A miserly approach by the Government to cases involving the gross sexual and physical abuse of children while in the care of State-funded institutions would be short-sighted in the extreme. Of course the Government has a duty to ensure the public purse is not raided by undeserving litigants, backed up by greedy lawyers. But the experience of recent years has shown that an initial generous approach is required if long-term costs are to be minimised and people treated fairly. Official resistance to the payment of attractive and early compensation to the Hepatitis C victims and to victims of other infected blood transfusion products caused final settlement costs to soar while generating deep anger within the community.
Blame for the sexual and physical abuse of children in institutions cannot be laid solely at the door of the State. But some fault does accrue. The State had a responsibility to ensure the institutions it funded and supplied with children were run in a proper and humane fashion. And it is clear from the reports of inspectors at the Department of Education that this did not happen in some instances.
The Government has been commended here in the past for its decision to establish a Commission on Childhood Abuse that will take a two-tier approach to its investigations. One division will have investigative powers similar to the Dail Public Accounts Committee and will be able to summon witnesses, request documents and make detailed findings on how the institutions functioned. But it will meet in private; and none of the evidence heard can be used later in a court of law.
The second division will cater for those persons who simply want to tell what happened to them. They will not be legally represented and will not be cross-examined. Again, the hearings will be in camera. The Commission, under the direction of Ms Justice Laffoy, will establish as clear a picture as possible of the nature and extent of physical and sexual abuse in institutions and other places. Its work could take two years.
There is a world of difference between the willingness of the State to investigate what went on in the hidden Ireland of the past and its readiness to compensate the victims of those institutions. The first instance is exemplified by the establishment of the Commission on Childhood Abuse, where cases of both sexual and physical abuse will be fully examined and reported. The second involves the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Bill, designed to facilitate delayed compensation claims by those who suffered damage within the institutions. The Government has refused to include physical abuse within the terms of the Bill and, instead, has referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission for consideration. Even where special cases involving sexual abuse were concerned, the Government refused concessions.
The Government is in the process of drafting a National Treasury Management Agency Bill to allow for the establishment of a State Claims Management Agency. Attempts will be made to route all future compensation claims through this body. But the co-operation of claimants will be required for such a system to work efficiently and cost-effectively. Because of that, the Government and its agencies would be well advised to adopt a more caring and open approach to citizens who have valid need of redress.