Liam Fitzgerald (Fianna Fail)

The Opposition is in constant denial and in a permanent state of nausea at that fact. The Taoiseach publicly acknowledged the abuse and apologised for it on behalf of the State. Allegations that there has been no progress, that there has been only denial by the Minister for Education and Science, that there have been a litany of complaints from the various workings of the commission, that the Taoiseach's sincerity is questionable, that the review was brought about to reduce the remit of the commission, and that independent observers have stated the workings of the commission have been a disaster and a failure are wild, unfounded and totally unsubstantiated. I regret they have been made on the record of the House today. The Opposition is repeating the pattern of debate which took place in the other House last October and again last night.

The purpose of the commission, as Members are aware, was to investigate and inquire into alleged abuses that took place in institutions and to report on them. Chapter 8 is central to this matter. It outlines the detail of the commission's remit which is to do its job as stated under legislation adopted by both Houses of the Oireachtas. I take this opportunity, by way of vindication of the rights of and our belief in the credibility of witnesses to read into the record some of the detail of Chapter 8 of the report. On page 110, the commission outlines life in Baltimore school as described by the witnesses and states:

Experience of life in Baltimore school, as recounted by the witnesses, was so harsh and deprived by the standards of today as to verge on the unbelievable were it not for the fact that a contemporaneous record is available to give credence to the testimony.

The report, on page 111, states:

The witnesses described the appalling accommodation they were living in; the large dirty dormitories, the poor quality with flea infested and urine saturated mattresses and bedding...

The witnesses recalled the clothing provided for the pupils was not only inadequate but also a source of embarrassment. . .

Even by the standards of the time, the lack of hygiene and unhygienic practices described by the witnesses seem remarkable. . .

On the evidence the most startling failure in the treatment of the pupils in Baltimore schools related to food and diet. Every witness commented on the inadequacy of the food. The witnesses recalled that the pupils were not merely hungry; they were literally starving. They were compelled to supplement their diet by eating raw vegetables and vegetation — potatoes, turnips, mangolds, carrots and sorrel — by eating barnacles at the sea shore and by scavenging, begging and stealing in the village of Baltimore.

The chapter goes on to describe in detail the physical hardship, the conditions pertaining and the physical punishment and sexual abuse perpetrated on the residents of Baltimore school. However, the committee prefaced the account of the allegations of sexual abuse by stating:

Before summarising the evidence given by the witnesses in support of the allegations that they made of sexual abuse, it is important that the committee emphasises again that the evidence could not be challenged or contested by the persons implicated in the allegations or on their behalf.

The chapter, nonetheless, outlines harrowing details but is central to the commission's work.

It is necessary to respond to the assertions made by Senator Ulick Burke. Throughout this good report, criticisms are made of the commission's procedures. The Minister acknowledged that a number were justified but the Opposition has made little attempt to put the issue in perspective. Chapter 8 addresses the issues before the commission. Following publication of this report, the Minister gave his response publicly and in the other House and the Minister of State has responded on behalf of the Department but the Opposition has chosen again to denounce and harass the Minister and to side-step the issue. If the criticism is positive and intended to improve the process, it must be commended but it is quite the contrary.

It should be borne in mind that the Government is the first in the history of the State to acknowledge these serious problems and meet the survivors and its support groups. It is a little rich of the Opposition to denounce the Minister and the Government given that no Minister of the rainbow Government saw fit to take time out to meet support groups despite many approaches to do so.

The Government's strategy has involved setting up the commission and a number of other structures whereas the rainbow Government did nothing and ignored the survivors because it was in denial. Reference has been made to the failure of the Government and the Department to provide resources. While significant resources were provided, they proved inadequate, but the Minister never asserted he had the wisdom of Solomon. He acknowledged from the outset he was on a learning curve. The only similar inquiry took place in Queensland where, within one year, a report was drawn up. The Government was in a different position because of the Constitution and, as time has passed, the Minister, the Department and everybody else have been learning.

The contributions made by Opposition Members during the debates on the establishment of the commission highlight a lack of wisdom on their part in terms of the best way to approach its establishment. However, we are all wise in hindsight. Overall, the Minister has performed exceptionally well in responding to the difficulties that have unfolded. The report acknowledged there were problems in the Department and in regard to the quality of the directives that issued from the commission to the Department. The Minister has responded fittingly and positively and he has established reviews to ensure future responses will be even more efficient.