Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this important debate which I sought last week from the Taoiseach following the broadcast of the powerful "Blackrock Boys" radio documentary. I commend the immense courage of those who have come forward in recent weeks to disclose abuse that they suffered at Blackrock College, in the other five schools run by the Spiritans, and in other schools too. I acknowledge the horror of the abuse perpetrated upon children in this way and the immense harm caused to survivors, their families and communities as a result. I stress the importance of the Garda continuing to investigate where alleged perpetrators are still alive.

Last week, the Spiritans issued a public apology to victims and announced the initiation of a restorative justice process. It is welcome to see this constructive engagement given restorative justice is a non-adversarial, victim-centred approach, but it requires acknowledgment of wrongdoing as a pre-requisite for participation by the offender or institution. Given the tone of correspondence I have received from the Spiritan Education Trust in recent days following my comments in this House last week, I have concerns about whether sufficient acknowledgement will be forthcoming. Indeed, in the past, institutions and religious orders have failed to offer sufficient acknowledgment of wrongdoing.

In any case, while I think we are all conscious that restorative justice can be a welcome process, it is clearly also necessary that an independent inquiry be established to run in parallel. It is welcome that the Minister for Education and the Government have committed to establishing an inquiry and to hear she has started meeting survivors, meetings which I have heard from survivors have been very constructive. It is also welcome to hear she is engaging with Opposition party spokespersons and Deputy Ó Ríordáin, our party's education spokesperson, will engage on this with her and other party spokespersons next week. All of us are agreed that the first principle in establishing the inquiry should that it be survivor led and, therefore, meaningful consultation with survivors must take place before any final decision on the format of the inquiry can be made.

Even so, a few points can be accepted by everyone, because whatever format is accepted or adopted, an inquiry should be capable of going beyond the six schools run by the Spiritans. If necessary, a modular format could be adopted to ensure an overall framework for the inquiry can be established for the Spiritan schools, on which the focus is currently placed, but that framework could be adapted to cover other institutions because we are all conscious that others have come forward in recent days to disclose abuse perpetrated in institutions that have not yet been the subject of any State inquiry. Such a framework could seek to review the extent of abuse perpetrated in each institution, building on previous reports published by, for example, the national safeguarding board. The framework should look at the existing culture of impunity, of turning a blind eye and of institutional cover-ups within specific religious orders. Crucially, a State inquiry should examine what the State could and should have done to prevent such abuse. In the context of the Spiritans in particular, as I said last week, any inquiry must address issues relating to the knowledge of those who are still in key decision-making roles at Blackrock College. We are all conscious that while systems have changed and both Ministers outlined those welcome improvements in child protection, key personnel may well be still in place despite the system changes and that has to be addressed by any inquiry.

I greatly appreciate the engagement I have had from survivors in recent days. Those who have contacted me want to see all these issues addressed. They want to see significant and robust outcomes as a result of any inquiry and cultural change in various institutions and orders and, crucially, they want to ensure no other children will ever have to endure such horrific abuse.

Turning to the format of the inquiry, for survivors it is about seeing outcomes. I acknowledge the Minister, Deputy Foley, will engage with survivors and that we cannot decide on the format of the inquiry until that engagement has taken place. Nevertheless, on reviewing the experience of inquiries and speaking from experience having represented the survivors of abuse in industrial schools before the residential institutions redress board, I offer the following observations about this format of inquiry. As the Minister noted, we should learn from pre-existing reports. Shamefully, these recent disclosures follow a long line of disclosures relating to the abuse of children in various institutions. Next year will see the 30th anniversary of the Kilkenny incest investigation report. I believe that, in total, 17 reports into child abuse in different settings have been produced since 1993, and we can learn from them.

Second, as we know from experience, such as in the Ryan report process, statutory inquiries can be protracted and lengthy, but they come with significant powers of compellability. Some statutory inquiries, such as the Dublin and Cloyne reports, were much more swiftly carried out. While a non-statutory inquiry may have weaker powers, those powers may not be needed where an order or institution is fully co-operative. The Ferns inquiry, which was swiftly conducted, was a non-statutory inquiry and there are certain advantages to that.

Finally, whatever format is adopted, clearly it should not in any way preclude live Garda investigations.

I again express my gratitude and appreciation to the many survivors who have come forward to me and others in recent days and who have expressed their wish to see specific outcomes from an independent inquiry. We look forward to engaging with the Minister on the shape of that inquiry.

See this speech in context