Negotiations with Church totally inept

THE Government deserves to be roundly condemned for its inept handling of negotiations with the Catholic Church on the compensation package for thousands of victims of physical and sexual child abuse at the hands of priests, brothers and nuns in 18 religious orders.

By any international standard, the State’s lack of legal representation at crucial meetings is a damning indictment of the approach adopted by former Education Minister Michael Woods.

Blame must also be apportioned to Taoiseach Bertie Ahern for failing to insist on more realistic contributions from the Church. He finds himself in a quagmire of conflicting statements from senior Government figures.

The contradictory version of events from Mr Woods and former Attorney General Michael McDowell, now Minister for Justice, raises serious questions about the Government's motive in capping the Church's liability to 127 million while leaving the taxpayer to pick up the bulk of a bill which could top 1 billion.

Discrepancies in statements from Mr Woods and Mr McDowell will further heighten public disquiet over the Government's approach to the negotiations.

The forthright manner of Mr McDowell's disagreement with Mr Woods has posed problems not only for the former minister but also for the Taoiseach. A serious gap exists between the McDowell account and Mr Ahern's version to the Dáil.

According to Mr Woods, the Attorney General was fully involved in all legal aspects of the deal with the religious orders. But this claim has been refuted in a damning rebuttal by Mr McDowell.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Mr Woods is constructing a version of events to bolster his own position which, to an increasing degree, appears indefensible.

According to Mr McDowell, Mr Woods as Education Minister chose unilaterally to conduct key meetings alone. He claims that two meetings took place from which the Attorney General's office was actually excluded. He has openly expressed his unhappiness over the making of such important decisions without adequate legal input.

Astonishingly, when the Attorney General requested the full notes of all the meetings, he was informed that no such documentation existed. It beggars belief that a document had to be drawn up retrospectively to cover what had gone on behind closed doors.

It is incomprehensible that no contemporaneous record exists. for the negotiations between the Church and the State between November 2001 and January 2002. Those were the crucial months when the deal was clinched. Given the seriousness of the matter and the vast sums involved, it is mind-boggling that a record had to be cobbled together later.

Significantly, legal representatives of the religious congregations, including solicitors and senior counsel, were at the final meeting, a definitive session at which the State had no legal representation. For any Government to conduct its business in this way flies in the face of all negotiating practice.

Why did Mr Woods not have legal representation with him when he met the religious congregations for these crucial dealings? What was going on?

Could it be that on the eve of a general election, Fianna Fáil was hoping to buy the votes of members of religious orders? No scenario is too far-fetched for a party whose election campaign was riddled with lies and whose promises were broken as soon as votes were cast.

For Mr Woods to claim the State was mainly to blame and that it should, therefore, bear most of the cost is arrant nonsense. As one victim has put it, that would be akin to parents having to accept blame for the abuse of their child by a babysitter.

Admittedly, the institutions in which thousands of children were incarcerated were funded by the State and controlled by the Department of Education. It is equally true that some officials were aware of what was going on but turned a blind eye to the children's plight.

Having said that, the inescapable reality is that for decades appalling crimes against children were committed by the members of religious orders and congregations not by the people of Ireland.

Thus, in natural justice, the bulk of compensation contributions should come from the Church. Thanks, however, to the inexplicable agreement forged by Mr Woods, the Church is getting off lightly. There is now a compelling case for the religious authorities to show greater generosity towards their victims by greatly increasing contributions to the compensation fund.

By indemnifying the religious orders, Mr Woods effectively removed the right of victims to pursue their abusers in the courts. This serious omission has been roundly condemned by all groups representing victims. For him to defend this flawed financial pact by merely saying his critics, including the Auditor General, were wrong, shows how indefensible his position has become.

There is no denying the former minister was the chief architect of a deal aptly described by Labour leader Pat Rabbitte as "shameful, secret, negligent, and fraudulent".

But at the end of the day, the buck stops on the desk of the Taoiseach, who is increasingly evasive, disappointing and ineffectual.