I pay tribute to the Minister for commissioning this report and to the former Senator McGuinness for producing the report so quickly. The Kilkenny incest investigation report is horrific and chilling. Anyone who has read it has been horrified by it. It has many fine, worthy recommendations. The speed with which the Minister for Health and the Government as a whole have indicated a willingness to act on its findings and to provide over £30 million for their implementation is heartening and encouraging, but we cannot let the promise of future improvements in the health and welfare services and their capacity for effective intervention in child abuse cases could our judgment on the appalling failures of the existing public services as revealed in this report, particularly since the same practices still exist.
I have to conclude that this report unveils a scandalous level of incompetence bordering on negligence in the public services, notably by the South Eastern Health Board, and apparent inaction by the local gardaí, who on one occasion actually assisted the victim's violent father in tracking her down in a refuge in Dublin. This report cries out for greater explanation than has been offered either in the text of the report or by the Minister here today or by any of the officials, including the chief executive officer of that health board. There is an indecent haste for us to move on to the general and away from the specific. We are being urged, for instance, to almost see this case as a learning point through which we can improve our laws and our capacity to deal with child abuse in the future. The Minister has called it a milestone of social reform.
The Minister stated that he does not want to make a scapegoat of anybody. Neither do I; but this report, for all its fine, compassionate recommendations is a whitewash and a further betrayal of the unfortunate victim, whom we call Mary in the report. It is not good enough in this day and age, in the wake of this legacy of incompetence and neglect by various South Eastern Health Board personnel and the local gardaí in the ten year period from 1982 to 1992, that nobody is being held accountable. There is a failure to catch anyone's eye in the report, a similar evasion to that experienced by Mary over the years.
Why do we as a community invest all of our resources in the provision of such vital services as gardaí, social workers and public health nurses? We do so to prevent the criminal and sustained abuse of children like Mary, or at least to ensure when they come to light that there is effective intervention to end it. Yet we learn from this report that although Mary told social workers at the end of 1982 that there was violence and incest in her home, that her father was the father of her six month old baby, that he beat her, her mother and her younger sister and that all of this was confirmed then and there by her mother, it was to be almost ten years before effective action was taken by the authorities to tackle her nightmare.
Unfortunately, the fanfare of publicity with which the Minister announced the good news about future investment in childcare services last week — and that is all very welcome — has resulted, whether intentionally or otherwise, in the full brutal truth of the Kilkenny incest investigation not getting across to the general public. I have no doubt that there are people who believe that here was a case of appalling child abuse that slipped through the net because the victim did not tell anybody or perhaps because the social services were so stretched that they could not reach her. Neither supposition is correct. Mary was disclosing her orderal whenever she had an opportunity over the ten year period. She told social workers, public health nurses and doctors and nobody cried stop. Probably busy, well intentioned professionals wrote up their case notes, although there were serious omissions in the recording of those notes. They sought advice here and there, but nobody cried stop. On page 64 of the report it says that on September 4, 1985, at a meeting of no fewer than five professionals — the local public health nurse, a senior public health nurse, an area social worker, an acting senior social worker and a senior area medical officer — discussed "Mary's" case. What was their conclusion? Surely we could have had effective action after that, but we only had more worthy aspirations. The report tell us that these five professionals concluded:
It is necessary to find truth of Mary's allegations against her father. Get Garda to keep a watch if necessary and see for ourselves if someone is being battered.
Inherent in this conclusion was an obvious disbelief of Mary and lethargy to act. As far back as 1982 Mary had revealed that she was the victim of incestuous violence. In all, as we now know, Mary had no fewer than 115 contacts with the health services throughout the long nightmare of her life of violent abuse by her father. Yet, over six years elapsed before effective action by Garda Agnes Reddy and her detective colleague brought effective intervention to help Mary and bring the physical aspects of the abuse to an end.
I am driven to the conclusion, having read the report carefully, that for all its good recommendations it is no less a scandal than the decade of official incompetence and neglect which it reveals in the South Eastern Health Board. The Minister says we must not seek scapegoats. What does he mean? It is simply unreal and bizarre if nobody is held accountable for this extraordinary and appalling litany of official failure.
Cian O Tiarnaigh of the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children is right in saying that claims that the report exonerates the professionals involved in this case are "sick-making". Dr. Joseph Robins, a former assistant secretary at the Department of Health is also right when he says it is "clear that the misery suffered by this young woman, for so long, arises less from the lack of legal provisions and health board resources than from what appears to be gross indifference by far too many people in authority at the brutalisation of women and children".
Even today we see reports that measures to allow children who have been sexually abused to give evidence by video link are being challenged on the grounds that the rights of the accused might possibly be compromised. Our jurisprudence as to the rights of children is undeveloped and pitched against children's rights is a mountain of jurisprudence to protect the accused.
Dr. Robins also points out, for instance, that child abuse guidelines have been in existence for the health boards since 1977 and have been revised and updated occasionally. The South Eastern Health Board, therefore, can hardly have been unaware of public policy in this area.
The report is also deficient because of the inexplicable decision not to interview the two banghardaí who eventually took effective action in this case. Indeed, the only two people who took action were not invited to give evidence. The report lamely tells us on page 79 that "the investigation team were not given the opportunity to hear evidence from the gardaí actually involved in the case". Why not? This is a disgraceful omission from the report, we are presented with bureaucratic packaging and expected to settle for Garda evidence from a deputy commissioner on general matters of principle and policy but not the specifics of the handling of this case. I hope Garda Reddy is in the gallery today.
The terms of reference of the inquiry team were twofold: to carry out an investigation, in so far as the health services are concerned, of the circumstances surrounding the case and, in particular, to establish why action to halt the abuse was not taken earlier and, second, to make recommendations. The second part of the report has been delivered in sterling fashion while I welcome the recommendations which have been made which go beyond the provisions of the Child Care Act.
As to the investigation, the report presents us with a disjointed audit of professional incompetence and inaction which borders on negligence. Presented as they are, dispassionately, they still manage to paint a pattern of abuse and horror which is barely credible. The Minister has asked us to be reasonable, to look forward and not back but I cannot be reasonable when I am furious. Is it any wonder that the victim in this case said she is unhappy with the report? She has every reason to be because her case seems to be impervious to justice. Piled on the physical and sexual abuse by her father rests the incompetence of those who had statutory and professional responsibility for her safety. This report exonerates all, offers the victim nothing.
The Minister's plea for reason and for us to look forward constructively denies us the right to be furious. Anger should be expressed about the shortcomings of those involved in the South-Eastern Health Board. It is unacceptable that she could have slipped through every net in the system.
These bad practices, such as the failure to record properly conversations with her or to follow up on broken appointments and — worst of all — the failure to be pro-active in intervening when she had disclosed violent incest have been collectively excused as being understandable or the norm for that time in the context of "prevailing community attitudes" but the reality is that the same practices still apply in health boards right around the country. This will not change today or tomorrow even with a promise to provide £30 million.
I do not know how the Minister can be content with phasing in the new procedures as no amount of money will change bad professional practices if there is a denial, as there is in this report, that bad professional practices exist. The Minister is being over-protective of the professionals involved and compromising his own position in the interests of maintaining harmonious industrial relations. Anger must be expressed at the fact that our professional health workers let us down. It would be far better if we faced up to the fact that everybody concerned blew it. Then at least we could start afresh and I would be glad to look towards the future.
It has been mentioned that this report should provide us with a monumental precedent and a learning point, in terms of developing our child care policies in the future but up until tonight there was not even an apology to the woman involved. I note that the Minister was contrite tonight, which is welcome, because the report moved from the individual to deal with the general issue. This was unacceptable. I do not know if the reluctance to accept responsibility masks a fear of litigation but I hope she will bring a case because we owe her a lot and she should be compensated for a great injustice.
This report is not a serious analysis of bad practice which had a bottom line and a conclusion but rather a series of justifications, excuses and cover ups of individuals which seek to exonerate the professionals instead of finding out why nobody acted. We are talking about professional people trained in the field of child care protection. As I said, guidelines have been in place since 1977 but these were not adhered to. At every juncture there was slippage and the South-Eastern Health Board can hardly have been unaware of public policy in this area. In 1985, the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Women's Rights presented a comprehensive report to the Government on this issue and I do not accept that in 1982 nobody knew about sexual abuse.
It would be different if Mary has been taciturn and refused to talk. As I said, she disclosed information over the place and time after time, in an unbelievable fashion, nobody took any action. She disclosed information to general practitioners, a consultant and a public nurse. Garda Agnes Reddy and her detective colleagues were the first to take action and to take her claims seriously.
Much play has been made of the fact in the report, in terms of exonerating the health services, that by the time the health board had formal disclosure of the incest and violence Mary was over 16 and, therefore, out of the ambit of the 1908 Act but this is not sustainable. Following that vital disclosure in 1982 a social worker had a general discussion with the Garda but did not formally disclose the fact that incest had taken place. No case conference was held and no serious attempt was made to help either Mary or her 14 year old sister and her six month old baby who was on the "at risk" register and who could have been taken under the 1908 Act. They failed to act in relation to the 14 year old child and the six month old baby and at all times Mary and her child could have been made wards of court.
The involvement of the Garda in this case deserves another report. The inquiry team points out that it was not within the sphere of their terms of reference to look into matters other than the health services but the inactivity of the Garda in this case is remarkable. On two occasions, as I said, they actively colluded with the father in bringing her back from where she had sought refuge from her violent father.
The Garda has a long history of reluctance to become involved in domestic violence. It has become masters of the blind eye. This has to change. I note that the Minister for Justice has committed herself to enhancing the responses of the Garda to incidents of domestic violence, particularly against women and children. That is not before its time.
It is interesting to examine the statistics, comparing the cases of alleged sexual abuse reported, the ultimate low level of cases taken by the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the even lower number of those who managed to bring a successful prosecution. This aspect of the law must be examined immediately by the Minister for Justice.
The McKeown report is referred to in the report of this investigation in relation to prosecutions taken within the Eastern Health Board area in 1988. We note that the total number of cases reported to the relevant health board was 990; those referred by the health board to the Garda numbered 507; the number referred by the Garda to the Director of Public Prosecutions was 162 — one will note the numbers diminishing all the time — the number of decisions taken to prosecute was 55 and the number of cases in which the defendent was found guilty was 38. Only 38 defendants were found guilty out of the total of 990 cases reported to the Eastern Health Board. There appears to be a culture among the Garda that there is little point in initiating prosecutions because they are difficult to prove, so they take a non-interventionist approach. I think the Minister for Justice has accepted that we need greater numbers of women in our Garda force. Violence against women must be looked at within the broader context of women being victims in a patriarchal society. There has been much comment on that.
I agree with the emphasis in the report on the need for more refugees around the country. The refuges in Dublin, at first and second stage, are constantly full. Of course, there is a latent need obtaining for refuges which is not even articulated; in other words for women who would leave violent homes if they had a place to go. The overall question of violence against women and incest is only beginning to be articulated by women. Women's secrets in this overall area must be told if we are to put in place protections for them and endeavour to change the cycle of family violence. There are many women who remain silent. Here I might refer to women within the travelling community. I believe they have not told their story at all to date. We must be prepared not only to listen to their story but facilitate its telling.
The report contains an excellent recommendation that we should move on to consider a constitutional amendment to enshrine the individual rights of children which will take precedence over the conflicting rights of the family, stipulated in the Constitution to be antecedent to all positive law. Much of the reluctance to intervene in family violence over the years has been linked to a distinct discomfort on the part of Irish people to intervene in the integrity of the family based on marriage. Such reluctance has allowed circumstances to arise in which violent males have inflicted torture and abuse on their wives and children over many years during which nobody saw fit to intervene. Irish society, the Church and the State has had an obsessive interest in the rights of children so long as they are unborn but, once born, they take a hands-off approach, leaving the style, content and substance of the child's life, in the main, to the vagaries of the family unit.
This subject is of particular relevance to the travelling community. We are all in favour of recognising the rights of minorities, including the travelling community, their right to a folk way of life that is not part of the settled community. We must provide mobile support services immediately to supervise the health and care of infants and children of travellers. Their ill health is well documented and demands a specific targeted response.
It is my belief that teachers also are in the front line when it comes to the early detection of sexual abuse against children. They too must be protected if they are to assume a wider welfare role since for a part of the day they are in loco parentis and are ideally placed to note early signs.
I believe the Minister is aware of a case in the midlands where a teacher was proactive in reporting her suspicion of physical abuse of a pre-school child in her care. For her efforts that teacher was intimidated by the child's father who arranged a boycott of the school, which was ultimately closed for lack of numbers. In that instance, other children of the same family were already in care. Despite that prima facie justification of her suspicions, the teacher was isolated and a prejudicial report was submitted to the Department of Education which cast aspersions on her professional integrity as a teacher. As recently as the twelfth of this month the Minister said he was quite satisfied that that teacher's experience was properly handled by the relevant health board. The Minister is getting into the habit of being quite satisfied with the activities of health boards. For example, in the Kelly Fitzgerald case the Minister was reluctant to apportion accountability. In the Kilkenny case, depite the publication of a report which he himself commissioned to investigate why action was not taken earlier by the health board he is adopting a similar over-protective stance of the personnel involved. Why is the Minister allowing his ministerial interest in industrial relations to compromise the need for justice in the case of this woman, who has become known to all of us as Mary?
I would be the first to commend the Minister and the Government on agreeing to make the necessary resources available for the implementation of the provisions of the Child Care Act, 1991. Would the Minister issue guidelines immediately for the improved practice of our professionals nationwide within the various health boards? It is not sufficient to put it on the long finger.
I should like to know from the Minister whether the Government has any plans to compensate this woman for the terrible tragedy that befell her, for the fact that, no matter what she did, our system of justice did not respond to her plight. She was abused by her father and the authorities did not respond to her needs. She was then meted out injustice at the hands of the court, her father having received a light sentence which cannot be appealed. We learn that the provisions of the legislation cannot be applied retrospectively to that case.
The report exonerates everyone. This is not good enough. The woman concerned is left asking what has gone wrong, as though she were impervious to justice. This State owes that woman a lot. She should be compensated and should not have to plough a furrow through the courts to gain justice, as many others have had to do when they have been gravely wronged.
I hope the Minister, in replying, will give the House some indication of his intentions to make good the injustice meted out to her and to help her. I believe she is living in poverty. It is unacceptable that this woman, who has been a victim of injustice all her life, ultimately a victim of our inadequate resources, could not be offerred a new life in same way, with a decent place to live. I hope the Minister will respond and confirm that she will be offered at least that.