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

The amendments tabled by Deputy Bacik seek to address one of the most significant barriers in the Bill, which is the mandatory information session. The committee's pre-legislative scrutiny report was unambiguous in recommending that the mandatory information session should be removed from the legislation and that alternative appropriate safeguards should instead be provided for, such as the sending of correspondence by registered post. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission stated the information session presented an obstacle and potentially a complete barrier to individuals accessing long-sought information. The Council of Irish Adoption Agencies described it as contradictory to the spirit of the Bill. Others classified it as insulting, discriminatory and restrictive. That it is still in the Bill in its current form is deeply concerning. It is ignoring the wishes of people affected and human rights experts. If we accept the Minister's argument that some mechanism is necessary to address balancing the rights to accessing information and privacy, then the registered post option should be pursued rather than the paternalistic and insulting requirement for an adopted person having to sit down with a State agent who explains what the person already knows. Adopted people are already very knowledgeable about access to information and privacy. They have been forced to be so by this and previous governments.

The Minister's position fails to acknowledge that the secrecy was imposed by State agencies and religious orders on adopted people and parents. There was a systematic and highly organised process to arrange illegal adoptions, falsify records and cover up the whole thing. The refusal to allow people access their personal information was always about this system protecting itself. Unfortunately, the ongoing restrictions with the general data protection regulation, GDPR, and the most conservative possible interpretations by State bodies continues. If the Minister insists on retaining this barrier, then in line with the discussions of the committee on children, Deputy Bacik's amendment would ensure that at least it is non-invasive and considered.

See this speech in context