Mr. Martin Parfrey:

On behalf of Know My Own, I thank the Oireachtas for giving us this opportunity today. The main issues of concern for us are: the investigation of grounds for burial sites; the issues around DNA; the role of the coroner, which seems to have been excluded from the Bill; and that the Bill should come under the remit of a person with the status of an ombudsman, independent of the Oireachtas and the Civil Service.

We are particularly concerned about Bessborough. A company has two planning applications in for large residential developments on the grounds of Bessborough, where we believe there are possibly a lot of unexplained burials. More than 900 babies died at the Bessborough home but the burial sites of only 64 babies are known. Where the rest are is anybody's guess. The order kept no records and so they were unable to explain where any of these burials took place. We have heard stories, anecdotally, of babies being passed out through windows to workers for burial. They could be anywhere on that site.

In its final report the commission did concede it was highly likely that burials did take place in the grounds but that the only way this could be established would be through an excavation of the entire property, and this would be too costly. These are human remains, some of whom have close relatives who have been searching for them fruitlessly for decades. I honestly do not believe one can put a price on that. I was glad to hear Professor Scraton saying something similar at the earlier session today. Costs should not be a factor.

Apart from anything, geophysical examination of the grounds may suffice. There may not be a need for excavation. A few years ago in Cork Prison, geophysical X-ray equipment was used to locate the remains of Thomas Kent who died more than 100 years ago. This was achieved in a couple of days. I do not see why this would not be possible in Bessborough and all the other homes. I specifically refer to Bessborough because of the urgency of the situation as there are planning applications in the system.

With regard to head 65 of the Bill, which refers to the ten-year holding period for DNA profiles for any remaining unidentified bodies, we believe this is far too short a timeframe. We recommend this be increased to a minimum of 50 years. It only allows for DNA from parents, children, siblings or half siblings. Again, we do not see how this can be explained. Why could DNA samples not be taken from grandparents, cousins, aunts, or uncles?

Any method that might help to identify remains should be kept under consideration. The door should not be closed to any of these methods.

We also feel that DNA sampling could start immediately. It does not have to wait until the Bill comes in. Some of the people we are talking about are quite elderly and as they may not have a whole lot of time left, we do not see any reason for this to be delayed or why it cannot start right away. If these people want to make their DNA available; it should be taken while the time is still there.

On Bessborough, there are some heartbreaking stories. I have a friend who had a baby in Bessborough and her baby died in St. Finbarr's Hospital. She travelled over from England on numerous occasions asking for the burial site of her son. A nun tapped around with her foot to indicate where it was. It turned out afterwards, when the report came out from the commission, that her baby had been buried in the Famine graveyard on Carr's Hill. That is not right.