Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I was all ears in listening to the concerns that Deputy Cairns raised. They were very detailed. I look forward to the Minister’s response to them.

On their way in here, I am sure most Deputies will have noticed that, yet again, Sheila is outside the gates with her display on the mother and baby homes and the suffering that went on. In that, she mentions the 9,000 children who are alleged to have died across the 18 homes. Sean Ross Abbey is mentioned, as are Bessborough, Castlepollard, Dunboyne and more. This reminded me of what happened about year ago when I watched a very interesting documentary on Al Jazeera. It showed aerial archaeology of Castlepollard and, around it, what are suspected to be graves. Whatever comes out of all of this, as well as from the legislation and the complications around it, we cannot just stop at Tuam.

I want to begin by acknowledging that the Minister listened to the campaigners and the relatives in respect of the Tuam case. Catherine Corless has said that the Minister has taken on board issues that she and the campaigners had with the original draft of the Bill. I welcome that. I specifically refer to issues around the disapplication of the Coroners Act to those sites. To listen to and involve relatives in the process of the exhumation of remains and the identification of those remains has been hugely important.

I also want to quickly raise a couple of issues that were brought to my attention today from the Separation, Appropriation and Loss Initiative. They have concerns regarding the Bill. They say that the Minister has retained a highly controversial provision that empowers Ministers to unilaterally decide whether a site is to be exhumed and investigated or subject to a process of memorialisation. It also says the proposal of advisory panel is unambitious and it severely limits the input and guidance for so many survivors and their representative groups. Notwithstanding these concerns, it is important to acknowledge that the Bill is much changed from the original version. Legislation that continues to ignore the wishes and views of those who were directly involved in this terrible travesty in our history cannot proceed. It is good that the Minister has listened to survivors and their campaigners on this. However, I hope this also shows that if there is a political will to respond to witnesses and to those who are affected, we can also bring it into other aspects of legislation around the mother and baby homes and their legacy. This is because we have acknowledged, in relation to this specific Bill, that there are serious questions on the wider issues connected with Tuam and other sites in the context of the loss of all these children, and their mothers and what happened to them.

The first issue I want to mention is the redress scheme and the attempt to place a time limit on it to those who can access it. There is an idea that those who spent less than six months in mother and baby homes should not be able to access the scheme. The Minister should listen to campaigners on this issue, as he has done in respect of the specifics of the Bill. It is certain that trauma and lifelong effects follow all of those who were in these homes for less than six months. That choice is an arbitrary and unscientific limit without any justification, either morally, ethically or legally.

The second issue is the predicted cost of the redress scheme. According to a report, a redress scheme covering all 58,000 survivors of mother and baby homes would cost €1.6 billion - civil servants are alleged to have warned the Government that this will be the case - and could derail attempts to support the survivors who are most in need. Let us be clear about this. I really want to emphasise what I am about to say. Many of the institutions and orders that operated these homes possess enormous assets and lands. Others have built medical and hospital facilities - empires, really - on the graves of those infants. Again, if we have the political will, we can and should seize the assets of those orders and whatever remains of the legal entities that they have evolved into. We cannot repeat the disaster of the Woods deal whereby a subservient State and political class allowed the church and its institutions to put a figure on what it agreed to donate to the redress scheme relating to the torture and abuse of children in this country over decades. Those in the church were allowed to manipulate and drag their heels for years. They are still allowed to do so.

I the Minister to show the political will to deal with the gaping wound that the commission's report has inflicted on the people who have been affected by this entire episode of our history. Let us be clear that the findings detailed in the commission report are not acceptable to many victims and survivors, full stop. This is not even to speak of a political level by Deputies and Senators, but of the people who are mostly affected. Several witnesses who testified to the commission found that excerpts from their evidence were taken out of the report. The report also contains inaccuracies, misrepresentations, etc. We all know how seriously damaging it was. We know that 9,000 children died in the homes that are under investigation. It is stated in the report that the commission found little evidence relating to issues such as forced adoptions, abuse and involuntary detention. Survivors have told us that the commission's findings flatly ignored and contradicted their personal testimonies. That cannot be allowed to stand. Moreover, it is not acceptable that a State-appointed commission should leave on the record the findings that institutions and religious orders were no more culpable for the torture and deaths in these homes than general society was. The attempt to lessen the responsibility of those directly responsible by referencing societal views is and remains the most egregious aspect of the report. We need to see a political will in this House to address and correct that. The attempt to absolve the sins of religious orders by blaming us all is further abuse of the victims. I will conclude by asking the Minister to show the same political will in addressing those issues as he has done in addressing the Tuam issue in the details of the Bill before us.

See this speech in context