Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Members who spoke in support of our motion. I thank the survivors and survivor groups for all their efforts and for all the work they have done. Yet again, they have had to fight, agitate and campaign for rights every single one of us should enjoy in this country. Those of us in this Chamber have those rights while the survivors are left to fight for theirs. I refer to their right to their own information, their right to have that information rectified and the right to seek a judicial review of decisions public bodies make. I really wish they did not have to fight so hard for rights that should just be available to them.

I have been listening to the commentary this week. We have had so many twists and turns in the road. I have been reflecting on what it means and what I can take from it. What we saw this week was a clash of the old Ireland and the new Ireland. We have seen a clique that has come together and pulled strings. We have seen a power imbalance and we have seen an arrogance directed towards the survivors and their needs that is no longer acceptable in modern Ireland. The report that was delivered was probably the report expected six years ago, when it was commissioned. Ireland was a different place six years ago, but we have come a long way since then and we will not accept that kind of power imbalance and misinformation anymore. We will not accept the tone, victim-blaming, misinformation and inaccuracies in the final report.

I asked the Minister two questions during my first contribution. I am really disappointed that he did not use the final allocation of Government time to address the issues to which they relate. I found the speech of his colleague, referring to survivors pitted against each other, really disgraceful and unacceptable. There is absolutely no need for that. We are here for survivors. The Minister is coming at it from his own perspective. I would like to think he is doing what he really believes is right. We believe he is wrong in what he is doing, and survivors believe he is wrong. Pitting survivors against survivors is not how this should be done.

The first of the two questions I asked relates to whether the Minister can absolutely guarantee that every minute and second of the survivors' testimonies is intact and that a survivor who seeks her or his own information or story in a week, month or six months will not be apologised to and told the tape has been deleted - deleted by a commission that acted outside the scope of the legislation when deleting files. Can the Minister give an absolute guarantee? If he cannot do so, does not extend the commission and does not give people an opportunity to seek retribution or justice in this regard, it will be his responsibility.

The second question I asked the Minister was on the judicial review. Every person in this State has the right to a judicial review. What will happen when that commission dissolves? There will be no body that can be held accountable. Our country is looking for accountability. We recognise that commission was independent but being independent does not mean one is not answerable for one's actions. The commission needs to be answerable and survivors need to have access to the justice of the State through a judicial review. The Minister did not answer the question as to whether that would be available to them.

I say to all Deputies that it seems to me the tapes miraculously appeared out of the back of a sofa and everyone thinks that is fine, we do not need to extend the commission anymore and our job is done. That is not the job done. That report does not reflect what happened. The report will become the history of this State and by not extending the commission or allowing survivors to challenge the narrative of that report and the facts presented in that report, the Minister is allowing the rewriting of history. When the Minister - I was going to say "votes" but he is not even going to vote on this. He is playing political games and that is what we need to call out here. He says he is doing it so we can all work together for survivors. That is wrong. He should be actively extending this commission because we cannot stand over the rewriting of history like that. Any Deputy who does not actively seek the commission to be extended is doing so. I hope Deputies look hard and deep. They know what is the right thing to do. Please do it tomorrow.

See this speech in context