Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for facilitating me. I apologise for missing my speaking slot. I welcome the creation of the agency in respect of Tuam. It is a positive step forward and something which we all know is long overdue. We all know the various people, particularly Catherine Corless, who have campaigned for this for a great length of time. We also know that time is of the essence in light of the age of many survivors and relatives of survivors. I sincerely hope that we will also see this type of development in other areas where it is deemed necessary. I missed the start but I believe Deputy Cairns made reference to the group that is outside today. It was one of that group's desires that this would not just be done in respect of Tuam despite those in the group coming from and representing Tuam. It goes to show the instinct among survivors to ensure that it is not just about themselves and their own individual stories but also about survivors as a collective. They are always looking out for each other, for want of a better term. It is important that this be expanded and not just be done for Tuam. However, it is also important to acknowledge that this is happening. It is a commitment that was made and is actually coming to fruition. There may still be some concerns regarding the role of the coroner although I believe they were clarified in the most recent draft of the legislation. However, any reiteration of that role would be helpful for survivors.

It is our first day back. When I saw that this motion was on the paper for discussion today, I thought that the commitment to an independent review that was made last year had to be mentioned. I apologise because I was late and so may have missed reference to this in the Minister's speech but, if he did not make such a reference, perhaps he could mention in his closing remarks what exactly has happened in that regard. We have all spoken a great deal about how, time and again, survivors, their relatives and their families have been let down. Commitments and promises have been made that have not been followed through on. We need a really clear answer as to what exactly happened there. People want to know. Obviously, we want to see that commitment honoured. People welcomed it when the Minister made the commitment last year. Deputy Cairns mentioned that people found out about this in the newspaper. That is something the people who were outside today mentioned. They feel really strongly about this. They were very disappointed to read about this in the newspaper. Is there another explanation for all of this? I hope that there is. Perhaps, if it has not been touched on, the Minister can expand on that.

The Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth will probably be inviting the Minister before it and will certainly be having discussions about this. It is important for survivors that any commitments made are followed through on. Over the years, we have had a history of letting these people, the vast majority of whom are women, down. They were failed by the State in the first instance. People who were made to go into these institutions or who were born into them started off being failed by the State. The last thing we want, as a more modern generation in this Chamber, is to continue to fail them in that regard. It is not good enough and we need to look at that. We need to ensure that any commitment or promise we or the current Government or Minister give is followed through on and acted on.

However, the motion is specifically about the creation of the agency. It is a good thing and a positive step forward. Hopefully we will see the same provided in the other areas where it is needed. However, I would like some clarity on what exactly happened and how this came about because, as far as I am aware, a review group was set up to look into who would be the best or most appropriate person to act as independent reviewer. When that commitment was given, it was probably one of the few times people felt they were being listened to. To see it being rowed back on is very disappointing. "Disappointing" is probably not a strong enough word. It would be welcome if we could get some clarity on that.

See this speech in context