Eamon Ryan to save Limerick

You attacked the typo. He missed an opportunity to do the right thing. Why exclude kids who spent 5 months and not 6.

Just because I don’t agree with you it’s not bollox. You are rattled here beyond what you need to be.

He’s also proven to be economical
With the truth and the electorate have seen that and dismissed his views on the referendum as you might say bollox.

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) has called for changes to the payments scheme for survivors of mother-and-baby institutions.

The scheme, set up under the Mother and Baby Institutions Payment Scheme Act 2023, opened for applications today (20 March).

While the human-rights body welcomed the scheme, it called for measures that would improve its compliance with “recognised human-rights and equality standards”.

## 180-day requirement

IHREC has recommended the removal of a six-month stay requirement, to ensure that all children – including children who were adopted, boarded out and fostered – who were resident in a relevant institution were eligible to apply to the scheme.

The organisation said that the 180-day period was not an indicator of whether a child suffered harm.

I didnt attack the typo. I gave a detailed post showing why i considered your summary of it as random to be wrong. I think its quite clear.

It’s the definition of arbitrary. There’s no objective or scientific reasoning behind six months as a cut off date.

This may be another case that Rodney has failed to disclose the reasons he arrived at the six month decision and as the Minister responsible it is his decision.

It’s caused a lot of upset to people who again are carved out by the State and feel let down and that they don’t matter because they don’t satisfy what is a decision based on no scientific or logical reasoning - is a child left in a home for four months not worthy of redress. Maybe Rodney has said why he arrived at six months and reasons for same but I don’t believe so.

It’s an interesting article written by a lobbyist. Have you read it?. It does acknowledge that the scheme goes further than recommended by the report. He also shits on the finding that the number 1 priority of affected people was access to information, which is bizarre. It also has a weird argument equating the enhanced trauma of a younger age with the length of time, notwithstanding that most did go in at very young ages.
Nearly everything the government does is criticised by ngos and various other interested bodies and lobby groups. That’s very normal. I remember you posting tweets by a very extreme lobbyist survivor who had the ear of a few tds including Holly Cairns. Zappone tried her hardest and regularly met survivors groups tried to accomodate everybody and found she could do nothing (while being stymied by fg). O Gorman took on the bill, met all the survivors groups, took all those hits and abuse and drove it through. His redress and support schemes came out of the reports comissioned by the state. You can argue its not fair, absolutely, but he didnt pull it from thin air on a whim, as arbitrary suggests.

1 Like

I don’t think the reasons for six months were published. Maybe they were.