The Government should consider seizing the assets of religious orders if they refuse to contribute to the mother and baby institution redress scheme, some survivors have said.
On Wednesday, The Irish Times reported that just one religious order involved in mother and baby homes has made a “serious offer” of cash to pay redress to survivors.
Negotiator Sheila Nunan has submitted a final report to Government following talks with seven Catholic bodies and the Church of Ireland. A previous offer of a financial contribution from the Sisters of Bon Secours still stands, it is understood.
Up to the end of March, almost €65 million had been paid out to more than 4,100 people under the scheme. The average payout to date is €15,400.
Dublin bus routes move, paving way for traffic-free Parliament Street
‘One was always watching’: Woman raped by three men from nightclub said they acted like ‘predators’
Trump tariffs: 90-day ‘pause’ on non-retaliating countries as China is hit with 125% rate
School to stop disciplinary process against teacher who says she was wrongly identified as ‘GAA catfish’
Survivor Terri Harrison said she is “bitterly disappointed” but not surprised by the fact religious orders have not offered to contribute.
“We really hoped it would be different this time, but there is a lack of compassion and sincerity.”
Ms Harrison, who spent time in both St Patrick’s Mother and Baby Home in Dublin and the Bessborough institution in Cork, compared the Catholic Church to a profit-making business.
“If any other company did what they did, their assets would be seized,” she said.
Mary Harney, who spent her early years in Bessborough Mother and Baby Home, agrees that if religious orders do not contribute to the scheme, the Government should consider seizing their property or other assets.
Ms Harney, who spent much of her childhood in an industrial school, said she believes the Government approached the negotiations with a “misplaced deference” for the Church and a “cap-in-hand mentality”.
She said the Government should have demanded religious orders contribute to the scheme, rather than “asking them nicely”.
“The Government should say: ‘Look, you have all these properties and we will find out what their value is. We will confiscate your properties until you pay up’,” Ms Harney said.
All mothers who spent time in an institution are entitled to a payment, which increases based on length of stay. However, it is estimated that about 24,000 survivors are excluded from the scheme, including those who spent fewer than six months in an institution as a child.
There have been repeated calls to extend the scheme to include all survivors, but, Ms Harney said, this “doesn’t appear to be a priority” for the Government.
A number of survivors are taking legal action against the State over their exclusion from the scheme.
Those who do apply for redress must sign a waiver confirming they will not take future legal action against the State related to their time in an institution. Ms Harney said signing this waiver is “a huge thing” and has put some people off applying.
“Many people who went for the redress have done so because of necessity; literally, they need the money. Otherwise, I think there would have been a lot less applying.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Children said such a waiver “is a common feature of ex gratia schemes”. Accepting compensation via a redress scheme is “less burdensome” than taking a court case, the spokesperson said.
When asked about the suggestion that religious orders’ assets should be seized if they refuse to contribute to redress, the spokesperson said Minister for Children and Equality Norma Foley “will shortly brief Government on the negotiations report” before Government considers its recommendations and “any next steps”.
