logo
Survivors of Ireland's mother and baby homes risk losing UK benefits over compensation

Survivors of Ireland's mother and baby homes risk losing UK benefits over compensation

The Guardian2 days ago

Survivors of Ireland's mother and baby homes are being 're-traumatised' by the prospect of losing benefits in the UK if they accept compensation from the Irish state, Westminster has been told.
The warning comes amid a campaign backed by representatives of almost every political party in the UK and figures including Steve Coogan, who starred in Philomena, a film about the mother and baby homes scandal.
More than 100 MPs and peers from across the political spectrum – including both Sinn Féin and Unionist MPs – have now signed a letter in support of the campaign led by the Labour MP Liam Conlon, ahead of a parliamentary debate on Tuesday calling for a change in the law.
Ireland has begun the process of confronting one of the most painful chapters in its history by offering compensation to thousands of unmarried mothers who were shunned by society and hidden away in the church-run mother and baby homes.
However, up to 13,000 of those survivors who are living in Britain risk losing access to essential means-tested benefits if they accept the compensation, which can range from €5,000 to €125,000 depending on the length of time people were resident.
'Sadly, for thousands of survivors in Britain, what was meant to be a token of acknowledgment and apology from the Irish Government has instead become an additional burden,' the letter states.
At present, any compensation accepted through the Irish government's mother and baby institutions payment scheme by survivors living in Britain is considered as a recipient's savings. It can therefore disqualify them from means-tested benefits, including universal credit or pension credit, and affects eligibility for social care.
The letter adds: 'This complicated and stressful situation is putting undue pressure on survivors who are currently making applications to the payment scheme, forcing them to revisit their most traumatic experiences as they weigh up the cost of accepting compensation.'
The proposed solution, which is being called Philomena's Law, is to implement an 'indefinite capital disregard' – a legal mechanism that ensures compensation is not counted as savings for the purpose of benefits eligibility. Conlon said this model had been used for survivors of the 7/7 and Manchester bombings, as well as the Windrush scandal.
'Beyond ensuring that survivors are not forced to choose between compensation and vital benefits, our campaign has also been about shining a light on the mother and baby institutions payment scheme itself,' he said. 'Takeup is incredibly low in Britain and we want to ensure that every eligible survivor knows about it and feels empowered to apply.'
The bill is named after Philomena Lee, whose story of forced separation from and later search for her lost son inspired the Oscar-nominated film starring Coogan and Judi Dench.
'As one of the people who suffered unimaginable abuse within a mother and baby home, I know that, while financial redress doesn't fix everything for families like mine, it represents a measure of accountability for what happened,' said Lee.
The Irish government's redress scheme was introduced after an inquiry detailed the horrific experiences of about 56,000 women and about 57,000 children who were placed or born in homes, mostly run by nuns, between 1922 and 1998.
In its report published in January 2021, it discovered an alarming number of deaths of babies in the homes and documented the cruelty and neglect suffered. Many women were forced to take part in work and separated from their babies, who were fostered or adopted.
A DWP spokesperson said: 'Our thoughts are with the people impacted by this historic scandal. We are currently examining how compensation payments could impact benefit entitlement and will update in due course.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Geert Wilders collapsed the Dutch government. He wanted power, but had no idea how to govern
Geert Wilders collapsed the Dutch government. He wanted power, but had no idea how to govern

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

Geert Wilders collapsed the Dutch government. He wanted power, but had no idea how to govern

Earlier this month, Geert Wilders decided he had had enough. 'No signature for our asylum plans. No changes to the coalition agreement. The PVV is leaving the coalition,' he posted on X. After 11 months, he was withdrawing support for the Dutch prime minister Dick Schoof's rightwing cabinet, forcing the Netherlands back to the polls. The decision put an end to Wilders' far-right Freedom party's (PVV) first spell in power. Following an unexpected victory in the 2023 elections, the PVV joined a government for the first time in its 18-year history – alongside the conservative-liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), the centrist New Social Contract (NSC), and the agrarian-populist Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB) – although Wilders's coalition partners did not let him become prime minister. But the promise to drastically reduce immigration and implement a strict asylum policy proved difficult to deliver due to numerous constitutional and legal restrictions. The Netherlands now faces a familiar question: What is the 61-year-old politician trying to achieve – and how? Looking solely at his political platform, the answer seems relatively clear. With its emphasis on immigration, national identity, sovereignty, more direct democracy and stricter law enforcement, the PVV is a fairly typical radical rightwing populist party. In the European parliament, the PVV belongs to the Patriots for Europe group, alongside Marine Le Pen's National Rally, Viktor Orbán's Fidesz and Matteo Salvini's League. Within that circle, Wilders is one of the most prominent and pioneering ideologues, introducing a highly alarmist caricature of Islam as a totalitarian ideology of conquest. 'Walk the streets of western Europe today … and you will often see something resembling a medieval Arab city, full of headscarves and burqas … Mass immigration is rapidly changing our culture and identity. Islam is rising, and I do not want Islam to rise! Islam and freedom are incompatible,' he proclaimed in his keynote speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Budapest in May. In Wilders' worldview, Israel is the primary defender of western freedom against Islam and therefore deserves unconditional support. 'If Jerusalem falls, Athens, Paris, or Amsterdam are next,' he said in the Dutch parliament last week. 'Western mothers can sleep peacefully because the mothers of Israeli soldiers lie awake.' Wilders' anti-Islam crusade soon clashed with the Dutch constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion. To join the coalition, he put his most extreme positions 'in the freezer', as he described it – including a ban on the Qur'an and the closure of all mosques. Instead, he focused on curbing asylum migration from Muslim countries, repatriating Syrians and supporting Israeli military actions in Gaza and the West Bank (he consistently refers to the latter as Judea and Samaria). Yet, even in these areas, he faced setbacks. Under pressure from parliament and public opinion, the Dutch foreign minister, Caspar Veldkamp, has recently adopted a slightly more critical stance toward the Israeli government – much to Wilders' displeasure. In justifying the fall of his cabinet, Wilders mainly blamed resistance from his coalition partners, the bureaucracy, the courts and the media. But the truth is, he also has himself to blame. Nearly 20 years after its launch in February 2006, the PVV is still hardly a political party in the conventional sense. Exploiting a loophole in Dutch electoral law, Wilders chose not to allow any formal members into his party. As a result, neither PVV ministers nor parliamentarians are actual members of the party. Ultimately, he has failed to build and lead a professional political organisation that is capable of governing. Wilders adopted his party's unusual structure partly out of fear of attracting opportunists and troublemakers. But according to many observers, he is also a deeply suspicious and solitary figure by nature, someone who prefers total control and avoids consultation. His permanent security detail, a result of a fatwa, has likely reinforced these traits and made it even harder to establish a party structure. 'If I wanted to speak to a candidate, it had to happen in a hidden hotel, on the sixth floor, with six policemen in front of my bedroom door,' he once claimed in an interview. As a result, the PVV remains entirely dependent on Wilders' personal political instincts. While parties such as National Rally, League and Fidesz have large organisations with tens of thousands of members, local chapters, professional offices and well-funded campaign machines, the PVV is little more than Wilders' small, tightly controlled entourage. When he wants to change direction, there is no party congress or critical internal faction he has to convince. This is an undeniable advantage in today's volatile political landscape, but its cost is high. First, the PVV remains poor. In the Netherlands, only parties with more than 1,000 members qualify for state subsidies. The impact of this underfunding is evident in its amateurish election campaigns, low-quality videos, clumsy communication and a lack of skilled personnel. Second, the party operates in near total opacity. Its hierarchy, finances and candidate selection process are a mystery not only to outsiders – politicians, journalists, lobbyists – but even to its own supporters. As a result, many potential candidates and volunteers shy away. Who is willing to risk their reputation for a career in such a controversial and opaque organisation? Who dares to become a minister or junior minister for a party that revolves entirely around the unpredictable whims of one man? When Wilders was required to nominate ministers, he discovered he had no capable candidates with administrative experience, an understanding of the Dutch political system or knowledge of the constitution. He had never invested in training his own people or building a network of future administrators. In desperation, he appointed a few loyal early followers such as Marjolein Faber as minister for asylum and immigration; she subsequently got herself embroiled in a scandal for refusing to sign off on royal honours for individuals who volunteered to help asylum seekers and falsely stating that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was not democratically elected (she retracted her words). Other PVV ministers also stood out mainly because of their blunders and incompetence. After the cabinet's collapse, his party's ministers seemed almost relieved when speaking to the press. They had been cast in roles they couldn't fulfil and never truly wanted. Wilders claims he wants to become prime minister after the next elections. But does he truly mean it? There is little evidence that he is taking the country's governance more seriously. After the failed experiment of the past months, future coalition partners will also take this aspect into account – this week the VVD ruled out entering another coalition this with this 'unbelievably untrustworthy partner'. It seems that Wilders, the solitary ideologue, is really more interested in opposition, where the burdens of responsibility are far lighter. Koen Vossen is a political historian and the author of The Power of Populism: Geert Wilders and the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands

What to know after anti-immigrant violence flares in a Northern Ireland town
What to know after anti-immigrant violence flares in a Northern Ireland town

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

What to know after anti-immigrant violence flares in a Northern Ireland town

Police in Northern Ireland say 17 officers were injured during a second night of anti-immigrant violence in the town of Ballymena, where rioters threw bricks, bottles, petrol bombs and fireworks and set several vehicles and houses on fire. Police used water cannon and fired rubber bullets to disperse a crowd of several hundred people. The Police Service of Northern Ireland said Wednesday that the violence died down by about 1 a.m. Five people were arrested on suspicion of 'riotous behavior.' What sparked the violence Violence erupted Monday after a peaceful march to show support for the family of the victim of an alleged sexual assault on the weekend. Two 14-year-old boys have been charged. The suspects have not been identified because of their age. They were supported in court by a Romanian interpreter. After the march, a crowd of mostly young people set several houses on fire and pelted police with projectiles. The Police Service of Northern Ireland said 15 officers were injured that night. There were similar scenes after dark on Tuesday, as well as small pockets of disorder in several other Northern Ireland towns. Police said agitators on social media were helping fuel what Assistant Chief Constable Ryan Henderson called 'racist thuggery.' The town's history Some politicians said immigration had strained the town of about 30,000 some 25 miles (40 km) northwest of Belfast, long known as a bastion of hardline pro-British Loyalism. Jim Allister, leader of the conservative party Traditional Unionist Voice, said 'unchecked migration, which is beyond what the town can cope with, is a source of past and future tensions.' Some Romanians in Ballymena told Britain's PA news agency they had lived in the town for years and were shocked by the violence. Several houses in the Clonavon Terrace area that was the focus of the violence put up signs identifying their residents as British or Filipino in an apparent attempt to avoid being targeted. Henderson said there was no evidence that Loyalist paramilitaries, who still hold sway over Protestant communities, were behind the disorder. Past Northern Ireland history Northern Ireland has a long history of street disorder stretching back to tensions between the British unionist and Irish nationalist communities. Though three decades of violence known as 'the Troubles' largely ended after a 1998 peace accord, tensions remain between those — largely Protestants — who see themselves as British and Irish nationalists, who are mostly Catholic. In Belfast, 'peace walls' still separate working-class Protestant and Catholic areas. Street rioters sporadically clash with police, and recently immigrants have become a target. Anti-immigrant violence erupted in Northern Ireland as well as England last year after three girls were stabbed to death at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in the northwest England town of Southport. Authorities said online misinformation wrongly identifying the U.K.-born teenage attacker as a migrant played a part. Government appeals for calm Police condemned the latest violence and said they would call in officers from England and Wales to bolster their response if needed. All the parties in Northern Ireland's power-sharing government issued a joint statement appealing for calm and urging people to reject 'the divisive agenda being pursued by a minority of destructive, bad faith actors." On the alleged sexual assault, the statement added that 'it is paramount that the justice process is now allowed to take its course so that this heinous crime can be robustly investigated. Those weaponizing the situation in order to sow racial tensions do not care about seeing justice and have nothing to offer their communities but division and disorder.'

Did ChatGPT get the spending review right? Treasury minister gives his verdict
Did ChatGPT get the spending review right? Treasury minister gives his verdict

Sky News

time2 hours ago

  • Sky News

Did ChatGPT get the spending review right? Treasury minister gives his verdict

The chief secretary to the Treasury has called the Sky News-Chat GPT spending review projection "pretty good" and scored it 70%. Darren Jones compared the real spending review, delivered by Rachel Reeves on Wednesday, and the Sky News AI (artificial intelligence) projection last week. Sky News took the Treasury's spring statement, past spending reviews, the 'main estimates' from the Treasury website, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies' projections, and put them into ChatGPT, asking it to calculate the winners and losers in the spending review. This was done 10 days ahead of the review - before several departments had agreed their budgets with the Treasury - on the basis of projections based on those public documents. It also comes amid a big debate kicked off by Sky News about the level of error of AI. The Sky News-AI projection correctly put defence and health as the biggest winners, the Foreign Office as the biggest loser, and identified many departments would lose out in real terms overall. It suggested the education budget would be smaller than it turned out, but correctly highlighted the challenges for departments like the Home Office and environment. Watch what happened with Sky's AI-generated spending review 1:31 Reviewing the exercise, the author of the real spending review told Sky News that this pioneering use of AI was "pretty, pretty good". He added: "I could be out of a job next time in 2027, which to be honest, it's not a bad idea given the process I've just had to go through." The Treasury made a number of accounting changes to so-called "mega projects" which AI could not have anticipated, and changed some of the numbers. 3:43 Asked to give it a score, Mr Jones replied: "I'm going to give it 70%." The spending review includes AI as a tool to save money in various government processes.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store