National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill 2012

Like other speakers, I welcome the introduction of this Bill. It is very important and was long sought by many Members. I claim credit for raising this issue on the Order of Business for at least five years. It is well known that the need for this legislation was heralded in 2008. At that time, the then Government was advised to introduce it. I acknowledge it was otherwise engaged but the legislation was of considerable importance. Despite the current Government’s being otherwise engaged at present, I congratulate it, including the Minister for Justice and Equality, on introducing the legislation now. It is needed, and has been for some considerable time. It will prove to be of major significance in the protection of children and vulnerable adults.

In the past 24 hours, the main Opposition party generated a debate in the House wherein it claimed that the state of the health service was solely due to the alleged tardiness of the Government and Minister for Health. What that party’s Deputies forgot during the debate was the degree to which they had contributed for many years to the demise of the service. They had considerable opportunity to address the issues in question, yet failed to do so. Not one of them had the guts to admit this in the House.

This important legislation was flagged as long as ten years ago after a number of high-profile cases brought into the public arena information to the effect that certain people had been allowed to work unsupervised with children and vulnerable adults. This led to questions about the degree of protection children and vulnerable adults could expect. That sexual and other abuses were committed for a long time without legislative intervention is something of which we should be ashamed. The abuses could not have been perpetrated without someone knowing about them. People were moved from position to position, sometimes over long periods, and committed numerous offences, but an attempt was never made to address the issue fundamentally.

From the information made public at the time, we know that there was a recurring pattern. The perpetrator sought a position in close proximity to vulnerable people, who comprise a broad class. For example, some impressionable young and old people were easily led into unfamiliar situations over which they had no control. How often have we read the evidence of victims in these cases? They explained how, through the gradual process known as grooming, they were led into situations in which they suddenly found themselves compromised and abused and had their futures destroyed thanks to the State’s failure to recognise the necessity of protective legislation.

It is important to recognise that the Bill is not an attempt in any way to damage the character of genuine persons working in what is a vital service, namely, caring for others. As with all legislation, this Bill is only as good as its interpretation and enforcement. Everyone applying for a position cannot be held suspect. Instead, the applicant must be of good character and have the right intentions. The applicant cannot intend to defile the people for whom care will be provided.

The reality was far from this model. It became important for perpetrators to work themselves into positions whereby they could gain the trust of organisations and individuals. They would then use that trust to abuse unfortunate, innocent and vulnerable people. It was an appalling situation that should never have happened. People who were fully aware of it and did nothing were equally culpable. Neither I nor the Acting Chairman know how their consciences let them sleep at night. No Deputy can surmise what their thinking was.

Some cases involved children and young adults with special needs. It is appalling that they fell victim to people with long track records of abusing young people. The Bill has been introduced to address that problem and it is important that it be handled directly. People’s records should be carefully vetted, authenticated and truthful. Any attempt to pervert the course of justice or to tamper with a file will be dealt with strictly, which is as it should be.

Let us review past events. By virtue of a series of unfortunate events, perpetrators gained positions of trust and responsibility and were able to carry out heinous deeds against innocent victims. The number of times this was allowed to happen is appalling. We proclaim to be a caring society, yet there was little uproar. Why was that the case? We tend to disassociate ourselves from actions that are done in our name. We must address this issue. If a wrong is brought to our attention, that it went unchallenged previously is insufficient reason to allow it to continue.

The major lesson to take from this is the degree to which we are prepared to respond in future when similar abuses are brought to the attention of public authorities and public representatives, including Deputies. Some Members of the House raised this matter previously and I hope they will continue to do so. No reason exists for postponing action in such circumstances.

Someone always has responsibility. The State, its agencies and private agencies that take unto themselves responsibility for caring for others have a duty of care. Their responsibility does not end after the person appointed to the job goes home in the evening. Their duty of care has consequences. The State is liable in the event of no action being taken to address issues, as is only right. Following the passage of the Bill victims will have a right to seek recompense from the State if there is a failure in the system.

The vetting of the individuals must be carried out, taking in those people working with children, young adults and vulnerable people. The State will become liable by this process, which was lacking in the past. That is as it should be, as who will protect the vulnerable if the State does not? Who else has the responsibility?

In the past, we seemed to shuffle our feet with these kinds of issues, as we did with many matters. We have suddenly looked back over recent years and realised we should have acted in a particular fashion before. That may be true but why did we not act? I can never understand such behaviour, and I do not know if anyone else in the House understands it. There were some atrocious and appalling acts committed against unfortunate young people and adults, when it was well known that the perpetrators had a long history of similar activity. In whatever aspect of our society that occurs, there is no excuse for it. If there was no track history and it was a one-off incident, one could argue that the excuse could be that we did not know about the problem. There is no excuse whatever for an issue that may arise when a child or vulnerable adult has been sexually or otherwise abused by unscrupulous people in a position of power and authority and who exercised that power in such a heinous manner.

I hope in future we will not have to revisit matters like this or the kind of incidents we read about and saw unfolding before us over the past ten years or more. Ten years is a long time and much abuse took place in that period. Much abuse took place even in one year. We can have regard for some of the court cases of which we read over a number of years, detailing how some of these incidents took place over ten, 15 or 20 years. It is an appalling reflection on our society that this could happen. The Opposition may have had a reason for delaying the introduction of this legislation. I believe it came down to competing demands, and although I am sure the reasons were genuine, there is no acceptable excuse.

I hope the legislation, when put in place, will address the issues that have caused concern for many people who have expressed a worry about the well-being of children and vulnerable adults in schools, churches and State or voluntary institutions. I hope the legislation will be adequate to protect those people and that the vetting system put in place will be sufficiently strong to ensure no one can use the system to follow through on a desire to abuse people. These people may have psychological problems that need to be attended to. In the case of persons being refused authentication by the authorities, I hope there is an assurance that if these people go elsewhere and make an application for a similar post, there is no means to circumnavigate the system for their own objectives.

I welcome the legislation, which is much needed and long sought. As someone who has promoted its introduction to the House over recent years, like many others in the House, including the Acting Chairman, I hope it will have the desired effect of once and for all setting into history the unfortunate series of events that have damned this country with regard to child abuse and a lack of adequate protection over a long number of years. That culminated in the kinds of atrocities that we have heard or read about, and up to now we have not had the opportunity to act on this.