Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I also wish the Minister well and hope he enjoys his new portfolio more than the last one.

This week, Ireland's compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was examined by the UN Human Rights Committee. The State was found wanting across a range of areas but the committee reserved some of its most severe criticisms for Ireland's record on women's rights. Given the events in Geneva, I am surprised and concerned by the Government's decision to appoint Judge Yvonne Murphy to chair this commission of investigation. Members will be aware that the Survivors of Symphysiotomy group unanimously voted to reject Judge Murphy's proposed redress scheme. The survivors' group stated that "Each woman deserves to know that her voice has been heard by those in authority".

In a move reminiscent of Martin McAleese's treatment of the Justice for Magdalenes group, Judge Murphy took no account of the testimony offered by survivors of symphysiotomy. The group's chairperson, Marie O'Connor, was even more critical in her statement to the UN Human Rights Committee, stating:

The scheme is based on the official lie that these operations were medically acceptable. It forces women to waive their legal and constitutional rights before they know the outcome of this State's process. There is to be no independent board, women will have no right to independent doctors, nor will their lawyers have a right of audience.

The UN committee also expressed serious concern about the redress scheme drawn up by the judge. It asked the State whether the scheme, presented by the Government as a solution to the problem of survivors, is compatible with Ireland's obligations under international human rights treaties. The Government's decision to appoint Judge Murphy will not give the women involved any confidence that this matter will be dealt with properly, satisfactorily and in accordance with international human rights standards.

The committee also raised the issue of the Magdalen laundries, asking why the State refuses to investigate the abuses in these institutions head on. The Human Rights and Equality Commission made a clear recommendation that the laundries should be included within the scope of the inquiry into mother and baby homes. This recommendation has been supported by the Justice for Magdalenes group and their arguments are hard to ignore. They point out that the McAleese report only looked at State involvement and did not investigate abuse in the laundries. They have highlighted the fact that the institutions are inextricably linked to the issue of adoption. If this investigation is to look into adoption practices and related issues, the final report will have a gaping hole if the laundries are not included.

In a recent article on the subject, Justice for Magdalenes committee member, Maeve O'Rourke, also points to the Government's comments to the UN Committee Against Torture, where it stated there is no evidence of abuse in the laundries. Ms O'Rourke wrote: "The fact that the Government's position on the international stage is that systematic torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment, did not occur in the Magdalen laundries is reason enough for these institutions to be included in the upcoming commission of investigation". I would ask the Government to take a serious look at the detailed submissions on this matter, both by Justice for Magdalenes and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, when developing the terms of reference for this inquiry.

I have not had a chance to read in full the report of the interdepartmental group on mother and baby homes, published yesterday. However, I am concerned that this report is laying the groundwork for making the scope of the investigation as narrow as possible. The references to the cost of previous inquiries are troubling. I also have serious questions about the way in which the survivors of the homes and laundries will be included in the process. Both the McAleese and Walsh reports were heavily criticised for ignoring the testimony of survivors. Is the Government prepared to learn from these mistakes?

The mother and baby homes, Magdalen laundries, symphysiotomy and abortion rights all come down to the fact that, historically and up to the present day, the State has had a fundamentally misogynistic attitude to women. This expresses itself most severely when it comes to female bodily autonomy and women's sexuality. All of the women affected by these issues have been horribly wronged by the State. We cannot undo the damage that has been done but, at the very least, we must give them truth and accountability.

See this speech in context