John Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I would appreciate if the record could show that I echo all of the sentiments that have been expressed by the speakers who immediately preceded me. I made a contribution in the Dáil last October or November when this subject was last raised and rather than just repeat it, I state that it was a very fair reflection of my sentiments, sympathy and support for the survivors of the mother and baby homes in the context of what we were talking about then.

Generally in society there is a lot of anger and frustration in January 2021 and into this has come the commission of investigation's report into the mother and baby homes. I am reading my way through the report, which is long. I commend anybody who has completed it at this stage and digested and reflected on it. All I can do is add my own voice to the voices of colleagues. We have a limited time in which to speak. I hope that we can come back to the report again in a few weeks when we have had an opportunity to digest it.

I know there are those who want to set the report of the commission aside and I understand the reason for that. When I was reading the executive summary, I had questions in my own head that I wanted to ask, but I wonder if it is a knee-jerk reaction. I say that for what I hope are good reasons. I understand the impulse behind wanting to set it aside, because in the minds of some it does not reflect accurately what the narratives of the survivors told us. I cannot believe that everybody has read right through the report to completion. Fair play to people if they have, and not only completed it but taken time to reflect on it. It is an incredible body of work. It has clearly been compiled painstakingly and thoroughly over a period by professional, highly capable and competent people. I know that it has not been fully faithful to some of the narrative of some of the survivors and I acknowledge the pain that has caused them.

I wish to focus on the aspects of parts of the executive summary which suggested that there was no evidence on the role of the church in regard to specific issues. I know that has caused anger and pain. I wish to look at the commission's report from another perspective. This is not a defensive perspective; it is a reflective one. I am not here to defend anybody. To blame the church completely is appropriate if it is accurate. Very often what we do is to blame the church or churches completely and let so many others off the hook, and very often we walk away. The authors of the report were being much more provocative than this. The role of the church was predominant, central and authoritative. To blame it exclusively is convenient also and allows the rest of the stakeholders to walk off the stage feeling exonerated. This is where the report is at its most provocative.

5 o’clock

The commission's report points out that there are other significant players on this stage, and Deputy O'Dowd just mentioned some of them. We cannot allow them simply to exit stage left or right.

It can appreciated from a distance of time that poor, uneducated people could find themselves subservient to authority. What of the intelligentsia, including journalists, politicians and writers? What about the senior civil servants and highly educated people at the top of Departments? What about the doctors, lawyers, visiting committees, local authorities and others? What stopped them from challenging this? Perhaps the answer is the church. The commission's report does not exonerate the church, and that is laid out pretty clearly in the entirety of the document. We must not miss the opportunity to look closely at the other players and demand answers for their action and, most of all, their inaction. The unparalleled high mortality rate of babies and children appears not to have aroused the attention of anybody. Why did this not get people's attention?

What should our legacy be to these women in 2021 and in future? I add my contribution to this. Having met some of the survivors with my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, two years ago, I was struck by how frugal some of their requests, needs or demands were. People have spoken about how we can make amends with reparations, and I absolutely support that. I will support any legislation that can assist them. My words may be clumsy but one of the legacies we can leave is an overdue conversation that this country needs to have about the relationship between church and State. That conversation could be initiated through a citizens' assembly.

Finally and in a mature and intelligent way, we should be able to talk about this subject and acknowledge the role of the church, whether it was destructive or whether it contributed richly to society. We should move eventually but not too far in future to embracing what we need from the church as a society. We should let go of what we need to discard.

See this speech in context