2026-06-23

"Táim ag iarraidh go nglacfaidh an Rialtas lena fhreagracht agus, ar a laghad, go dtabharfaidh siad síocháin dúinn ag deireadh ár ré." Is iad seo na focail ó bhean amháin de chuid mhná Dhún Darú. Is marthanóirí iad a bhí tar éis mí-úsáid ghnéasach uafásach a fhulaingt i Scoil Náisiúnta Dhún Darú i gCorcaigh sna seascaidí agus sna seachtóidí. An inseoidh an Taoiseach dóibh inniu go ndéanfaidh sé an rud ceart agus go gcuirfidh sé cúiteamh ar fáil sa dóigh atá ceart agus gan tuilleadh moille? The following are the words of one of the Dunderrow women: I want the Government to take responsibility and to at least give us peace at the end of our time. I'm here suffering along with fellow victims who went to a school that was run by the State, and this was done to innocent children. It's totally wrong, totally unfair. I want justice. These women are survivors of horrific sexual abuse inflicted on children by teacher Leo Hickey at Dunderrow National School in Cork in the sixties and seventies. They have now broken their silence in their quest for justice and for compensation for the State's failure to protect them. The Taoiseach will recall how Louise O'Keeffe, one of Hickey's victims, spent years courageously battling for the State to take responsibility and provide redress. In fact, the Taoiseach was the Minister for education who fought Louise through the Irish courts back in 1998. She was forced to take her case all the way to the European Court of Human Rights and she won that case in 2014. The court found that the State had an obligation to protect children from sexual abuse in State-run schools and to provide redress to survivors. The judgment meant the State had to pay compensation to Louise O'Keeffe but the Irish courts found it was not just her who was abused in that school. We are talking about women whose children were abused by the same person in the same school during the same period but, 12 and a half years on from the European Court of Human Rights judgment, these women are still waiting, still being ignored and still having to fight the State to own up to its responsibilities. These women are told that they cannot access compensation because they have not previously taken a legal case against the State. Seriously, is the Taoiseach not going to do the right thing for these women who were abused because of some technicality? The State, true to form, wants to drag these women through the courts and wants to force them to take on expensive legal proceedings to get compensation. We have seen this all before, and we know it is cruel. These are women who are now in their 60s and 70s who suffered appalling sexual abuse at the time and whose children were catastrophically failed by the State. It is shameful what is happening to them. The women have suffered enough. They are being retraumatised and being forced into a position where they must sue the State to get what they are entitled to by law, and that is wrong and we all know that. Louise O'Keeffe summed up the injustice perfectly when she said, "I was abused by Leo Hickey in Dunderrow school. The Dunderrow women were also abused by Leo Hickey in Dunderrow school. It is time to give these women the redress that is theirs. It is time to do what is right." I am asking the Taoiseach today to bring this to an end. I asking him to tell them today that he will do what is right. I asking him to tell them that he will provide redress without any further delay.

The abuse carried out by Leo Hickey was evil, horrific and deeply harmful to many people who were children at the time that he was in Dunderrow National School in the 1960s. I do appreciate and I am fully conscious of the enormous trauma experienced by the survivors of sexual abuse in that school and abuse carried out by Leo Hickey. It is important that their voices are heard and listened to. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found that in respect of day schools the State failed in its obligation in specific circumstances to protect Louise O'Keeffe from sexual abuse by Leo Hickey. This was not the Irish courts but the European Court of Human Rights. The key issue was the absence of any safeguarding advices or Children First guidelines. All of that was not in place at the time. That was not advised to what was a diocesan school at the time. That was the key underlying reason for the decision of the European Court of Human Rights. Since then, a number of measures have been put in place to implement the judgment, including an ex gratia payment scheme. That said, in 2015 the then Government established an ex gratia scheme of payments for victims of abuse by teachers and other school employees that was designed to ensure the implementation of the judgment. However, that scheme was not adequate at all, and it was reviewed in 2019 by an independent assessor, Mr. Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill. This involves some who were in Dunderrow but others who were not in Dunderrow. The scope of the scheme was expanded following Mr. Justice O'Neill's conclusions and there was a more straightforward process. Some 193 applications were made to the revised ex gratia scheme and a total of €10.75 million has issued to about 128 approved applicants. The scheme closed to applications in July 2023. Meanwhile, as Members know, the scoping inquiry into historical sexual abuse in day and boarding schools more generally run by religious orders published in 2024 recognised the significance of the issues for survivors and their expressed wish that those running those schools where sexual abuse occurred should be held accountable financially. An interdepartmental group was then established in the aftermath of the scoping report to work on each of the recommendations, particularly in the context of redress. The interdepartmental group recognised that consideration of a redress payment scheme, more generally, has far-reaching implications and it is doing further detailed work in respect of that. The survivors of the abuse by Leo Hickey from Dunderrow, through their legal representatives, have sought mediation. As I have said, legal advice is that we would enter into mediation. We will enter into a mediation in good faith and we will engage constructively. I said that earlier this morning. Admhaím gur fhulaing na mná agus na daltaí go han-mhór ar fad as ucht an méid a rinne an múinteoir Leo Hickey. Bhí sé uafásach agus go hainnis. Admhaím go bhfuil tráma faoi leith ann do na daoine atá fós ag fulaingt as ucht an méid a rinne sé.

The plea from the survivors of the abuse at Dunderrow is: give us peace at the end of our days; we want justice. They are asking how long do they have to wait? This goes right back to 1998 when the Taoiseach was the Minister at the time. That is nearly 30 years ago. It is twelve and a half years since the European court made a judgment that the State was liable and we are hearing words from Ministers and taoisigh about mediation and about listening when the survivors are asking for peace at the end of their days and for justice. I am asking the Taoiseach a very simple question because he knows. Louise O'Keeffe had to win her case and fight her battles in the European court and have compensation paid to her but the Taoiseach knows that the Irish courts have made it very clear that other women were abused in that school by the same teacher at the same time. Will the Taoiseach say to these women that, yes, compensation will be paid to them, that we hear them and we see them and that we are going to set this right?

To set the record straight, back in 1998 and 1999 the issue was industrial schools. I created a commission into abuse that happened in industrial schools.

The first proceedings were lodged in 1998.

I want to put that on the record. It was the first time ever any Irish Government established a commission of inquiry into abuse in schools and that was in the context of industrial schools.

The Taoiseach was named in the Louise O'Keeffe case, in fairness.

I want to make that point. It was many years later when this particular case came to the Irish courts and then it went on to the European Court of Human Rights. That said, various ex gratia payment schemes were developed in respect of Dunderrow and others who were party to the case at the European court. As I said earlier, about 193 applications were made. About 128 were approved under the ex gratia payment scheme. We are going to enter into remediation at this stage in good faith. We have a wider issue which the interdepartmental group is examining in terms of both redress and the implications of all that for the State, for survivors and for religious orders in terms of their culpability and accountability in respect of contributing to redress.

I want to read into the record the testimonies of two women who were sexually abused by Leo Hickey, their principal in Dunderrow National School in Kinsale. One said: Sometimes while abusing me with his right hand, I would see him put his left hand inside the clothes on the lower part of the body of the girl beside me. Again, this could last for the duration of the class. Another said: I remember feeling something hard pressed against the small of my back and I remember wondering what this hard object was. I thought it was something in his pocket. This seemed to happen for a long time, but it probably lasted about ten minutes. I remember wanting to get out to play before the break would be over ... These women and 17 of their schoolmates are, rightly, seeking redress for what was done to them as children. They were failed by every system that was supposed to protect them and they are still being failed today. Leo Hickey was eventually convicted while the State managed to evade all responsibility. I spoke to Louise O'Keeffe today, who spent 16 years fighting to change that. The State fought her, in her words, "tooth and nail" every step of the way, pursuing her through the courts and aggressively seeking legal costs against her. In 2014, she finally won at the European Court of Human Rights, which found the State had failed in its duty to protect children. That judgment should have been a turning point. Instead, in a textbook Irish Government approach to how it treats survivors of abuse, the redress scheme excluded the very people it was supposed to help. Incredibly, 19 victims of Leo Hickey - women whose evidence helped secure his conviction - have been denied redress. Their testimony was good enough for the criminal court but somehow is not good enough for the State. It is unbelievable. In 2019, the Taoiseach stood on this side of the House and said that the O'Keeffe judgment demands that every child who experienced sexual abuse in a defective child protection framework in schools be compensated for that abuse. He also said that redress should not wait for the results of any commission of investigation. Survivors do not need another review, report or excuse. They need a Government willing to do what the Taoiseach himself called for. I have two questions. Does the Taoiseach recognise the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights and if so, will he commit to providing fair redress to all survivors without arbitrary barriers?

First of all, I thank the Deputy for again raising this issue. As I have said, the abuse committed by Leo Hickey was horrific and unconscionable. The suffering and trauma people went through because of him has been life lasting. The Deputy is correct that in 2019, I advocated very strongly that the original redress scheme of 2015 was far too limited. That led to the appointment of Mr. Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill to recommend an expansion of the ex gratia payment scheme. That is what I have already referenced; that opened it up to some degree back then to 128 people. Obviously, not all were in Dunderrow but I did not have the identities of all of them. I represented one or two people myself from outside of Dunderrow, who had come to me as a TD at the time because I was not in Government then. That person would have received compensation at the time but even that is at a modest level, if I am honest. The legal representatives wrote to the Attorney General last week. As I said, we are going to engage in a constructive way and I do want to see a resolution of this. There are also wider implications in the context of what emerged in the last number of years in some religious-run secondary schools, which led to the scoping inquiry that recommended a full inquiry - which we have established - into abuse in primary schools and all schools across the country. There is also the issue of redress and how that would be handled. An interdepartmental group was established to deal with that, which will have far-reaching implications all round but also with regard to accountability and responsibility. The established mechanism was that where schools were run by the diocesan authorities or by religious orders, it was those that were primarily culpable in terms of abuse that happened. In the context of Dunderrow, of course, in the 1960s, this was pre any official guidelines from the State or Government to these patron bodies in respect of safeguarding children and guidelines that we have today, like Children First. We have a far greater framework of laws and guidelines to try and protect children, which did not exist then. That is the area where the European court found the State culpable in respect of adequate safeguarding not being provided to schools at that particular time. We will take this forward and revert to the House in due course.

What the Taoiseach has highlighted is the well-established practice of the State. At the hands of the State, people are seriously and systematically abused. They try to seek justice. There is delay after delay, an interdepartmental group, a commission of investigation, and a redress scheme that is blatantly cruel and excludes the people who need it, then the State does it all again with another redress scheme that also does not work. It is delay, delay and consult. The Taoiseach said today he should positively engage and listen to these people. I spoke to Louise O'Keeffe this morning. She said she met the Taoiseach in March 2025 and he said he would get back to her in a month. She has not heard from the Taoiseach since. This is not engaging positively. She went to the European Court of Human Rights after fighting the State for over a decade. She won. Eighteen other people were abused in the same school by the same man. Their testimony was used in the criminal court to convict him but the Taoiseach will not take that as good enough to provide the redress these people have been waiting over a decade for. The Taoiseach will delay more with another interdepartmental group and another redress scheme. Why will he not commit to giving these people what they are entitled to now and end this despicable practice of disregarding survivors and delaying, delaying and delaying?

Hear, hear.

It is not delay, delay, delay in respect of the mediation that has been sought by the representatives of the survivors of the abuse by Leo Hickey. We will engage in that mediation. There is a wider redress issue that has to be examined in the context of schools in general across the nation over the last number of decades. That is the point I am making. This has been in a legal framework for quite some time as well. I have no issue meeting with people but the Government has to resolve this as well and come to conclusions in respect of it. I am clear on what we need to do, specifically in terms of these survivors of this particular abuse but there will be others as well. There will be other schools and a need for further responses in different contexts. That was the idea of the overall comprehensive inquiry and the idea of the interdepartmental group to examine how we deal with all of these issues, not just in one or two schools but the generality of where abuse has taken place.

Over recent days, we have once again been confronted with some of the darkest chapters in the history of this island. Yesterday saw the conviction of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson for horrific sex offences against children. Today, survivors of systematic sexual abuse, perpetrated upon them by Leo Hickey at Dunderrow National School, have come forward to share their harrowing ordeal. Still excluded from existing State redress schemes, they are calling for an effective route to recognition for the horrific campaign of abuse they suffered as children. Last night, we heard the final episode of RTÉ’s "Pirate Predator" documentary, with renewed calls from survivors for an inquiry into the State’s failures to apprehend the prolific and violent sex offender Eamon Cooke. Last week, we learned of the death of paedophile Bill Kenneally, whose crimes destroyed numerous young lives and many of whose victims are still seeking justice. I want to begin by paying tribute to every survivor of child sexual abuse. Survivors have shown extraordinary courage in coming forward. As they tell us, many are still fighting for justice and to be heard. A common theme runs through these appalling cases of child sexual abuse: power and silence; abuse of power by monstrous predators; and silence from the institutions of both State and church that should have been protecting children. The church and the State have a duty to make amends for decades of their failures towards victims. We know the commission of investigation into abuse in schools is under way and that an interdepartmental group is examining options for future redress. That report is due in May next year. Its recommendations must be survivor-led. These may require significant legislative and policy reform, but there are things we can do now to deliver justice for survivors. The first is in respect of the Dunderrow survivors. I spoke again today with a representative from the group of women. They want to see action. They heard what the Taoiseach said about listening to them but they want action and they want redress. Second, the Tánaiste has said that religious orders must pay their fair share of redress - I agree with him and I welcome his comments. The Taoiseach will know that the Labour Party has a Bill before this House on Thursday in my name. It is a Bill to enable survivors of institutional child sexual abuse to pursue redress from religious orders, which have substantial assets. An analysis of finances from a sample group of congregations showed that collectively they had about €1.3 billion in cash and other assets. Yet, they owe the State €750 million in unpaid redress in respect of those who were abused in schools and institutions that were run by religious orders. Our Bill would end an indefensible practice from religious orders that purport to show moral leadership, yet are refusing to pay redress and are shifting assets to put them out of reach of survivors. All institutions in both State and church that facilitated or enabled abuse of children should pay redress. We want to hear from the Taoiseach about justice and redress for Dunderrow survivors, and about what the Government attitude will be to our Bill on Thursday. Will it facilitate the Bill's passage? We have spoken before about it. The Taoiseach said he would refer it to the Attorney General and I know his interdepartmental group is looking at mechanisms to pursue religious orders for redress, but survivors cannot wait. The commission of investigation is not due to report for three or four years and the interdepartmental group in a year's time. There are things we can be doing now for survivors.

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. If we look back over the last three decades, we have had numerous episodes or revelations pertaining to institutions both public and private in respect of child sexual abuse. It has been quite horrific. I refer to governments from about the late 1990s onwards and the 1999 period onwards when we first initiated the inquiry into industrial schools. I recall the anger when the State paid up close to €1 billion in redress. Everybody attacked the government of the day, of which I was a member, because the accusation was we left the religious off. I never accepted this fully by the way because I felt the State had culpability there too, in terms of inspectorial reports and so on. The State always had culpability in respect of its involvement in the industrial schools. As to the capacity to get money at the time, we did not want to put victims and survivors at that time through years and years of courts. Then, we had the swimming abuse inquiry. We had a series of diocesan inquiries, which the government initiated against Cloyne and against Dublin. I remember the Ferns inquiry, for example, and further abuses and revelations right up to the present day in respect of the Spiritans and of schools more generally. We are now in a situation where we have a comprehensive commission of inquiry into schools, which we did not have before. The situation has evolved. There was a time prior to the nineties when the State did not habitually establish commissions of inquiry into abuse, but from the late 1990s onwards Irish society was opened up in many respects. It was not opened up completely, not comprehensively, but in many respects. A torrent of abuse has emerged in all aspects of life, it seems to me. We can look at the SAVI report going back along and the context in which it reported in respect of its estimations of the nature of abuse. That said, on religious orders, the Government's position on the Labour Party's legislation will be a six-month timed amendment. We believe it aligns with Government policy. We are not in disagreement with the intent or purpose of what the Labour Party is proposing legislatively. We will support that. We are entering into mediation in respect of Dunderrow. We will try to progress that as quickly and as effectively as we can, while also knowing we have a broader issue to deal with, as the Deputy has said, in respect of the interdepartmental group.

I certainly do not need a lecture on the vile history of child sexual abuse and State and church cover-up in this country. I represented survivors of abuse in the 1990s before the Residential Institutions Redress Board. I recall the flaws in that scheme, which I have spoken about before. I also recall the 2002 agreement, the shameful Michael Woods agreement, which capped the contribution of religious orders at a fraction of that €1.5 billion cost the Taoiseach rightly pointed out. Of course, religious orders should pay more, but given opportunities multiple times since 2002 they have failed to do so. That is why the Labour Party is proposing this constructive Bill. I welcome the Taoiseach's indication that the Government will support that Bill on Thursday and will look to see it brought into law as it aligns - as it absolutely should - with Government policy. Over the decades since the Ryan report, with all of the revelations and all the bravery and courage of survivors, we have learned so much about church and State cover-ups. The practical steps we take now are what is important. I welcome the Taoiseach's comments on our redress Bill. It does offer a way forward. It gives the State leverage to pursue religious orders for unpaid redress. Second, I ask precisely what the Taoiseach means by mediation for the Dunderrow victims. This group of 19 women are absolutely right to seek redress now in respect of the abuse they suffered at the hands of Leo Hickey. What does the Taoiseach mean by "mediation"? What is the timeline? Can these women secure redress before we see the very welcome further developments at a broader level through the interdepartmental group?

The legal representatives of the Dunderrow survivors have written to the Government and to the Minister inviting the Government to enter mediation with their clients with a view to resolving their claim against the State. That is what I said this morning. We will respond positively to that invitation. Those are the specifics of the request. This correspondence arrived in the past week or ten days. That is the factual and specific response to that point. On the broader issue, the interdepartmental group is due to report next year. We will see if we can bring that forward.

In April of this year, 46% of our country's electricity came from wind and a further 7% came from solar. That 53% of our electricity or 1,300 GWh of clean renewable electricity in a single month. A key problem with the electricity system in Ireland is that we do not have the energy storage capacity to take full advantage of renewable energy when those conditions are right. At times, renewable producers are directed to create less energy than they have capacity to generate. The system uses technical language like "curtailment" or "dispatch down" for this but there is a simpler word, "waste". In the middle of a worldwide energy crisis, when Irish households' electricity bills are shooting up, renewable energy is being wasted at scale. According to EirGrid, in April 2026, 18% of wind energy was wasted. This is why we need more energy storage in Ireland. The concept is simple. Battery storage captures renewable electricity when wind and solar production is high and releases it back onto our grid when demand is high. A significant number of battery storage systems have been granted planning permission here in Ireland. However, when Energy Storage Ireland presented to us in audiovisual room recently, the key barrier it set out was a lack of routes to market access. The last Government published the electricity storage policy framework in July 2024, almost two years ago. This included ten actions. Action 7 required the Taoiseach's Government to set a long-term target for the amount of battery storage needed in order to give an indication to the industry of how much battery storage is anticipated. Action 9 requires the creation of a market framework to incentivise energy storage technologies. Wind and solar electricity have the renewable energy support scheme. Energy storage needs similar financial certainty to incentivise development. Two years after the publication of that framework, these two actions have not been achieved. As a result, millions of euro worth of renewable energy, renewable electricity, is being squandered. The problem here is not judicial reviews, gold-plated environmental regulations or the climate action Act. The problem is the failure of the Government to prioritise the detailed policy work that is needed to ensure that this technology can work for Irish consumers and for the Irish economy. Will the Taoiseach commit to his Government setting a clear target for long-term energy storage needs in Ireland by the end of this year? Will he also commit to putting in place a renewable energy support scheme for battery storage by the middle of 2027 so that this waste of renewable electricity will come to an end?

What the Deputy said at the beginning is true. We are making very significant progress on renewable energy in this country. We have reached a record of circa 8 GW of renewable energy generation capacity, which is up from 4.8 GW in 2020. Onshore wind now provides very significant levels of power. Last year, we hit the important milestone of 5 GW of installed onshore wind capacity. We also reached the milestone of 2GW of installed solar capacity last November. In terms of solar generated electricity, in April we reached a peak of 1 GW on the grid. That is enough power for around 500,000 people. Solar generation went from zero to replace coal as the third highest source of indigenous generation in less than a decade. This is the progress we are making. There is about 1.91 GW of electricity storage systems with planning permission and connection contracts pending fulfilment with EirGrid as of last December. As the Deputy knows, we are pursuing offshore wind capacity. Particularly in terms of the auctions that were concluded over the past two years, if we can get those developed, then we will be in a very significant position in terms of renewables powering the majority of electricity. On the storage issue more generally, we will commit to setting a target. In terms of an incentive scheme or grants, as the Deputy has outlined, I will revert to the Minister in respect of that. Again, that is something that will be assessed. More broadly, the technology is improving all the time. There is a significant degree of private sector investment in the storage area, also. I have witnessed some of this at some of the openings we have been at. For example, in the midlands in particular, we will see further developments in that regard. However, we have made a lot of progress. We can make more progress. When the Deputy said it is wasted and so on, it is an issue of technology and technology catching up in terms of that storage area. That has been an evolving story for the past number of years. It is not quite there yet but it is making huge progress. We will do everything that we can to support it.

With respect, while the Taoiseach is right that it is an issue of technology, the solution is there. The solution is there in terms of battery storage and we do not have enough of it. What representatives of the industry told all Members of the Oireachtas from the Opposition to the Government when they were in with us is that the two key barriers to them are the lack of a national target for how much the Government thinks in terms of energy support that is needed and that support system to help them to deliver it. The Taoiseach is right that planning permission has been granted for plenty of battery storage units around the country but they will not get the financing if they do not see that there is a clear route to market access. The companies that are looking to set up here are mobile. They can support it in Germany or other European countries - the countries that actually have put in the work to put in those support frameworks to make it financially viable. What is needed is here is focus on getting through the policy blockages that exist and that can actually ensure that this technology that is available can deliver lower price energy for Irish consumers.

The Minister is pursuing these issues across the board. We certainly we engage in respect of a support system. When any industry comes looking for a support system, it is reasonable that the Government approaches that in terms of value for money, representing the taxpayer and to make sure that we do it properly and right. I will engage with Minister in respect of the issues the Deputy has raised now and revert to him.