have listened to apologies and we have all read reports. We read the reports into the mother and baby homes. Some of us read the Ryan report. Time and again, we have seen brave courageous survivors stand up, recount their deepest traumas and ask this country to do one simple thing, which is to get them accountability. Yet, on many occasions they have been met with a State redress scheme that is cold, bureaucratic, adversarial and forces them to repeatedly prove they are not lying. If the State's failures are cause for deep concern, the utter moral bankruptcy of certain religious orders is worse. We need to call this out for what it is. This is a masterclass in corporate evasion by institutions that claim they are Christian, but whose actions, in reality, are anything but. Culpable religious orders are actively dodging their responsibilities. They are using grubby, dirty, cynical legal tactics to place their vast wealth and considerable assets completely out of reach. They move properties and millions of euro into lay-run trusts, drawing a legal curtain between their riches and money, and the victims they broke, bruised and failed - vulnerable people who were, in many cases, in their care. The recent scoping inquiry noted "mixed engagement" from the orders on redress. In my view, "mixed" is a laughable term to use. It is almost a euphemism for literally whacking the door shut on survivors. We cannot continue the same failed approach of asking religious orders to, effectively, appeal to their better nature. That approach has failed us for nearly 30 years. It is time for the State to force their hand. I want to read an excerpt from an email I received from a constituent of mine who is a survivor of Sean Ross Abbey, which outlines eloquently the core of the issue: If the State truly understood the lifelong damage caused to women and children by mother and baby homes, it would never have designed the redress scheme as it did. Women entered these institutions at one of the most vulnerable times in their lives, and many arrived frightened, alone and ashamed, often having already been rejected by their families and communities. Instead of compassion, proper maternity care and support, women in Sean Ross Abbey experienced fear, humiliation and inadequate care. Women have spoken about being left in pain during childbirth and being told to offer up their suffering for their sins. Many mothers left these institutions without their babies. Many children grew up not knowing who they were, where they came from or why they had been separated from their mothers. This trauma did not end when the doors of these institutions closed because women and children continue to live with the physical and emotional consequences today, and many still require counselling and support decades later. No amount of money can compensate mothers and children for the trauma, abuse and lifelong consequences of what happened in mother and baby homes. However, the State has effectively decided what that suffering is worth. The redress scheme tells its own story, with the arbitrary cut-offs and medical card eligibility issues once again reducing lifelong trauma and its consequences to a simple calculation of days. Recently, two survivors successfully challenged their exclusion from the redress scheme through the courts. The Government's response was not to accept these decisions; it was to appeal. Only weeks after the Minister stood in the Dáil and apologised to survivors, the State is once again forcing survivors through the courts. Survivors are looking for justice, for accountability and for religious orders to pay what they owe. It is shocking that in 2026, mothers out there who are survivors of these institutions have no clue - and may never have a clue - where their dead children are buried. When survivors consistently seek answers about what happened, information remains unavailable and important questions remained unanswered. Apologies have been made, reports have been published and legislation has been introduced, but for many people time is running out. I note with deep disappointment the Minister of State's amendment providing for a six-month time delay, because some of these survivors may not have six months. The Bill my colleague has introduced provides the legal teeth to break through these trusts and recover the damage that is rightfully owed to survivors. No survivor should have to resort to dragging themselves through an adversarial court system to fight for their dignity. If an institution facilitated, enabled and covered up the horrific sexual abuse of children, that institution must pay what is owed. We have given the Minister of State a mechanism to act; please use it.

Sentiment score: -0.09