Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I find it extraordinary, Sir, that the same battles have to be fought with regularity in this House and issues on which we should be able to agree across the Chamber become issues of conflict and debate, and which are avoided by double speak and ministerial tactics. If we learned nothing else from the Ryan commission report, the very least we should have learned was that those who were sexually abused as young people have suffered lasting effects on their lives, on their psyche, on their capacity to function, on their capacity to trust people, to conduct normal relationships and to maintain normal intimate relationships throughout adulthood.

One thing that is absolutely clear from the myriad of allegations and from the conclusion of the Medical Council is that Mr. Shine indecently assaulted a number of people. The allegations of three were accepted by the Medical Council. We now know that somewhere between 140 and 150 former patients have stated that they have been the victims of Mr. Shine. It appears that whenever allegations are made against people in authority or for whom society is supposed to have respect, be they medical professionals, members of the clergy, teachers or sports coaches, the wagons are circled, denial is accepted and there is no transparency or accountability. What is absolutely crucial, in the context of a functioning medical service in a democracy, is that where allegations have been made and have been substantiated by the Medical Council, that there is transparency and accountability, and an inquiry. The lesson we have learned is that victims, whose stories have been denied for many years, need to come to terms with what has happened to them in their lives, to have their stories heard, to have an opportunity to be believed and to be validated by an independent inquiry.

What I find extraordinary about this debate is that the Minister is opposing the motion. There is subterfuge and political game playing in the Minister's amendment. Her colleagues are supposed to support her for having met Dignity 4 Patients last week and for giving consideration to their call for an inquiry. Could the Minister not agree tonight that, in principle, there should be an inquiry? The form of that inquiry may well be a matter for discussion between political parties in this House. It does not need to be a decision uniquely made by the Government, but as Deputy Jan O'Sullivan correctly pointed out, if there is to be an inquiry, it should have a broad range. Its terms of reference should be agreed in consultation with other parties in this House, as has happened with many other inquiries that have taken place in the past. This is not an issue on which we should divide on a party political basis. We should recognise that where there are allegations of this nature about our health service, then they must be properly inquired into in circumstances where there has been no adequate inquiry in the past.

Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital has a very difficult history. Allegations were made against Mr. Shine, three of which have been upheld by the Medical Council but many of which have not seen the light of day, have not been the subject of inquiry, nor have they been the subject of criminal prosecution. The behaviour of Mr. Michael Neary went on for many years and blighted the lives of many women. In the case of two so-called esteemed doctors in that hospital, there was a major cover up and denial. To the utter disgrace of the medical profession and to staff in that hospital, the whistleblower, Ms Bernadette Sullivan, suffered as a consequence when she tried to alert the hospital management and others to what was occurring. Fifteen medical staff at the hospital, including consultants and senior nurses, testified in favour of Mr. Shine, which is to their eternal shame. They have questions to answer as to why they so conducted themselves. This was a seriously dysfunctional hospital that failed to acknowledge the need for transparency and accountability. Even in the context of the management of that hospital changing from the medical missionaries to the HSE, the tradition of a lack of accountability and transparency there continues to the present day. When there have been serious medical errors in that hospital, there has been a tendency to cover up and not publish reports of incidences that have taken place. It is an ethos that we must drive out of our hospital and medical services.

The general public want to trust their doctors. They have a great faith in the vast number of members of the medical profession who have done great good across our society. The Minister often criticises members of the medical profession, but the reality is that the overwhelming majority of them are dedicated to their patients and to good medical care. Where that trust is broken, the State has an obligation to ensure there is accountability and that issues are addressed that need to be addressed. I again ask the Minister not to divide the House on this issue. She should agree in principle to holding an inquiry.

More than 140 patients now report themselves to be the victims of abuse. The initial prosecution in respect of a small number of patients failed. One of the difficulties in dealing with sexual crimes is that we have no dedicated unit within the Garda Síochána sufficiently large to provide special expertise in this area. Whether it is a question of further investigations into the allegations against Mr. Shine, further investigations arising out of the Ryan commission report, or further investigations arising out of allegations not yet addressed that concern the treatment of those in residential institutions run by the State, such as St. Laurence's in Finglas, or Trinity House, Trudder House or Madonna House, the Garda should have a specially dedicated sexual victims unit that has the expertise to investigate allegations of sexual abuse in an informed and consistent basis. One of the great difficulties for victims of sexual abuse in this area is that they often have to go to their local Garda station and may be dealing with gardaí who mean well, but who do not have the specialist training necessary to conduct the right investigations.

Where there are whistleblowers who have sounded the warning about the abuse of children or young adults, they must be taken seriously. Their jobs should be protected and where people have lost their jobs in the past because they have blown the whistle, such people should be treated justly and their circumstances should be also the subject of an inquiry. In that context, as well as referring to the experiences of Bernadette Sullivan who heroically blew the whistle in this instance, I also refer to Loretta Byrne who heroically blew the whistle in the 1980s on abuse occurring in the institutions I mentioned, namely, St. Laurence's, Trinity House and Trudder House. She was an official working in the Department of Education who, from her perspective, was driven out of that Department for whistle-blowing, sounding warnings and seeking protections for children which the then Minister, subsequent Ministers and the Department would not take seriously. Her circumstances must be investigated. What occurred in these institutions requires proper investigation, with the institutions run by religious orders.

See this speech in context