Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I agree that we have very limited time here and are, therefore, obligated to use it as best we can. It is a fact that the Minister has had the interim report for nine months and we are discussing again in some ways expressions of sympathy and disappointment. We are "ochoning" the things that happened in the past when we really should be focusing on what actions will be taken as a result of the content of the interim report and the needs that have been highlighted over the past period. While it is welcome that the Minister has said that tomorrow she will start seeking expressions of interest regarding the supports and consultation, I echo the points made by Deputy Catherine Connolly that it does seem to be in the context of what we are calling unaccompanied children rather than others and that this needs to be addressed. What is the timescale for that process? What access can people get in terms of support from dedicated staff? How long will that be? Do we know the level of detail or are we just seeking an opinion to see what we might do in terms of the supports because if we are, that is somewhat problematic in terms of the lack of detail?

The Minister suggested an amnesty in the Seanad in order to assist in the gathering of records. I agree that it is vital to get records. In fairness, it is an issue we have been raising for a very long time. However, an amnesty somehow gives an impression of a waiving of any criminal responsibility. There needs to be clarity around this. People do not need a history project or lesson. They need justice and the delivery of justice means that if we are getting access to files, the information from them can be used. When we talk about false birth certificates, forced and illegal adoptions and so on, it has been the norm to say that the Adoption Act 1952 dealt with those issues. That is not the case. We know that these criminal actions also took place after 1952 and we need to clarify that an amnesty does not exclude prosecution from the use of some of those materials, although the protection of records is vital.

The issue of redress is in many ways the critical one. We know the Minister has rejected the commission's recommendations and decided not to act upon them until the final report. I think that is wrong and that Deputy Catherine Connolly is right. The commission is flagging it as a huge issue and burying our heads in respect of it now will not change the reality. We know that the commission has not made any findings to date regarding abuse or neglect but that does not mean that there was no abuse or neglect. In fact, we all know that there was abuse and neglect so burying our heads now will not change that. It will be part of the final report and we might as well tee it up now. We need action and concrete dates and timelines on when this is being delivered rather than nice words, which are important but not enough.

See this speech in context