Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 Oct 1995

Vol. 457 No. 4

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Madonna House (Dublin) Investigation.

Helen Keogh

Question:

17 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Health if he will publish the report into allegations of sexual abuse in Madonna House, County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15513/95]

As I indicated to the House on 20 September, the report of the investigation into the operation of Madonna House was referred for legal advice with a view to determining how much of it could be published, without undue risk of legal complications.

Within the last few days, I have received advice that substantial parts of the report cannot be published without running a serious risk of committing grave contempt and defamation.

A number of civil actions have been initiated against Madonna House and the Eastern Health Board by or on behalf of former residents of the home. Those actions claim damages against the defendants for assault, negligence and breach of duty. I am advised that it would be improper and unlawful to publish any material which prejudges issues arising for determination by the courts in the pending proceedings.

I am examining what options are now open to me in the light of this advice.

From a preliminary study of the legal advice I have received, it appears that there are two possible options open to me: not to publish the report or to publish an abridged version. As far as I am concerned the first option can be discounted. My colleague, the Minister for Health and I are anxious that as much of the report as possible be put into the public domain. That has been our unequivocal position since we took office and it remains our position.

In the light of the legal advice received, I am now actively considering the most appropriate way in which those segments of the report which do not give rise to legal complications can be published. I am concerned in particular to ensure that the recommendations contained in the report are made known and that the general public are informed of the steps being taken to implement them. I also intend to engage in urgent consultations with the Attorney General to see what legislative measures, if any, can be taken to ensure that, in future, similar reports may be published without fear of proceedings.

Who would be prejudiced by the publication of the full report? The Minister's legal advice is that to publish the report in full would prejudice the rights of some individuals. Is the Minister referring to the person charged and convicted of abuse? Would it prejudice those who operated Madonna House or members of the health board? Does the report indicate whether the 1987 guidelines were breached in this whole affair? In the light of the facts regarding events at Madonna House involving abuse by an employee of children in care, does the Minister intend to introduce a process of licensing care workers throughout the system on a national basis? Such a measure has been requested by care workers who work with children.

I am informed that the Deputy has legal training. I am sure that if she were approached by a client who requested advice based on the information I have provided to the House she would advise that client to be extremely careful. In circumstances where phrases such as "running a serious risk of committing grave contempt and defamation", and "it would be improper and unlawful to publish any material which prejudges issues arising for determination by the courts in the pending proceedings", I am sure the Deputy will understand that there is very little I can add to my original reply to the House. A number of civil actions have been initiated against Madonna House and the Eastern Health Board by or on behalf of former residents of the home. In relation to the guidelines and whether they were breached, I have already mentioned the necessity for me to be careful in any replies I provide to the House on this matter.

I accept the Minister's reservations with regard to the information he can provide to this House. Is the legal advice received by the Minister to the effect that he will be in a position to publish the report in its entirety when the courts have finished with these matters — which are the subject matter of the report — given that the prejudicial aspect will not then apply? When does the Minister expect to be in a position to say whether he will publish an abridged version of the report in the public interest?

I am not in a position to say when I might take such a decision. It is too early for me to do so because there are too many implications for me to even hazard a guess. The Minister for Health and I have made our desire clear to make as much of this report as possible available to the public. It is our intention to do so when the time comes.

Does the non-publication of these reports — I too appreciate the difficulties the Minister has outlined — and the defensiveness of the system not reinforce silence and secrecy which allows child sexual abuse to be accommodated?

Yes, unfortunately there is some truth in what the Deputy has said. It is an unfortunate aspect of it and is one of the reasons that in my original reply I said I also intended to engage in urgent consultations with the Attorney General to see what legislative measures, if any, can be taken to ensure that in future similar reports may be published without fear of proceedings.

Top
Share