Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this opportunity to speak on the Bill. One of the frustrations about it is that it should include other issues, on which people are generally supportive, but it does not. These gaps will be the problem. For many of the women, a small number of whom I know, there is a sense of frustration about one particular aspect, which is being believed. I made this point when we were discussing the mother and baby homes. The problem is the women had no control over how the records were kept. In some cases it is very difficult to prove where they were and this is a serious problem.

In some cases meeting the requirements of the redress scheme will mean proving the time spent in the institution, and piecing this together can be difficult. Some particular orders are forthcoming but others, particularly the Sisters of Charity, are most unforthcoming with their information and their records. They are letting down those affected by this issue and themselves by not being forthcoming because we cannot keep dragging out this matter and this will continue to be a glaring inadequacy.

One of the women with whom I have been in contact for a considerable time - I have known her for several decades - gave me a copy of a tape she made in the 1970s. She wanted to ensure she had a record of what she remembered. She needed to piece it together to put her life back together and have some closure. This was not about money for her; it was about something bigger than that, which would allow her live her life with some degree of dignity. She has a very good family around her and she had children, but she comes to me almost every week and we speak about this because she does not have closure. She has been denied the dignity of acknowledgement of where she was. I am sure there are others with fairly similar stories.

The compellability, which is part of the mother and baby homes scheme, is not part of this, whereby one would be sure the records would be obtained. I know this would be a huge undertaking. It is part of the reason I believe the Magdalen laundries should be included, even for this reason alone. The UN Committee against Torture has openly criticised four religious orders and the Vatican for their hesitance to produce the necessary evidence and records and to contribute substantially to the redress scheme. Justice for the Magdalenes has also made criticisms that not all of the recommendations of Mr. Justice Quirke's report, in particular recommendations surrounding health care, are being implemented. We know it is not just about having a medical card but the benefits that go with it. Everything is not being included with regard to the recommendations.

It is important that survivors of the Magdalen institutions are advised that full recourse to the courts is available to them if they so choose. These are all important points.

We have all received correspondence from constituents and non-constituents who were not in the Magdalen laundries but who have expressed their support for the women who were in them. They want this issue to be dealt with in a comprehensive way. The incident in Tuam horrified us all and it made world news, and why would it not? There is a notion that we have a certain reputation when it comes to financial matters, but what impression would people get about this island if we keep showing a nature that is not the true nature of the Irish people?

Deputy Boyd Barrett make a point about the direct provision system, which will be a legacy issue in the future. I know it is an issue about which the Minister of State feels strongly and about which he is determined to do something. The following is the test we must apply to ourselves. If a member of our family left this country because they feared for their life, or for economic reasons, and ended up in a centre such as a direct provision centre, would we find that acceptable? If we would answer "No" to that question, then it is not acceptable here. I know the Minister of State and I would agree on this, but it is not enough to agree on it; collectively, we must act to end that system. Otherwise, we will have people in the Visitors Gallery at some future date, in the same way as we had the women from the Magdalen laundries, and somebody will be in the seat that the Minister of State is in now making an apology. We must take responsibility for these matters. I am not saying there should not be an immigration policy and strategy, and a humane one at that, but it must be done in an efficient and fair way, and this cannot be part of it.

I have received dozens upon dozens of e-mails, as I am sure other Members have, from people who were not in institutions. That shows the attention being paid to the issue of the Magdalen laundries. It involves a very small number of women, but people want it dealt with comprehensively. I hope amendments to the Bill will be accepted to improve it and make sure it deals with the matter in the way people expect, and have a right to expect.

Regarding complementary therapies, if one has lived or existed in a very stressful environment, often one has to manage the stress later in life. Sometimes therapies can be helpful in managing stress and keeping people well. By excluding their provision, we may not be giving people the tools that would eliminate the type of stress that could become a health care problem for them. There must be an open mind on this, or a different definition for it, but such provision should not be excluded.

See this speech in context