Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Comhghairdeas, Minister, and my very best wishes for the new role.

Initially I thought it was a pity that the terms of reference were not ready for today but I accept there is a vital need to get them right. I do hope that in the coming months that will be done, so there will be greater clarity on those terms of reference when we come back after the recess. I want to acknowledge the work of support groups and individuals who have been working tirelessly on these matters over the years, pursuing justice for the women and children involved, both in Ireland and abroad.

While work on the terms of reference continues during the recess, there will be an opportunity for officials to meet those groups in the interests of justice and getting it right. We are talking about a dark time in our history when there was little or no regard for women and children, especially those from poorer backgrounds, as well as others with mental health issues and especially children born outside marriage and their mothers.

The men are missing from that picture having not accepted the responsibilities of fatherhood. The men in the picture were responsible for putting daughters, wives, mothers and sisters into the institutions.

It is also an opportunity to learn from the mistakes and omissions of previous inquiries. There were drawbacks to both the McAleese and Ryan commissions. All parties need to be involved, and all documents must be released. I supported the inclusion of the Magdalen laundries in light of evidence uncovered by Justice for Magdalenes and the oral testimony that babies were born and nursed in the Magdalen laundry in Sean McDermott Street. Justice for Magdalenes uncovered Department of Health archives and biannual reports which contained information on 26 children in the Tuam baby home between 1953 and 1958 whose parents are recorded as a mother in a Magdalen home or mother in the Galway Magdalen home. The records for Galway and Mayo county councils also note that children were maintained at Tuam. We know that it was State policy in 1933 that unmarried mothers who had given birth for the second time would be transferred to a Magdalen laundry. There were connections between the Magdalen laundries, the mother and baby homes, the auxiliary homes and the county homes and hostels. However, while calls have been made for the inclusion of all of these institutions, two of the organisations most directly involved, Justice for Magdalenes and Adoption Rights Alliance, have taken a slightly different approach by calling on the commission to focus on the issue of children born out of marriage in Ireland since 1922 rather than on the institutions of themselves. They have identified various fields of inquiry, as follows: infant mortality rates in light of concerns that the rate of infant mortality was higher in the homes than in general society; issues of vaccines and medical experimentation, including the denial of adequate medical care; forced placing of unmarried girls and women who had given birth or were seen to be at risk of giving birth; the conditions for women and children; and the use of punishment, in which regard the McAleese report has been criticised.

I have seen evidence that homes were involved in adoptions to the US, including correspondence between the homes and the Department of Foreign Affairs, which makes for grim reading. A focus on these areas will bring the commission into the various institutions involved. We do not want to see inaccuracies or gaps after this commission has completed its work. The McAleese report found that 61% of known entries spent less than one year in Ireland's ten Magdalen laundries but the names project carried out by Justice for Magdalenes cast serious doubt on this finding through a comparison of electoral registers with Magdalen grave records. This research identifies issues pertaining to exhumations at Hyde Park and records for the Good Shepherd Laundry in Cork, among other matters. The McAleese report did not make findings on treatment and I think that is owed to the women who were in the laundries. This criticism should be heeded and, in particular, the voices of those who were affected must be heard. These include the surviving women and children, as well as those who have campaigning on the issue over many years with the aim of uncovering the truth. Although we are ashamed of what happened in the past, we cannot be afraid of facing the truth. It may be a cliche that truth can set us free but that is what we owe to the women and children concerned. They have been denied the truth about their identity for too long.

I wish the commission well in its work over the coming months and hope that the job can be done properly and comprehensively. It has to be independent and have statutory powers to compel evidence. All records must be made available and examined by trained archivists or historians. The process must be transparent, sensitive and, above all, accountable. We have to face up to the past and accept what happened.

See this speech in context