Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I would like to be associated with the tributes paid to her for the great personal interest that she has taken in the issue over the years and for her genuine hard work in seeking to bring the stories of the Magdalen women to light. She also sought to ensure that whatever measure of justice is possible at this late stage in their lives, and in the life of the story, could be done. The Minister of State has received well-deserved tributes in that regard.

I also want, at this early stage, to pay tribute to those organisations which have worked to collate stories and worked on the issue over the years. I compliment them for carrying out advocacy work very well and on behalf of the Magdalen survivors. I want to pay particular tribute to Dr. Martin McAleese. On reading the report I can state that it is a great example of public service by him. It is not often that politicians get an opportunity to do the particular kind of service that he did.

As I read through his report a number of issues emerged and I was left in no doubt of his compassion and that of his team. He is now a former Senator but I wish that he was here to listen to our tributes. Unfortunately, he has left the House. He was very determined to tell the truth, the full truth and nothing but the truth while sticking to his remit. When he made other observations he was also very honest in stating what he found to be the case. I was struck by his honesty right from the beginning. In his introduction there was the juxtaposition that "None of us can begin to imagine the confusion and fear experienced by these young girls, in many cases little more than children, on entering the Laundries." In particular he talked about those who did not know why they were in the laundries but others knew. One of the really sad aspects of the story is that some people did not know why they were there and they did not know why they were picked up and brought back when they left, and such like. The Senator rightly talked about the harsh and physically demanding work environment.

It seems that when one compiles a report like this one must navigate between the very legitimate remembrances of those who have stories to tell of the great suffering that they had experienced in their lives but one must also seek to understand the issue in its fullness. I note that, in a few paragraphs, the former Senator talked with compassion about the hurt that the sisters of the religious congregations had also felt in the way that the story has sometimes been told. They understood themselves to have responded, often in practical ways, as best they could to fraught situations. In many situations they had to pick up for the inadequacies of State and society and I say that not to justify or excuse one single instance of cruelty that took place in any given time in any given situation. It is right and proper that the Dr. McAleese should tell it as he heard it and state the fact that the majority reported that they did not experience the cruelties, the physical punishment, the ill-treatment and abuse that was prevalent in the industrial schools system.

As politicians - and I shall exclude all present company from my statement - sometimes reach too easily for the big statement or great emotional statement that we know will bring us short-term congratulations. It takes courage in the current climate to tell the truth gently and completely. Dr. McAleese came as close as I have ever seen it done, without in any way minimising the wrongdoings and the cruelties, and sought to understand the position of those giving and providing the service for the State, so to speak, found themselves in. Great credit is due to him for that. His report is a fine example of public service. For the first time his report provides us with an accurate picture of the Magdalen homes issue. A deep apology by the Taoiseach last week was appropriate, necessary and long overdue.

As a society Ireland failed and we failed these women terribly. For some inexplicable reason we turned to the institutionalisation of people who did not fit within the parameters of a society that we were sometimes trying to create. What an amazing cruelty and lack of compassion that involved. Dr. McAleese, in his report, found that the Magdalen laundries had a profound and enduring negative effect on the lives of the women involved. He spoke of social stigma and the fact that many women found the experience lonely and frightening.

The report also enlightens us in regard to the earlier perceptions about the profitability of the laundries, the birth of babies in the Magdalen homes, the alleged widespread cutting of hair and widespread violence against the women in the homes. He dared to tell a different story where he heard testimony to that effect. The main findings for him were of isolation, emotional hurt and, in many instances, a lack of understanding and knowledge of why individual women were in care. Of course all of that is serious enough anyway.

The report also states that the findings, in many cases, may encourage a review of some perceptions about these institutions and the women who were admitted to and working in them. The committee hopes that the facts, established for the first time by its work and set out in the report, would contribute to a more complete, accurate and rounded understanding of these issues. In general terms, he said that there had been a considered debate of the issue but he found, in some instances, a move towards blaming the religious for all that occurred.

My time is limited. I apologise to the Minister of State that I must attend a meeting in Blanchardstown at 7.30 p.m. so I will not be able to do her the courtesy of listening to her respond to our presentations today but I will read it with great care. I hope that the Government, in its engagement with the religious orders will produce, and I shall paraphrase to some extent what Senator Bradford said, generosity on all sides and creativity. The redress story has been a sorry story for many reasons. I would hate to think that the heavy hand of threats around public relations, or how things would be perceived, would be part of the negotiations on any side. We also need to address the societal dimension. Can we examine the possibility of a contribution being made from lottery funding?

A big part of this story was the failure of individual citizens at every level of society and within families, sometimes because they were vulnerable families themselves and sometimes because people in those families were criminals. In conclusion, instead of singling out State and church in those easy big terms, can Members consider opening up the possibility that all of us in society might be invited to contribute in some way? For example, this could be through publicly-organised fund-raising events or a contribution from national lottery funds. Members could have a longer discussion about some of these ideas, some of which may be good and others may need a lot of work. However, it is worth opening discussion about that at this point and I thank the Acting Chairman for her indulgence.