Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all those who came in today to lay out the facts that are known to many people but not necessarily to everybody.

Essentially the witnesses are recommending not proceeding with the Bill. The advice given by successive Attorneys General has been that a promise was made and a commitment was entered into at the time the then Minister for Education and Science, Michael Woods, did a deal with the religious orders. I have raised the matter continually over the years. The answer that has always been forthcoming, including at Government meetings, has been that a promise was given about the destruction of the records.

This morning's contributions, particularly by the lawyers, Dr. O'Rourke and Dr. Logue, have has been very helpful. Freedom of information legislation, which is very strong in Ireland, the Data Protection Commission and GDPR all emphasise the right of individuals to their records over and above, as I understand it, what rights the State may have. However, in this respect there is what is sometimes called in America a deep state, where a set of attitudes has rolled on as an inheritance from what happened in the institutions and what happened to children in different circumstances, who for one reason or another became institutionalised. I do not think that those arguments will be easily let go.

I have been surprised at times to meet people many years younger than I am who still believe and certainly put forward the argument that as a promise was made, the promise needs to be kept even if I and many other people might believe it was an invalid promise because the people about whom it was made were never consulted.

Other people, particularly lawyers, tell me that the legislation we have in Ireland is very robust.

That should be summarised so that that argument is made to people who are making decisions about the legislation at the moment. The proposed legislation should be stalled; perhaps it is entirely unnecessary. I have an open mind about it.

We have seen the emergence of the 125 or 130 fraudulent or falsified birth certificates, which is probably only the tip of the iceberg. Since GDPR came in, Tusla is absolutely refusing to give any information. I have attended meetings with the Minister and with other Members of the Oireachtas at which it has reiterated that refusal. At some of the meetings when, for instance, the issue of birth mothers came up, representatives of Tusla have said to people like me, "Our birth mothers", meaning that in an institutional sense the birth mothers are being minded by Tusla. One of the protections it is offering to birth mothers is that their children will not have access to data when in practice most - although not all - have been quite amenable to information sharing and to information being made available, which is not the same as contact.

What has been said this morning is very important. Do the witnesses believe that the powers they mentioned under the National Archives Act, the freedom of information legislation, GDPR and the Data Protection Commission are strong enough to address these issues? Do those powers mean that this new legislation, which is being offered as a must-do alternative on the basis of the promises made as part of the Michael Woods deal, is not particularly necessary?