Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will pick up on some of the comments that have been made in the debate across the House. We can have "incorrect" and we can have "illegal". I think that is a good proposition. I do not think the terms are mutually exclusive. I think that is important.

We need to be careful here. We are legislators and we are dealing with this Bill, but there are many hundreds of people listening in, looking in and reading the transcripts of what we are saying here today. I am conscious of that. This is particularly the case for an issue like this, which will be documented and will be covered in the national press and in all various forms of social media. Let us be clear about the message we are giving here. I cited the case of the children of a particular family, all of whom said it was illegal. They are the people who matter. They are the ones who have lived this life. They are the ones who have had issues.

I wish to focus on amendment No. 14, which provides that ""illegal adoption" means an illegal adoption". That is pretty logical. I understand that the Government has a job to do. The Minister is putting his best foot forward in terms of his legislation. It is the Government’s Bill. I will not be critical of it because I think there is a huge amount of positivity in it. I would like to be in a position to support this Bill. I want to put that on the record. I want to be in a position to support this Bill. I think the Minister has taken responsibility and has led on what has been a very difficult issue, as I said at the outset. This is one of a suite of different measures regarding people in institutional care, issues around the family, issues relating to people who were outside the family and inside the family and issues around childcare. The Minister is hugely committed to the Bill, as are his officials. I thank his officials for being today, as well as all the officials who have supported him around this.

I am saying I do not think that we are that far off. However, this is also about empathy and about sending a message that we understand what people have experienced. People are saying to me that there was illegality around the issues.

I would like to read some of the lines from the amendment before the House, which seeks to define "illegal adoption". It refers to circumstances in which "a non-marital child was registered as the natural child of the adoptive parents without the mother’s knowledge or consent and no adoption order was made". That is simple and logical. It is in English here in front of us. The amendment also refers to circumstances in which "a non-marital child was registered as the natural child of the adoptive parents and an adoption order was made". It also refers to circumstances in which a "child over a year old was sent overseas for adoption without the consent and knowledge of the mother". They are illegal acts. I do not think we should get hung up on it. They happened; they are illegal. I cannot understand why there is an issue with this. What is the downside of including the word "illegal" in the legislation? Could somebody explain that? I know the Minister will come back in. He will have an opportunity to explain this. I am speaking about what I am picking up.

I want to acknowledge the work of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. It has engaged extensively with all of us here on this issue. It has made some really strong points on this particular issue. I believe that this is the core. This is one of the core issues around this legislation. It is a fact that people had unfettered access into institutions and - I might add - into families. There were illegal - you can call it what you like, but they were illegal - arrangements made. They were supported by different faiths and different churches in terms of baptismal certificates, name changes and the falsification of documents that were required later in the State. There were many layers of people who were complicit in this illegality.

I am not in the business of laying blame with anyone at this point, but I am in the business of trying to equip people to understand what happened and empathising with them. It was an illegal act. It should not have happened. That is what we have to acknowledge. What would any of us in this House have to fear by accepting and acknowledging that it was illegal? It should not have happened. I understand the reasons it happened. These were different sets of circumstances, different times and different taboos. The Chair spoke recently about the issue of great shame, stigma and taboo. People did not know how to handle the situation. I am not going to try to apply today’s standards and understandings in retrospect to these issues as they arose in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s and 1960s.

I believe that this Bill is going to start to unravel many of these issues. I do not think it is as complicated as some of us think, as I said earlier. I do not think there is as much information out there as people might think there is. I know where the Minister is coming from, but this issue of illegality is critical, and is one we have to grasp and acknowledge. It happened. It should not have happened, and it was illegal.