Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

It was a different time. That is what we say in this country when we do not have the words to describe why so many people suffered and we do not have the answers as to how and why it happened. It was a different time. It is not easy to find the words to describe how we, as a country, treated our most vulnerable. It is difficult, painful and uncomfortable, but it is essential. We must find the words, however hard it might be. We need to express, in plain English, the painful truth of what happened in these institutions. We must say and acknowledge it and do what we can as a society to finally compensate for it. We cannot move on until we do.

What do we do when we ask people to come forward to tell their stories of what happened to them in mother and baby homes? They are stories of incarceration, heartbreak and abuse. We ask them to trust us, believe that the mistakes relating to previous reports will not be repeated, set aside their experiences of being mistreated by the institutions of the State and believe that things will be different this time. We say that this time, we will centre survivors, make a real effort to provide justice and get it right.

What happened instead? It is difficult to know where to start. In October 2020, this Government rushed through legislation relating to the commission, despite the concerns of survivors, the Opposition and the entire general public. The public outcry on the sealing of the archives came directly from the Minister and statements from his Department. He rushed through the legislation without scrutiny, unnecessarily. He claimed that GDPR did not apply and stated that that was the advice of the Attorney General. It then transpired that GDPR does apply and, in fact, that was the advice of the Attorney General all along. Again, the needs and concerns of survivors were denied and disregarded by the Government. I am not referring to a Government of the 1920s or 1940s, but to the Government of 2021: the current Government of which the Minister is a member.

We like to claim that we have moved on as a society, but abuse is still allowed to happen. This is how abuse happens and continues. In recent weeks, the commission said that it had destroyed 549 survivor testimonies. When, almost immediately, people questioned how digital files could be truly deleted in this day and age, the commission stated that it had carried out an investigation and could confirm that the testimonies were unrecoverable. In recent days, the Minister stated that he would not extend the life of the commission because he did not think it was legally possible to do so. When that claim was debunked, he changed tack and said that he did not want to extend the life of the commission because it would scupper subject data access requests. That was also debunked. When he was backed into a corner, the tapes were miraculously recovered.

It is ironic that people who are seeking the truth are met with so many untruths. The commission of investigation is due to be dissolved in four days' time. It has done good work in many areas, and that needs to be acknowledged, but there are considerable and legitimate concerns. There are questions that need to be answered. Who will be held accountable for the findings contained in the report? Who will answer the legitimate questions of survivors regarding their testimonies and stories? Unfortunately, it appears that commissions of investigation are designed to leave no one accountable. The Government distances itself by saying that the commission is an independent body and the commissioners refuse to appear before Oireachtas committees.

The report of the mother and baby homes commission is part of a series of reports, including the McAleese, Walsh and Harding Clark reports, that minimised abuse and violence against women and their children and sought to explain it away, particularly by undermining survivor testimonies. Many survivors who contributed to those commission reports say that the process was callous and hostile. Now we are hearing the same again. Dr. Máiréad Enright has noted:

It doesn't matter who the respectable messenger or figurehead is - the state has been doing this for years. This latest report is just the sloppiest and most expensive example.

Where is the accountability? Survivors are seeking the right to see that their testimonies are accurately recorded and represented in the report. Regrettably, parts of the final report appear incoherent and self-contradictory and contain leaps of judgment unsupported by evidence. The executive summary states: "Women were admitted to mother and baby homes and county homes because they failed to secure the support of their family and the father of their child." Later, the report shares details of women and children raped, some by family members, and vulnerable women assaulted in State care. The report includes the incredible claim that: "The Commission found very little evidence that children were forcibly taken from their mothers; it accepts that the mothers did not have much choice but that is not the same as 'forced' adoption." These statements ignore the testimony of survivors, testimony we now know the commission was determined to destroy. Such callous contradictions compound the suffering of survivors and undermine the credibility of the commission.

Why is the Minister preventing survivors from understanding why their lived experience was disregarded in the final report? What does the commission not want people asking about? What is the role of the Government in this? While it is a massive relief to discover that the deleted testimonies now, miraculously, seem to be recoverable, we are left with more questions than answers. If the commission is dissolved at the end of this week, who will be left to answer those questions? Will the Minister and his Department do so or will he pass the buck to a non-existent commission? The Minister knows that the term of the commission can be extended and he knows that this should be done.

Judicial reviews are a basic entitlement. Survivors and adopted people are entitled to challenge the findings and recommendations of this report. If they choose to do so, how can they bring judicial review applications against a commission that no longer exists? Should a mother not be entitled to judicial review to challenge the finding that there is no evidence of coerced or forced adoption or that the labour in the homes was not abusive but simply what women would be expected to do in the home?

The commission's recommendations are stark. It makes no recommendation of redress for women whose children were taken. The only recommendations for redress are for women who worked in county homes or in Tuam or those who had stays of more than six months. It makes no recommendations of redress for children other than those who were kept in institutions without their mothers. The commission ignores the illegal separation of mothers and children in its redress recommendations. If it turns out that someone's testimony is not recoverable, he or she should be able to seek a remedy under the GDPR in the courts, as required by EU law. The Minister has begrudgingly accepted EU law in the past and I hope he will do so again today. Finally, it is very important that the DPC is able to continue its investigation in order that we can learn what went wrong.

The term of the mother and baby homes commission must be extended if we are to have truth and justice. The commission's legitimacy is derived from the survivors, not the other way around. If the survivors say it is not over, then it is not over. That approach is survivor centred, human rights centred and justice centred, which is what the Minister promised.

All the progress on this matter has occurred in spite of the Minister and the Department, not because of them. This progress includes the acknowledgment that GDPR applies, the commitment to allow access to the Minister's copy of the archive and the last-minute discovery of tapes. All this has been achieved only through the tireless activism of survivors, adopted people and advocacy groups, with massive public support.

I ask the Minister to extend the commission and put survivors first this time. I ask Deputies from all parties and none to take a stand today and say loud and clear to the survivors that they will use their vote and that this time, it will be different. If the commission is not extended, the only question left worth asking is: whose interests are being served? It is not the interests of survivors. The Minister knows he can extend the commission. We all do. The Minister, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the authors of the report blame society for what happened at the time, to the effect that it was society's fault that this happened. Society is very different now. Society wants the Minister to extend the commission so there is no excuse for not doing so. The irony of people being met with so many untruths, even in the past week when this should be a truth-giving exercise, is simply unacceptable. People have had enough. Irish society has had enough. If society has the pull, punch and power that the Minister and authors of the commission report state it has, the Minister will extend this commission.

See this speech in context