Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak with the committee today. After the publication of the final report of the commission of investigation in January of last year, many survivors were disappointed and angered by the treatment of testimony they provided to the confidential committee. Having gone to the effort of engaging with the confidential committee and reliving what happened to them in institutions, many felt they could not see their own words in the final report. For many, the commission’s report, grounded as it was in the legal approach of a statutory inquiry, felt removed from the profound grief, loss and trauma of their lived experiences. From my engagement with survivors, I know the hurt that has caused.

As we know, the confidential committee module was created alongside the inquisitorial process to allow those with lived experience of the institutions to provide their accounts as informally as possible. Although this was envisaged as a way to allow the truth as survivors wanted it told to emerge, I recognise that this has not happened for many. In June of 2021, following comments attributed to one member of the commission, I indicated the possibility of a review of the testimony offered to the confidential committee. I have always recognised the importance of these testimonies. That is why I went to some lengths to secure the audio recordings of these testimonies when originally they were believed to have been deleted. I believe that a process with the capacity to record, preserve and recognise survivors’ personal accounts presents the most meaningful opportunity to address the concerns expressed to me. Such a process can restore choice and agency to survivors. The accounts will be housed in the national centre for research and remembrance. This rightly places the lived experience of survivors at the heart of our national archives in a visible and powerful way.

A number of factors have influenced the proposed approach. First, the core concern expressed to me by survivors is that their lived experiences have not been adequately reflected thus far. They do not see their words in the commission’s report and they feel their voices were ignored. Second, we must recognise the continuing influence of the legal framework provided by the Oireachtas to facilitate and direct the independent commission’s work. Significant legal complexities would arise in seeking to facilitate an external review of accounts provided privately and in confidence within the robust legal framework of a commission of investigation. The Government cannot, via a non-statutory process, retrospectively alter or interrogate the independent commission’s findings or methodology. We must be upfront about such complexities. However, this does not prevent human rights experts or others from conducting further analysis of these matters. Notably, part 5 of the final report details the sources used by the commission for the express purpose of supporting such work. Finally, I believe that such a review could not fully respond to the concerns of those who were unhappy with the record of their testimony created by the commission. It would not change the commission’s report and it would completely exclude those who had not had the opportunity to engage with the commission.

The new initiative will focus on respectful recording and acknowledgement of the lived experiences of those who spent time in institutions. The process will be underpinned by statute and operate on a voluntary basis with the consent of participants. Those who recounted their experiences to the confidential committee will have the option of permitting the reuse of this testimony and-or offering new or additional oral or written testimony. If someone does not want to give their testimony again, they can use the existing testimony that has been recorded by the commission, which was recorded orally by the commission’s archives. No one will be asked to recount their experiences again if that is something they do not wish to do. This process will be overseen by a team with expertise in human rights, trauma and memory, communications and oral history.

In advancing our deliberations, we are consulting with relevant legal and technical experts to develop the initiative in the context of work on the national centre for research and remembrance.

Most importantly, we will also consult survivors on their views. The initiative demonstrates the State’s willingness to hear about and to formally acknowledge the deeply personal accounts of survivors and I will bring specific proposals to Government for its approval.

In my time as Minister, I have endeavoured to improve the manner in which we communicate the actions we are taking to respond to legacy issues, to survivors and former residents. As such, I regret the indirect and limited manner in which survivors heard about deliberations on this issue, via a response to a media query. My preference, and my clear intention, was to update survivors using existing channels, which we do on a regular basis, to ensure that survivors are the first to hear of developments. To that end, details of this initiative were included in our most recent quarterly update on the action plan, which recently issued to our mailing list.

I have always been clear that the report of the commission is not the end point in our engagement with the legacy of mother and baby institutions. Last November, I published the Government’s action plan, designed to address the needs and concerns of survivors and their families. Intensive work is under way to deliver on this.

Members of this committee are aware of the significant legislative developments which have taken place this year. The Birth Information and Tracing Act 2022 was enacted in June. The information provisions came into operation yesterday. To update the committee, already 1,898 queries have been received by the website birthinfo.ie, with people inquiring and looking for access to their information. Similarly, in July, the Institutional Burials Act 2022 was signed into law. This morning, the Cabinet agreed that the final order establishing the Tuam agency would be agreed. It has been determined that no environmental impact statement, EIS, is needed in respect of the Tuam site, and that eliminates any potential delay on that ground. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has given approval to the Public Appointments Service, PAS, to appoint a director and that process may begin shortly.

All elements of this work are hugely important, and they are a priority for me and for the Government. I thank the Chair and members for their attention, and I look forward to answering their questions.