John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)

I contributed to the previous debate on this issue. We were addressing what exactly happened to Grace. At the end of that debate, it was suggested that this House, as it represents the people, should insist on continuing to go back to the Grace case, to highlight the issues involved and to make sure that everything was dealt with. Since then, we have had various reports, including that which we are discussing. I am shocked by the manner in which the report has been presented, by the language in it and by the fact that you can hardly understand various parts of it. I am familiar with this matter. However, in the course of reading the Farrelly commission's report, it is hard to piece it all together. It is also hard to believe that it has cost the State so much money.

I have heard senior members of the Government say how bad these investigations are, how difficult it is to get what we want out of them and so on. In other words, they are not really fit for purpose. Yet, those people have been in government for a number of years. They had the opportunity to put in place an investigation - a commission of sorts - that would get to the truth and that would not cost this much money. What we are doing now is referring to the cost and the terms of reference as if we should no longer have commissions or reports like this. It is incumbent on the Government to establish best practice for the future.

Right now, we have this case. The question for the Dáil is: are we going to allow this report to sit as it is? Are we going to walk out of this Chamber and say that we have heard from every now and that is it? I do not think we should do that. We should pressure the Government to ensure that this case is fully dealt with. When the original terms of reference were presented to the House by Finian McGrath, it was stated that the commission would only investigate Grace's case. With the help of Brendan Howlin and others, it was impressed on the Minister that this was not good enough. As a result, he had to withdraw those terms of reference and take steps to include the other 47 placements. We are now back in the same position again and are being told "Here is the Grace case, and forget the 47 others". I will not forget them. I remind the House that, as Members who represent both the people and this country, and having regard to the responsibility that should be shown by those who run health services and so on, we should not forget them.

I have heard it said that so many changes have taken place that this could never happen again. Ask Mrs. Jones about that. She had an experience with Tusla that would shock people. She and her husband lost their house because of an accusation of sexual abuse made against one of their children. That accusation was found to be untrue. I raised that matter in the Dáil with previous Ministers. I was given replies to the effect that the matter would be looked into and that I should send on the relevant paperwork. I did so, but did not receive a single reply. I did not even get a phone call to say that the Jones family would be looked after. I have an email before me that contains the message "Please don't forget me". I want the Minister to understand that the Jones family would love to meet her to discuss what is happening now - not 30 years ago, but today.

I have another case where a child being cared for by Tusla is allegedly being exposed to abuse when he visits his father. This was reported to Tusla, which refused to discuss the matter with the boy's the mother. That is happening today. What is the Minister going to do about these two cases?

To go back to Grace, we may have paid millions for this Farrelly commission report but there have been lots of reports before this.

More importantly, there is the protected disclosure made by the whistleblower. It was not the HSE that found out about the case of Grace and this foster home. It came up at the public accounts committee under a question on procurement, when we discovered that people who worked in the HSE were now set up privately and were giving reports on various issues, paid for by the HSE, to the HSE about issues they were familiar with when they were in the HSE. You could not make it up. They are named in the context of the Farrelly commission and some of them are still employed in Tusla. If we are serious about safeguarding children, those facts have to be investigated. The Minister cannot tell me that the Government will give this to somebody else to look at. That would be a disgraceful and shoddy thing to do. It would be another effort to push the facts under the carpet.

This home was not recognised as a home. It took children from the HSE and the Brothers of Charity. It had private people coming in. The reports tell us how many in each year were in that house. The reports tell us in a factual way how the house was constructed and where these people lived - in outhouses. One child was kept under the stairs and was sexually abused. Another woman described how her daughter was sexually abused. She described it like this: her daughter would take off her clothes and put herself into a sexualised position. That could not have been done by a non-verbal, emotionally and mentally challenged person. It was felt in the case of that woman that implements had been inserted in her and that was part of the sexual abuse. The same description was given by Grace's representative. She turned up at a day centre filthy, doubly incontinent, destroyed, and having to be washed and cleaned by the centre. She was undressing and putting herself into a sexualised position that she would never have known about, lying down with her legs apart. Will the Government ignore all of that? It is not me saying it. It is there in the various reports by whistleblowers and by the staff within the HSE. The Government cannot walk away from this.

The senior person involved, who was a social worker but was senior in terms of administration, was never shown this file. He did not know that Grace existed. It was kept from him. The file was kept elsewhere and he did not know. It was a cover-up from start to finish. Every report since then has been a cover-up and a whitewash. I do not say that lightly.

I got a text this morning from another woman asking to please not let people forget her daughter.

In the notes, which are handwritten, of every single meeting with the HSE, I noted that the HSE's first reaction was one of, "My God, this will destroy the corporate image of the HSE, we will have to stop it in its tracks." It is written in the various reports I found. That is true. Are we going to leave that too and walk away from it? Are we going to allow those within the HSE at the time, who knew everything about Grace, to walk away, and do nothing?

The front pages of newspapers scream headlines about corruption, abuse and so on. Financial abuse is dealt with curtly in the report, which glossed over it. Not one single penny did Grace have when she finished in that home. She had no bank account. None. That is fraud in terms of social welfare payments and where the money went, but we are not going to look at that, according to the Farrelly commission. On sexual abuse, Grace had bruised breasts and thighs, black eyes and God knows what else, and there was an accusation that she was sexually abused and implements were inserted into her. Does that not cause the Minister to be concerned that this is not about just one case, but other cases involving men and women? They were young, non-verbal men and women and we are just going to leave it go. There is a case there for sexual abuse having happened. The Garda thought so. It sent five files to the DPP.

I covered financial and sexual abuse. There was also physical abuse. When a child turns up at a daycare centre doubly incontinent, destroyed, with filthy clothes, unkempt hair and eating all round her, both her food and everybody else's - that is contained in the reports - does that not ring alarm bells? Did the commission not see that? Did it not understand it?

In the course of the commission's report - I could not read it all but I read some of the transcript - I saw that the most senior person at the time did not know anything about Grace. Another person sent a submission to the commission. He delivered it by hand to the HSE at Lacken. The commission contacted him some time later asking him had he nothing to say. He said he had given a submission, typed it up himself, gone through everything in detail and got it signed for. The commission did not have it. It is a similar thing all the way along. We can go back to the public accounts committee and what happened thereafter, but the whistleblowers will tell us that despite all the correspondence they entered into, the key correspondence was never replied to. It was never acknowledged. That is why the greatest reports that are there to help are the reports that were written up by the social workers. They must not have been read by the commission. They would make a stone cry, so they would. It was the social workers who were telling us this.

In the transcripts from the commission, when an official from the HSE was being cross-examined on how it would approach things legally, it was put to that person that what he had been describing was actually legal subterfuge. He was asked twice in cross-examination whether he minded if it were described like that, whether that was the way the HSE would work, and whether that was what he meant by it. He said it could be called that, as casual as you like, probably knowing full well he was going to get away with it. In that commission, the HSE was armed to the teeth with lawyers of one kind or another. They cross-examined some of the witnesses in a brutal way. When witnesses then wished to cross-examine someone else, they had to do it themselves with no legal protection or legal representation.

There is so much wrong with this report and so much wrong with what the Government is suggesting, which is that we now give it to somebody else. Dogs are barking and the caravan will move on, but I hope to God that there are enough people in this House, across all the political parties, who will put down some sort of motion to bring the spotlight back on the HSE and the South Eastern Health Board to insist that they be asked to come before us.

I believe that the Farrelly commission and others should be brought before a committee of this House so that the content of these reports can be teased out. It cannot be let go.

See this speech in context