Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I support Senator van Turnhout's call for a debate on the report into the deaths of children while in the custody of the social services of this State. I am somewhat puzzled by the statistics which indicate that 84 of the 196 deaths over the ten period in question were due to natural causes. I find this difficult to understand and would like to learn more about it in the course of a debate. It is important that we approach the issue with real truthfulness. I realise that some people are linking it to a referendum on children's rights but, while I am reserving my position on such a referendum until I see the wording on offer, those who believe it is a part of the response need to demonstrate their case with clarity. As it appears that the failures set out in the report can be blamed on a failure to apply existing legislation and norms, we would be passing the buck if we laid the blame primarily on the Constitution.

This is a time in Ireland when church and State are required to admit responsibility for past failings and to learn from them in order to do better in future. It is interesting to contrast the scapegoating that occurs in respect of abuses within the church, whereby individuals are identified, their failures are raked over and certain demands are made of them, with the death of children in State care, which we appear to be able to discuss at the level of generality and the failure of the State and the HSE. Nobody seems to be calling for reports on who did what or individual accountability from individuals who worked on behalf of the State. Is anybody responsible for allowing these files to descend into rag order? The report refers to good practices but noted that they were sporadic and inconsistent. Will anybody seek accountability from individuals? I have previously stated that I do not favour a culture of resignation because I prefer accountability and reform. However, a double standard is on display. There will be a generalised discussion and a certain amount of media coverage but little outrage or desire to find out who exactly was responsible. That is before we even begin to discuss the individuals with ministerial office who should carry the can. Perhaps these issues can form part of our debate in due course and I hope such a debate will not be long in coming.