Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There is much political play made in this Chamber about the necessity for an apology to the survivors. On behalf of the people of Galway East, I would like to say sorry to those survivors. I hope they hear it loud and clear from this Chamber. I also understand how difficult it is for the Government not to get to its feet today and say sorry. It is the advice it has been given. I hope that whatever little sense survivors can take from that acknowledgement goes some way to address their circumstances.

I broadly welcome the terms of reference for a commission but I share the concerns outlined by my colleagues in the Chamber today. I ask the Minister to consider taking on board the observations made by all Deputies in the Chamber over the course of this debate. The terms of reference demonstrate some flexibility. My concern is that in the past, previous inquiries and tribunals were challenged in the courts in respect of that same type of flexibility. It would be better if the Minister would consider opening up the terms of reference for amendment, as has been proposed by other Deputies in the House today.

If that was the case, we could include three holding centres: Temple Hill, Stamullen and the nurseries in Fermoy; Westbank, Ovoca (or Avoca) House, Braemar House,

St. Philomena's and St. Gerard's; and St. Rita's nursing home and the second Regina Coeli hostel, which was the sister of another hostel in Dublin which was

included. If we amended the terms of reference, we could expand it make it more inclusive, get more information and seek as much justice as possible for those who have been injured by the past. The method of taking a representative sample of county homes is reasonable enough but survivor groups have requested through their Oireachtas representatives that the sample should include any home where a survivor from such a home presents themselves to the commission. It is unfair to exclude any survivor because we have segregated homes and said that one home will take precedent over another. It is unfair to those people who seek to have questions answered. It is not an unreasonable request and would provide at least a partial measure of justice to survivors whose circumstances are not provided for in the appendices. Given the large body of records and research that has already been gathered on the Magdalen laundries, it is inexplicable as to why we would turn our faces from these people. Even at this late stage, I would ask the Minister to consider including that data.

The treatment of women and children in these institutions and in society at large is a dark chapter in our history. We need to face up to it, be honest and complete this process in the interest of justice for everybody involved. We also need to pay tribute to those people by having an open, transparent and inclusive process. Given the mortality rates, forced adoptions, forced labour and the mechanisms of shame imposed on those people, they require the most inclusive process to ensure that this commission is worthy of the justice that is required. Society's shaming placed women and children into these homes. It ensured that the dark events of our past - the unsayable - were kept unknown. These mother and baby homes must be seen in the broader context of the scale of institutions that existed in this country in the past, be they mother and baby homes, industrial schools, Magdalen laundries and mental health facilities. It has been said in this House that at one point in our history, we had more people locked up as a proportion of our population than the Soviet Union. We know that society, State and the churches combined to shame these women and their children, sought to separate these vulnerable people from the rest of so-called respectable society and punish them for actions that were not a crime under any statute law. Rather, they were being punished for violating a harsh and unforgiving social code.

It is important that we face up to our past and state in unambiguous terms that the survivors of these homes have no cause for shame. I invite the rest of society to open its arms to ensure they can be part of the acknowledgement of the dedication, commitment and action for justice for those survivors. We know that church and State combined together and engaged in forced adoptions, aspects of whom continue to echo in respect of the refusal of certain bodies to permit those affected to have access to their own information. The long history of forced adoption in this country needs to be faced up to and we need to amend the law where necessary.

Worse still, those not adopted were often sent out as virtual slave labour on farms or in businesses owned by the so-called respectable persons in society. I have personally met former residents of the homes and I ask that the Minister include those people and allow them to make their allegations about the practice of child labour and the abuse that took place in rural Ireland in respect of farming out children as slave labour for the well-off. I have also met others who were farmed out to the infamous industrial schools and endured physical, mental and sexual torture.

We also know that vaccines and clinical drug trials were carried out on children in the care of the State in homes subcontracted to and run by the churches. This information is not new and has been known for well over a decade. In respect the extent of the practice and questions around it, we cannot be complacent about securing truth and justice.

This story began in Tuam and the many of the specifics of what happened there seem likely to have been common in other mother and baby homes. In Tuam, we know that almost 800 children died in the mother and child home enduring a mortality rate that was far higher that the prevailing national infant mortality rate at the time. We know that their deaths were recorded but not the circumstances of their burial. We know that some if not all of the bodies were buried in unmarked graves in or near the site of the home. We know that there are some skeletal remains within a tank, most likely a disused septic tank, which lies inside a local authority housing estate on the Dublin road in Tuam. In its high mortality rates and in its burial practices, Tuam was not unusual in comparison to other such homes. I hope the commission will examine the circumstance of the burial of deceased children. There is a need, unfulfilled since this story broke, for the State to take an active part with regard to managing that grave site. This matter is causing considerable distress to many families in that area who suspect that their relatives are buried there and to those living in the estate.

I have been contacted by some of them who have been distressed by the accumulating speculation and rumour about burial sites in that area.

We need to get into that location to clarify the nature of the burial site and the tank. Even if only one body is discovered, that will still leave us with almost 800 dead children unaccounted for. Even if we find all 796 children buried in neat rows and with obvious care, it will still leave us with a mortality rate far in excess of the national figure. The site in Tuam should be properly secured, as should any records connected to the Tuam home and to all other such homes throughout the country.

The fact of malnourishment being listed as a cause of death is worrying and requires investigation, as does the exact function and management of the dying room. Who was monitoring these homes, from the point of view of the State and the church? This State outsourced and privatised the care of the most vulnerable of people. Who in this House was responsible for ensuring accountability and transparency on behalf of the most vulnerable people in our history?

See this speech in context