Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North-West, Fianna Fail)

I thank the House for allowing us time to continue the debate on the Farrelly report, which began last week. A number of commissions have reported to this House in my time as a TD. Certainly, a number of them have left the victims or the people at the centre of those reports very dissatisfied with the outcome. We have to ask ourselves a question about the independent commission model.

It is important to repeat that the commission is independent of Government. It is essential that we re-examine whether that model of establishing facts, given the cost of it and the outcome for those people at the centre of it, is appropriate and whether we move forward with that model. A quasi-judicial or legal approach allows us to produce a report that is publishable and defendable from a legal perspective but from a social care perspective, what many people want to know is what changes need to be made for Grace and for other people in similar situations going forward. The Minister has talked about adult safeguarding legislation and I look forward to the work on that.

I was particularly concerned by the statement made by Ms Marie-Claire Butler, the general solicitor for minors and wards of court. While I am no expert in this area, the general solicitor put forward the case that she had made submissions to the commission, not in her own interests but in the interests of Grace and in the public interest. Her indication that those submissions were not referred to in the report is deeply worrying for the system of wards of court that we have and also because we knew from the outset that Grace, as somebody who is non-verbal, would not be able to give verbal testimony. When one legal office makes a submission to an independent tribunal, any layperson would assume that cognisance would be given to that. Perhaps more will be said on that in the future.

We need to consider this more fully. I have heard mention in the House that this debate should be followed by a discussion at the disability matters committee when it is established. As a future member of that committee, I would welcome that opportunity. There are a number of elements to this. For social care cases like this, is a commission of inquiry the right model and does it delivery any "value"? I use that word very loosely. I am not talking about taxpayer value but about having an outcome that actually changes the individual circumstances of the person concerned, gives him or her a sense of justice, a determination of justice and also makes changes to the system.

During the Easter recess, I spent some time trying to consume this report but it was incredibly difficult because of the layout and formatting. Perhaps that is because it is an incredibly complex case. I have listened to Deputy McGuinness speak on this matter at Fianna Fáil parliamentary party meetings over the years I have been a member. He has spoken very passionately about this case and whatever I know about it is in no small part due to the Deputy's contributions to our meetings. While it is incredibly complex and involves lots of different communications between officials and so on, I found it very difficult to find a consolidated version of the commission's findings. I found that I was really actively using the find function in the PDF to try to piece things together. The lack of an executive summary is a failing. In the past, executive summaries were criticised because they did not give the result that many people wanted. I refer to the executive summary of the mother and baby home report which many in the House at the time called for the independent commission to withdraw because they felt it was offensive. Perhaps on this occasion the commission made a decision not to include an executive summary to avoid a similar situation. However, the failure to have some consolidated findings made it very difficult for me, as a legislator, to consume what happened. I cannot say that I have read the report in full because it was incredibly difficult. It would require several readings to try to establish all of the facts in my own head.

There is more work to be done and the disability matters committee is the place to do it. I would urge the Government to consider whether tribunals of inquiry provide "value" - and I use the word loosely again - to the State but particularly to the victims of the injustices that tribunals often investigate. I do not believe that we can let Grace or any other Graces out there to remain in a situation where they may be at risk which is why adult safeguarding is important. I will be calling on the committee to examine the situation whereby the submissions of the general solicitor for minors and wards of court were not included. Perhaps it will be necessary for the chair of the commission to come before the committee in the same way as previous chairs have done. That might answer some of the questions we have. I will not prejudge the discussion of the committee but I will be calling for the chair of the commission to come before the disability matters committee, so that we can try to examine some of the issues that have been raised. I commend the Minister, who is new to her office, on the way in which she has addressed the issue. The proof of the pudding for this Government will be the actions that we take arising out of it. As someone who will be involved with the disability committee, I hope it will be swift and that we can work together to ensure there is some justice in terms of how things change going forward.

See this speech in context