Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Bacik, in particular, for tabling amendment No. 59. It is certainly a key issue for me, and a breaking point. First of all, I acknowledge the tremendous work that has been done by the committee and the Minister. However, all of that work was done on the backs of the suffering of women. We have to acknowledge that. All of these changes were forced, every step of the way in the whole process. I think the Minister would acknowledge that. I could pick any one of a number of examples, including the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes, the discovery of the Tuam site, the delays, leaks, misinformation, and the case of the Northern Irish woman who asked for her name to be removed. I could go on, but I will not, because it is out of context, except to say that trust is of the utmost importance when we are discussing this Bill. The absence of trust did not come proactively from the Minister. It is no reflection on him; he has done tremendous work. It did not come proactively from the Government or from the committee, that has worked very hard on this legislation, as most committees do. It is important to reiterate the point that it has come from scandal after scandal, leak after leak and tremendous suffering. The absence of trust with people on the ground in relation to the system is palpable. The Minister will recall when there was a webinar and people were not given copies of the report, even though it was reported in every news bulletin that they would be briefed beforehand. We are back to this legislation to provide for a right to records about one's identity. We are in the 21st century and the year 2022, and we have to bring forward legislation on this issue. We can imagine what women, and children who are now grown up, have gone through in relation to it.

What is happening under section 17 of the Bill is perfunctory. It sounds very serious when we say we have to balance the rights of the parents who do not want any contact. If the exercise in relation to the balancing of rights is necessary, it would be much more effective and in keeping with that obligation, if that obligation exists, to do what Deputy Bacik's amendment is proposing, namely, to send a registered letter to everyone. Without a doubt, what the Government is doing here is, once again, infantilising women. I note the Minister is shaking his head. However, that is exactly what the Government is doing. In his contribution, the Minister talked about the sea change that has come about, and the movement away from the working assumption that documents should not be released to the assumption that they should be released. That is nothing to do with a proactive system. I can think of people, straight off, as all Deputies can, who today are still struggling through the courts to get basic information. I can think of a person who has gone to practically every length to make it public, much and all as he did not want to. I know, on every level, professionally and personally, of the struggle and the difficulties that people have on the ground. We are continuing here, as if this balancing of rights is something positive, after much struggle and debate, when it is perfunctory in the extreme. It can happen on Zoom or it can happen on a partly connected phone call, given the way that our phones are interrupted on a constant basis. It is simply perfunctory, insulting and unacceptable. For me, it is key that this requirement is dropped from the Bill. Unfortunately, my name is not on the amendment. Otherwise, I would certainly be pushing it to a vote. I cannot accept this. It has been pointed out by those who will suffer the most, and who have suffered the most. It has also been pointed out by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and other human rights organisations. This is not a proper balancing of rights, if that is what needs to be done. We cannot set up the fundamental right to know one's identity against privacy in this manner. Deputy Bacik's amendment has gone a long way to balancing that right, within the Government's framework, which I do not accept. I accept it for the sake of the argument. I fully support this amendment. I hope it is pushed the whole way.

See this speech in context