Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

First of all, I thank the Deputies for their support for this amendment and for their engagement with me over recent weeks when we were able to provide briefings on what we are doing here and the reason for the speed at which we are doing it, which I acknowledge. I also thank Dr. Maeve O'Rourke, Dr. Mark Coen and the special advocate for survivors, Ms Patricia Carey, for their engagement with me and with my officials in terms of supporting this section.

I will take a step back from the particular proposals here. As Deputies will be aware, in 2022 we voted to protect and allow access to the personal records of individuals - people who were adopted, were boarded out or were the subject of illegal birth registration. We made it an offence to destroy those personal identity documents and we gave people rights of access to them. What we are dealing with today is not the personal identity documents, but the wider institutional documents, such as financial records. We are not dealing with people's individual names but with documents such as those pertaining to the wider flows of money within institutions, ledgers and staff handbooks. We are talking about a wide range of documents that would have been crucial to the recording of how these institutions operated but did not list the names of individual survivors and former residents. These documents are extremely important in terms of understanding how these institutions operated. We have to recognise that they are the property of these institutions and that property rights are protected within the Constitution. We are placing a very significant restriction on what these institutions can do with these records. I will not make comparisons, but they cannot throw them out. They will no longer be able to decide that a box of files is in the way and that they want to get rid of it. It will be a criminal offence for them do to that. We are putting a very clear restriction on them.

I believe much of the information on those files will be hugely valuable for understanding the structures and how these institutions operated. I would like to see those files accessible through the national centre for research and records that we are working to develop at present. My Department is working closely with the National Archives. With Dublin City Council, we will build on the site on Seán MacDermott Street and allow access there. That will require legislation. It will require legislation if we decide that the State involuntarily takes ownership of all of those records.

It will require access rules in regard to the access of researchers and individuals. It is really important, in response to what Deputy Sherlock said, to say that in all our work, access to a person's individual, personal information is regulated by GDPR and the birth information and tracing legislation. There are strong protections there. When the national centre is opened, those strong protections will be continued and it will require legislation. If it is necessary to do so, I am sure whoever succeeds me in this role will work to enhance those provisions. We are absolutely focused on the information rights of individuals, survivors and former residents of these institutions and ensuring they are cental. What they want accessed or not accessed is a priority over research, over everything else. In fairness, any academic I have spoken to fully recognises and stands to that point. That is the higher level. I hope it describes where this legislation is in terms of the steps. We protected and provided access to personal information. Now we are protecting the more generalised information. It will be for future legislation to talk about access to that more generalised information. There is a balancing there. I am in favour of as much State control as possible but that discussion will require a more detailed piece of legislation and indeed a more detailed process than we have done for the present Bill.

In terms of the specifics of Deputy Connolly's questions, amendment No. 10 allows the Minister designate by order an institution, a relevant body or a relevant record. It allows an institution be added, a body be added, or a relevant record. That is quite a significant power to broaden out the application of what is here. The power given to the director of the National Archives is a power to demand an inventory of the files held by a holder of private records. If that is not provided, there is a criminal sanction as well. The criminal sanction is not just for the destruction, falsifying or exporting of the records. The criminal sanction is also for failing to comply with the action of the director of the National Archives. I would maybe draw a comparison with what was done in Northern Ireland. We are closely mirroring the provisions that have been used there. Those provisions have actually encouraged private record holders to go to the state archives and say they have something and they want to hand it over. Maybe they are not confident they can maintain the records to the degree necessary. There has been a significant transfer of records to the state records in Northern Ireland on foot of similar legislation. It is also worth noting that since we brought in the birth information and tracing legislation, it has also encouraged private record holders here. The ISPCC, for example, has handed over a significant amount of records to the Adoption Authority of Ireland voluntarily, and there is provision under law for that to happen. We resource the AAI in terms of the archive it controls and curates, and obviously the National Archives as well. This is another step towards the protection of and subsequently the access to these privately held records that deal with the wider institutional operations.

See this speech in context