EIGHTEEN GROUPS that were involved with the running of residential institutions for children investigated by the Ryan commission have refused to contribute to the €1.36 billion costs incurred by the State in compensating people who had been abused in the institutions.
These management bodies are in addition to the 18 religious congregations that ran the orphanages, industrial schools and reformatories. They also include bodies involved with running Protestant residential institutions for children.
Included among these latter management bodies contacted by the State for a contribution to redress costs, and at the suggestion of the 18 religious congregations directly involved, are the Dominican Order of Nuns, the Daughters of Liege, the Salesian Fathers, the board of governors Baltimore Industrial School (the Catholic Bishop of Cork and Ross).
Others involved included the Daughters of Wisdom (Sisters of La Sagesse), Mrs Smyly’s Trust, Cottage Home Child and Family Service, Miss Carr’s Children’s Services, Cope Foundation, Sisters of Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Sisters of Charity of Jesus and Mary, Kirwan House Charity,Enable Ireland, Stewart’s Hospital Services Ltd, Traveller Family Care, Los Angeles Society for Homeless Boys (now Home Alone), Tabor House, and the Bishop of Raphoe (St Columba’s Industrial School, Killybegs).
The Adelaide and Meath Hospital in Tallaght (Harcourt Street hospital) has not been approached. It is understood that this is because it is a State facility and asking it to contribute to costs incurred by the State would be absurd.
In his statement to religious congregations last Friday, Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn said: “I understand that when you met the taoiseach and other ministers last year you raised the issue of seeking contributions from other management bodies, ie, outside of the 18 [religious congregations]. That was done but I regret to say that the response proved equally unsuccessful.”
At Friday’s meeting the Minister said he proposed exploring “ways in which we might obtain some indication of the relative involvement of different institutions in the redress process perhaps by direct contact between the redress board and congregations”.
He insisted there was “a moral responsibility on your congregations to significantly augment your contributions”.
