Reaction: Groups representing survivors of abuse in residential institutions are unanimous in their opposition to suggestions by the Minister for Education and Science, Mr Dempsey, that the investigation element of the child abuse commission might proceed by sampling.
The One in Four group has expressed "grave concern" at the idea which it described as "fundamentally unacceptable". Ms Christine Buckley, of the Aislinn group, said it was "very offensive", while Mr Tom Hayes of the Alliance group was "adamant" every survivor must be given an opportunity to tell their story.
Mr Mick Waters, of SOCA (UK), felt "sampling is unjust and cannot happen. It can't be right. There's no justice in that," he said, while Mr John Kelly of Irish SOCA believed "sampling can be got around".
In a statement yesterday the One in Four group said it did not believe sampling would "allow the commission to establish the nature or extent of abuse in institutions or establish responsibility for such abuse. We do not believe that such an approach can in any way provide meaningful justice for victims of abuse."
It said it was pleased to see in the Government's statement yesterday clarification that the State's "pre-eminent concern is the interest of survivors of abuse and establishing the nature, causes, circumstances and extent of abuse in institutions and responsibility for this abuse".
It hoped "to see this pre-eminence reflected in any changes to the working or mandate of the commission" and repeated its call for the next stage review "to be fully transparent and for the Government to publish all draft proposals at an early stage. We also again call for a full role for the Oireachtas in this review."
Ms Buckley felt the Government proposals were not the way forward "to find out exactly what victims want". They needed choices, she said.
Some may make sworn statements, some not, as "they want to meet their abuser", she said. "Why are they (Government) so reticent about letting us confront abusers. What are they trying to hide?" she asked.
She felt the proposal to give the commission power to require sworn statements was "intimidation and heavy-handed".
What of victims who refused, would they be penalised, she wondered. She also asked whether the taxpayer would have to pay the Chrisitian Brothers' court costs if they lost their current action.She asked that the Taoiseach reflect on whether Mr Dempsey was "the right person for this very sensitive position". If she attended Monday's meeting between the Department of Education and survivor groups she would be accompanied by legal advisers, she said.
Mr Tom Hayes felt there was "nothing" in the Government proposals. He believed that numbers who opt to go for investigation at the commission were far less than spoken of and could be accommodated under existing structures.
Mr John Kelly believed the proposals indicated that the Government didn't accept that "Laffoy has been holed below the waterline". Oral hearings were important to victims, but he couldn't see "an 80 year-old abuser being made to face accusers 300 separate times, much as victims would like to meet their abuser". There had to be give and take on all sides, he said.
