Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Miss de Valera, to the House. I am glad of the opportunity to express our opinions on the third and final interim report of Ms Justice Laffoy. From the Minister of State's address on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Dempsey, it would seem he is still in a state of denial in so far as he expresses the many things he has supposedly done in a positive way. The record speaks for itself. To claim, at the outset, that there is some form of closure at this point is an argument without substance. The third report is damning. It indicates a litany of failure by the Minister, his predecessor and the Department as sponsors in this particular case. The evidence is quite clear that the Department of Education and Science cannot justifiably continue as sponsor and respondent as the commission continues under a new chairman. I wish Mr. Seán Ryan every success in his work. He has a difficulttask, bearing in mind the history of what has occurred.

Three main issues are to be considered. When the commission was established, following the Taoiseach's apology to the victims on behalf of the nation, most people believed he was sincere in what he said. Whether intentionally or otherwise the public can see for itself that all the commitments given then subsequently rang hollow. The failure was in three areas, the first of which is the question of the commission's resourcing. It may be, as the Minister of State said, that this was doubled during the course of its investigations. In reality, Ms Justice Laffoy brought it to the attention of the Minister and the Department that it was necessary to provide adequate resources, at the time of the review initiated by the Minister, Deputy Dempsey.

Up to June 2002 matters were all right and the commission and the chairperson fully accepted that the resources promised at its inaugural meeting would be provided. Alas, they were not. The Minister's first intention and act were to review the situation. Ms Justice Laffoy immediately wrote to the Attorney General and outlined the consequences of the intention behind this review, which was essentially to reduce the commission's remit. This was the start of the Minster's lack of co-operation and obstruction in this particular issue. This led, thereafter, to a sense of tension that was never repaired and finally to the resignation in September last of Ms Justice Laffoy. If the Minister can justify his continuing sponsorship of the commission, he does so from a weak position in that it is he who must take full responsibility for a litany of failures.

Many independent observers would say he provoked the situation in which the commission was not allowed to do its work on the basis on which it started out. Its remit had to be changed and the Minister provoked the situation which brought that about. If that is the Minister's record on this matter, it is time he realised he must let go and allow an independent Department to take over. I am not sure whether the Department of the Taoiseach is the best option, even though Ms Justice Laffoy ruled out the Departments of Health and Children and Justice, Equality and Law Reform on the grounds that their involvement would be improper.

Why did the Minister deny the files requested by the commission? He justified that by saying more than 500,000 documents had been presented. The reality is that most of them were useless and superfluous to the task at hand. The Minister of State says that there are huge resources within the Department by way of staff — 11 lawyers and 37 other personnel. If the departmental personnel could only find that the majority of the 500,000 documents were useless, how could anybody, especially the victims and the public as taxpayers, have any confidence in the continuance of the investigation under the auspices of the Department of Education and Science?

Apart from resourcing, on which the Minister has failed, there is the whole question of refusal and obstruction. If the Minister was serious and wanted to bring closure to the issue, he would have demanded that staff in the Department provide files as required.

It was difficult to access files. The Department was given ample notification by the commission that it required all files relating to particular institutions. Is administration within the Department of Education and Science so chaotic that it was impossible to provide them? The result was a manifestation of obstruction rather than helpfulness and co-operation. That is a damning indictment of inefficiency, non co-operation and obstruction. Is it any wonder the eminent judge was forced to resign having exhausted her patience?

The commission will soon reconvene under a new chairperson. The time has come for the Minister to bring about closure for those who want it — 67% of whom are aged 50 years or more. They are crying out to have their stories heard. I was a member of the education committee to which many of them relayed the horrific facts that tortured them and each member who listened to them. Many of those who live to tell their side of the story are to be denied an opportunity to do so because of the new concept of grouping cases. Many of the people involved have told the Minister that is not satisfactory. Again, it is an issue of resources.

The Minister for Education and Science may say this matter is the collective responsibility of Government, but he is the Minister with responsibility for distributing resources within the Department of Education and Science. He has failed in that regard. If we are not to provide victims with the opportunity to tell their stories we have broken the first guarantee given by the Taoiseach when he announced his apology and the setting up of the commission. We were told by the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, that resources would not be a problem. That promise too has been broken. He walked away from this issue and all the promises he made. The deals he made are now a sorry saga of failure.

The Minister for Education and Science should reconsider his position and allow this matter to be handled by another Department. I ask that victims who wish to present their cases individually, something for which they have lived, be provided with the facilities and opportunity to do so. Whatever resources are required by way of staff and so on to bring closure to this matter should be provided by Government and the relevant Minister or, perhaps, the Taoiseach. The Minister for Education and Science should cease justifying what he has done in this regard. All he has done is to drive a very eminent chairperson to retire and caused disappointment to those victims who thought somebody was going to listen to and respond to them. We have an obligation not alone to the victims, but to the public to provide answers to the terrible deeds perpetrated by lay or religious staff operating institutions on behalf of the State. All of this will be in vain if we do not get proper answers.