Audit should reveal orders’ true assets

THE decision by 18 religious congregations involved in the abuse compensation deal to carry out a detailed audit of their wealth, and to make this information public and transparent, is a welcome development.

This initiative will help shed light on whether the religious orders could contribute more than the €127 million agreed under the controversial compensation deal with the Government.

While it is unlikely to explain the motives behind the Government’s sweetheart pact with the orders, it should reveal the true state of their assets and property holdings.

Under the kid-glove terms of the deal forged behind closed doors with former Education Minister Michael Woods, the liability of the religious orders represents only a tiny fraction of the final bill estimated at €1billion.

It would be misleading to suggest their decision to conduct an audit means the orders will renegotiate the binding contract or that they will put more money into the compensation fund. As things stand, the lion’s share will be met by taxpayers.

Astonishingly, the Attorney General was excluded by Mr Woods when he went into key meetings where the Government gave the religious orders full indemnity against future legal actions arising out of the compensation process.

In seeking to justify its position, the Government claims the bulk of compensation should be paid by the State because it funded and controlled the institutions where abuse took place under the gaze of through civil servants, who turned a blind eye to what was going on.

As a matter of basic principle, it would be totally illogical for the State to carry a greater share of responsibility than the perpetrators who actually inflicted physical and sexual abuse on children. That would be tantamount to suggesting that a parent would be held chiefly to blame if a babysitter abused his or her child.

With pressure mounting on the Church, the decision to carry out the audit was taken after the proposal won the backing of Fr Seán Healy, the director of the justice commission of CORI, the Conference of Religious of Ireland.

Between them, the orders own vast amounts of property, including most of the country’s schools, plus major hospitals and extensive land holdings. In particular, the spotlight will turn on the Christian Brothers and the Sisters of Mercy, both deeply implicated in abuse allegations.

Going on the experience in other jurisdictions, it would be appropriate for the relevant orders to guarantee the proposed audit will be fully independent and not only cover property assets but also financial investments.

In Canada, where the Christian Brothers faced a flood of compensations claims, the order went into liquidation and claimed inability to pay.

Yet on further examination by an independent auditor, evidence came to light of far greater assets than the order had admitted. In the event, the state paid out compensation to victims and then proceeded to sue the Christian Brothers.

Putting a realistic value on assets may be difficult in today’s climate. A possible solution, worthy of consideration, would be to transfer property, such as a hospital, to State ownership.

No one wants to bankrupt the religious orders. But in the interests of justice they should be prepared to pay significantly more than was agreed under the Government’s one-sided compensation deal.