Deputy Buttimer is the next speaker and he is sharing his time with Deputy Bannon.
Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation: Motion (Resumed)
The following motion was moved by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, on Wednesday, 21 January 2015:
That Dáil Éireann:
— having regard to the motion passed by Dáil Éireann on 11th June 2014 which recognised the need to establish the facts regarding the deaths of children at the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home in Tuam, County Galway between 1925 and 1961, including arrangements for the burial of these children, and which further acknowledged the considerable public anxiety as to the conditions generally in mother and baby homes operational in the State in that era;
— noting that it is the opinion of the Government that these matters of significant public concern require, in the public interest, examination by the establishment of a Commission of Investigation;
— noting that the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has led the Government’s consideration of these sensitive matters;
— noting the factual information compiled and the specific matters identified for further consideration in the Report of the Inter-Departmental Group on Mother and Baby Homes which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 16th July 2014 and which has assisted to inform Government considerations on the scope, format and terms of reference for a Commission of Investigation;
— and further noting that a draft Order proposed to be made by the Government under the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 (No. 23 of 2004) has been duly laid before Dáil Éireann on 16th January 2015 in respect of the foregoing matters referred to, together with a statement of reasons for establishing a Commission under that Act;
approves the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order, 2015 and the statement of reasons for establishing a commission of investigation.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 2:
To delete all words after “establishing a Commission under that Act;” and substitute the following:
— calls for Schedule (11) (B) of the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order, 2015 to be amended by inserting after ‘their children’, ‘with particular regard to the practices employed in obtaining the consent of mothers who had recently given birth to their treatment’;
— calls for Appendix 1(1) of the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order, 2015 to be amended so as to include the following homes:
Braemar House, Cork.
Ovoca (or Avoca) House, Co. Wicklow.
Regina Coeli Hostel, Athlone, Co. Westmeath.
Saint Gerard’s, 39 Mountjoy Square, Dublin 1.
Saint Joseph's Centre (aka Saint Clare's Centre), Stamullen, Co. Meath.
Saint Patrick’s Infant Hospital, Temple Hill, Blackrock, Co. Dublin.
Saint Philomena’s Centre Lakelands, Stillorgan, Co. Dublin.
Saint Rita’s Nursing Home, 68 Sandford Road, Ranelagh, Dublin 4.
The Nurseries, Fermoy, Co. Cork
Westbank Home, Greystones, Co. Wicklow; and
— calls for Appendix 1(2) of the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order, 2015 to be amended by inserting after ‘these mothers and children.’, ‘Any former resident of any County Home will be entitled to be heard by the Commission of Investigation.
-(Deputy Robert Troy).
I wish to echo the words of the former Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Charlie Flanagan, who spoke about this issue in June 2014. He referred to the shame that society made women and children in mother and baby homes feel. His was an important speech. For many of the women, the sense of shame has lasted a lifetime. Some of the women are friends of mine, and some are constituents who have come to my office to share their stories with me. It has been a revelation to hear their accounts. Having been in the institutions prevented many of the women from reaching their full potential, and it prevented some from leading the kind of life they really wanted to lead.
Now that we have uncovered how the women and children were treated by society, it is our turn to feel a sense of shame. It is the turn of society to take on the burden, to be remorseful for the way it treated these people, who are citizens of our country, and to regret that it took so long to reveal the truth of what happened and shine a light on the desperate injustice done to those concerned. I hope that through official recognition by the State, through the actions and words of the current Government, we can bring solace, comfort and help to the women and children. In many cases, this is so much desired and needed. I hope this recognition and the establishment of the commission of investigation will help to lessen the burden the women have carried for too many years.
As I stated, since June I have been contacted by friends and constituents who have shared their difficult experiences with me. From what I have learned from this engagement, the process of the State investigating the so-called homes brings relief. It comes at a time in which we must help the affected individuals to heal the emotional scars that have been left by time. As a result of the practices of the past and putting the women into the institutions, there are generations of people who are left asking many questions. Adults who were children in the homes ask continually why they were abandoned. That question is a perfectly understandable response to their separation from their mothers. Unfortunately, some of the women and their children can never let this go and cannot resolve the issue. For some, it is a significant cause of anger and resentment. As a society, we owe it to the women and children to be fully honest. We owe it to them to investigate fully and lay bare the facts regarding what happened.
Last year, the horrific events in Tuam were uncovered. Thanks to the investigative work of Catherine Corless, we found out some of the story from that particular home. However, institutions such as that in Tuam were many in number and located across the country. They were places where mothers and their babies were kept sheltered from the full view of society. They were behind a wall, living a parallel life that was seldom spoken about or recognised. In Cork, my city, there were numerous homes, particularly the one in Bessborough. I hope the commission of investigation can unveil the long-overdue truth of what happened in the homes.
Just today in preparing for this speech I came across an e-mail from a lady living my constituency. She states that, since Thursday, she has felt the lifting of the burden of shame. She states she and others have had their shame, pain and hurt officially recognised, and that with the relief after all the years of carrying the burden in silence, healing can now begin.
I am glad to see the commission established. I am particularly glad the Minister, Deputy Reilly, referred to amendments in his speech yesterday and that we can bring hope to and encourage the women. I encourage the women to participate in the inquiry under the confidential arrangement or through the public forum. I hope the women will avail themselves of the arrangement and that we can make it accessible, as with other commissions. I hope the women's privacy will be protected and that the advertising of the commission will be straightforward. It is important that we make it easy for the women and their children to approach it and tell their stories. The women who want to participate believe the process should be advertised and that we must help other women who are in the closet to come out and participate in the inquiry. I commend the Minister. It is important that we start this process so we can bring healing to the many women who require it today.
I am pleased to offer my thoughts on the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes. I thank the Minister, Deputy Reilly, for all his work and being present for this motion.
Deputy Buttimer mentioned homes in Tuam, Cork and other parts of the country. One of the country's largest mother and baby homes was in County Westmeath. In 1934, the Cork-based order Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary bought the Pollard manor house and estate in Castlepollard. They built a hospital and a church and started a mother and child home, which lasted until 1971. Young pregnant women used to arrive in Castlepollard having travelled from all parts of the midlands, and some arrived on the bus from Dublin. There were up to 120 girls in the home at any one time, and many of them had been sent there by their families for the supposed sin of falling pregnant out of wedlock.
What I find most shocking about the home in Castlepollard, something I learned from speaking to a person who was there, were the great lengths to which the staff went to ensure the girls where hidden away from public view and the eye of the local community. On admission to the home, the girls were given a different first name. Contact between the people of Castlepollard and the home was kept to an absolute minimum and neither the girls nor the staff ventured outside the complex gates. Perhaps even more astonishing was that when two girls came from the same area, every effort was made to keep them apart by locating them in different parts of the home. Several accounts have been provided about the harshness of the regime.
Last summer, the Westmeath Examiner noted the concerns once raised by a councillor, James Fagan. In January 1945, he claimed that "inmates" at the institution were being compelled to do manual work in the fields. He said the girls had to cut timber and wield heavy sledges in all kinds of weather, clad in overalls. He described the conditions as uncivilised.
According to Adoption Rights Now, there may be as many as 500 babies buried in the surrounds at Castlepollard but, as with most of these institutions, there is a lack of concrete evidence as to how many are buried and their location. However, it is not the "little angels" plot that gets the most attention from visitors; rather, it is the high wall and walled garden directly opposite.
Anyone who has visited this wall will have been greeted by an eerie sight. Along it, about ten to 18 inches apart, there are a countless number of iron nails bulging from the wall. They are of varying lengths and heights off the ground, and are placed at irregular intervals. Any local historian or member of the community will tell visitors that these nails are headstones and are all that is left to remind us that a human life once existed and is now interred there.
The mother and baby home in Castlepollard is only one of the homes that this commission will investigate. Hundreds of children were born in this home, many of whom now live in the United States, the United Kingdom or across Europe, and may not even know their original birthplace. I received at least four letters from persons who are now in their 50s and 60s seeking information. I was not able to help, but I tried my best.
I hope this commission will play a part in healing the scars that many of these women and their young children, now adults, have had to carry throughout their lives. I commend the Minister on all of his work on this important issue. Given the age profile of the mothers, I hope the commission carries out its investigation in a timely manner and I look forward to a favourable outcome.
I acknowledge the presence of the Minister in the House.
This proposed commission of inquiry is yet another investigation into a dark era of abuse of children in Ireland, an investigation into the destroyed lives of both mothers and their babies, and, of course, an investigation into lives cut short, some having spent only a short time on this earth.
There are many aspects to this. There are two that I want to focus on, and provision is made in the terms of reference before us for both of those. The first relates to county homes. I am glad to see provision for county homes is included. The terms of reference state that in some county homes mother and baby services seem to have been a considerable focus of the operation. I also want to draw the Minister's attention to some of the other county homes which were never designated as mother and baby homes but acted as such. Roscommon county home was one of those. For example, to give an idea of the figures involved, on 31 March 1941 Roscommon county home had 18 unmarried mothers, which would be proportionate on a population basis to the other much larger homes across the State. These homes were obliged to admit anyone who would otherwise be homeless, and because of the stigma attached to unmarried mothers, many of their parents committed them to county homes. I understand that in 1962 there were approximately a dozen young women residing in Roscommon county home. They worked unpaid in the laundry and in the kitchen, and their children, if of school age, attended the local primary schools. While all of the children in that particular home left in the early 1960s, their mothers remained as virtual prisoners, rarely leaving the premises, because they had become institutionalised. The regime in that home, as in every other home across the country, was harsh. In one story that is told locally, a young woman pleaded desperately with the caretaker of the county home to let her out, and after he acceded to her request and let her out at night, he lost his job. We must publicly acknowledge that these homes acted effectively as mother and baby homes, and while they may not have such formal designation, they provided similar services to those provided in the other official mother and baby homes. Sadly, we must acknowledge that some of the mothers and some of the babies never left those homes throughout their lives, whether long or short, after their admission. That should be included in the consideration by this commission.
The other issue I want to raise, referenced in Article (1)V of the terms of reference of the commission, is that of vaccine trials, or, in plain English, the use of residents in these facilities as human guinea pigs. A series of separate trials were carried out on children in these homes. Previously, I raised in this House the issue of the trials that took place between 1960 and 1961, and two others that took place in the early 1970s, which continued up to 1976. According to recent research, it seems that there were earlier trials in the 1930s and there may have been later trials than the ones of which we are aware to date. These children were seen as an accessible group for whom consent was not an issue. Some were used in more than one trial. For example, it is reported that Ms Mari Steed, who is now based in the United States and who was born at Bessborough in 1960, was used in four separate vaccine trials. These children were treated as if they were little more than laboratory rats, and that is unacceptable. The trials were performed with the knowledge, if not the approval, of official Ireland, including the medical and scientific community, because a report on the 1960-61 trial, which involved 58 infants in institutions dotted around the State, was published in the British Medical Journal in 1962.
The background to the subsequent clinical trials that took place in the late 1960s and early 1970s was the great upsurge at the time in the number of severe adverse reactions in children who received the three-in-one DPT vaccine manufactured by Wellcome. The 1973 vaccine trial involved an institution and a comparative control group outside that institution. A total of 116 children were involved, comprising 59 from the community and 57 from two children's homes in the Dublin area. The children in the community were given the normal commercial vaccine and those who were used as guinea pigs were given the new trial vaccine that was being studied at the time. As the Minister will be aware, these children were used to test out vaccines because during the late 1960s and 1970s there was a significant increase in the number of adverse reactions to the whooping cough vaccine. A former Minister for Health admitted while in office that the side effects generally recognised as occurring occasionally following the administration of the whooping cough vaccine included mental retardation and paralysis. These trials, which took place in 1973, were approved by the National Drugs Advisory Board and a licence was issued to Wellcome for a two-year period, yet these trials were still ongoing in 1976.
The trials raise a number of questions which remain unanswered. How many vaccine trials in total were conducted? What concoction did these children receive? Why was it always the case that the children in the institutions received the experimental vaccine while the children in the community received the control vaccine? Were children in care used in the trials and what consent was given for this? What, if any, are the long-term medical effects of the trials on the children who participated? Why has the State refused to investigate the contents of the files that were handed over to the Laffoy commission by the religious orders, State agencies and Wellcome? Why were those files handed back to those organisations rather than retained to ensure such information was controlled by the State? As the Minister will be aware, this particular issue was to be investigated by the Laffoy commission but, because of a court challenge, that did not happen and that module never progressed.
The documents were handed back to the original owners in 2012. Could the Minister assure the House that the records that were handed back in 2012 can be sourced again, collated and made available to the inquiry in order that we can, once and for all, get answers to questions that should have been answered a long time ago? The children, now adults, should have had access to the records a long time ago.
I wish to highlight a story told to me by a constituent who approached me last week and asked me whether I would be contributing to the debate. She went to the mother and baby home in Bessborough in Cork. Her three month old daughter became seriously ill in Bessborough and was transferred to hospital. Soon after that she was sent home with no information as to where her daughter was. On her return home she tried to get information from the home on the whereabouts of her daughter but she got no assistance. Eventually she made contact with St. Finbarr’s Hospital in Cork and was told that the baby had been transferred to Crumlin hospital. When she got through to Crumlin hospital she was told that her baby had a very serious heart condition, that it had passed away and had been buried in a plot in Glasnevin Cemetery. It took her years to trace the burial plot in Glasnevin Cemetery but she regularly visits the grave. In her case she has a particular plot to go to.
The story clearly shows that even when the babies were not adopted and there was a clear answer as to what happened to the baby, the information was not disclosed to the mothers. They did not have an opportunity to grieve. Information and the truth are vitally important to those mothers and to all of the children.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to the motion. As the centenary of the issuing of the 1916 Proclamation approaches and the stated aim of the Proclamation being a new Irish Republic “cherishing all the children of the nation equally”, there are few more stark examples of how the reality of life in the Republic failed to live up to the ideals of the signatories of the Proclamation than the treatment of single mothers and their babies.
In reviewing the first century of the Republic's existence, rather than self-congratulatory commemorations, it is perhaps more fitting that we examine the conditions and regime that pertained in the mother and baby home in Tuam and other such homes with a view to gaining a full understanding of how the country's most vulnerable children were treated, both in life and in death.
The work of local historian Catherine Corless in identifying the burial site of children who died in the Bon Secours mother and baby home in Tuam between 1925 and 1961 has raised serious questions about the operation of the home, but has raised wider questions about the treatment of the women who went to the home and other such homes to have their babies, the care they received and the care, or lack of care, that the children born there received.
The emergence of this story has once again called into question society's unquestioning attitude about what went on behind the various high-walled institutions throughout the country. However, this story has also raised many painful memories for mothers whose babies were born in the home and children born there and who spent part of their childhood in that setting. I have met many mothers whose babies were born in the home. Many yearn for closure and welcome the current commission and have confidence in those appointed to investigate this matter. For others, it has reignited a period in their lives that they had buried and they are fearful that old wounds will be reopened. I have spoken to mothers who had children in that home as teenagers and whose other children are unaware of their elder sibling. I have also spoken to people born in the home who have no idea who their parents are.
The people who spent time in the institution in Tuam and those born there need as much information as possible and the report of the commission will be an important marker in terms of answers. I welcome the fact that Judge Yvonne Murphy has agreed to chair the commission and I also welcome the appointment of an international legal expert on child protection and adoption, Dr. William Duncan, and historian, Professor Mary Daly. The range of expertise will be necessary and welcome in dealing with the many cases that will emerge and the many stories and testimonies that will be heard in the coming months.
The report of the commission will tell us much about Ireland in the 20th century and underline the fact that we must strive for greater equality in 21st century Ireland. I welcome also the fact that Ireland is now prepared to examine dark areas of its past. Recent years have seen much work in that respect, for example, the treatment of inmates of industrial schools and Magdalen laundries. That spirit of questioning about what went on behind those high walls is hugely important, and the most important testimonies are those of the people who were inside the high walls, which in turn raise important questions for wider society about its acceptance of such conditions and society's willingness to go along with the invisibility of those incarcerated behind the high walls, both during and after their incarceration.
The year 2016 will be important for commemorations and perhaps we should also remember that it is the 44th anniversary of this process of questioning what went on behind those high walls. It was 1971 when Hanna Greally's book Bird's Nest Soup was published. A 19 year old Hanna went into St. Loman's in Mullingar for "a rest"' and was to remain there, detained against her will for 20 years. Her courage in telling her story foreshadowed much of the testimony we heard in recent years from survivors of industrial schools and laundries and that thread will continue with the appointment of the commission, which will help establish the facts surrounding deaths in the mother and baby home in Tuam and the condition generally in other mother and baby homes in the State in that era.
I was contacted by a graveyard committee in Tuam that would like an opportunity to meet the Minister, Deputy Reilly, or the commission when it is set up. The group has worked for many years with Catherine Corless. It has gathered much information before the commission even begins its work. A number of weeks ago a media outlet ran a story about a baby it said was born in the mother and baby home in Tuam but that was not the case. The report also said the mother was unmarried, which was also untrue. The story has already caused great distress for the people involved and the media airing further added to that. It is important that anyone who has information should be invited to attend the commission at the start in order that it can garner a more comprehensive understanding of what is going on and to allow them to express their concerns.
I thank local historian, Catherine Corless, for her work in raising this issue. I also thank the many women I have met in recent months who shared the stories of their experience in the home and the men and women who were born there who also shared their stories. The work of the commission is particularly important for survivors, but it will also inform wider society on what it was like for many to live in 1940s or 1950s Ireland and will go some way towards telling the stories of many hundreds of children who never had the opportunity to live in that era, the children who were certainly not cherished by the Irish Republic and a society which did not see them as equals.
I wish to comment on the establishment of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and to commend the Minister, Deputy Reilly, on his swift action on the issue. Mother and baby homes are just another chapter in what has been a series of revelations in the past 20 years in this country about the treatment of certain groups in society since the establishment of the State, as the previous speaker outlined. I use the word “state” in the widest sense because the state is made up of people and there was an attitude among the public as well as its representatives in State authorities that women who became pregnant before they were married had to be hidden. That was something that was often most apparent and obvious within families. Some of the most difficult stories I have heard from constituents about mother and baby homes are reflective of a wider approach that existed in society for far too long. The fact that we are to have a commission of investigation chaired by Judge Murphy is very much to be welcomed. I commend the Minister on that.
Like previous speakers, I have been contacted by a number of women who have in some cases pretty horrific stories about the treatment they received in the homes and also at the hands of their own families and communities. That will be part of the commission’s investigation.
Rather surprisingly, I was also contacted by a constituent who wished to express her gratitude for the treatment she received in a mother and baby home. I do not wish to give away any personal details but she said that at such a difficult juncture in her life she felt it was the only place to which she could go.
I did not expect to hear such a story and I am sure that in the course of the commission's investigations there may be other similar stories. However, with regard to the number of people who have contacted me, the overwhelming number have been people who have very tragic stories of maltreatment in those homes. I commend the Minister on establishing the commission and I wish Judge Murphy and her team success in their endeavours to unearth what is a very difficult and painful chapter in the history of our country.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the commission of investigation. I welcome the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order 2015, and the statement of reasons for the establishment of a commission of investigation. The manner in which single women and their children were treated in mother and baby homes was appalling. We need to investigate how they came to be there in the first place and the circumstances of their departure from the homes.
As a public representative for Galway East, I was shocked last May at reports in the media that a mass grave had been discovered in the mother and baby home in Tuam, County Galway. Like my colleagues, I wish to apologise to all the people who suffered in these homes and to their families. I was born in the Bon Secours hospital in Tuam and received my second level education in St. Jarlath's College, Tuam. At the time I was in college there and afterwards I certainly did not know about what happened in the mother and baby home. I know that many of the people involved continued to look for information about their identities. It all became very clear to me when I heard that people's birth certificates did not correspond with the period of time they attended school because the information on the birth certificates was completely wrong.
I refer to the motion passed by Dáil Éireann last June on the need to establish the facts regarding the deaths of the children in the mother and baby home in Tuam. The Minister has met many people and groups on these issues which arose as a result of the discoveries in Tuam. Much of the information was provided by the local historian, Catherine Corless. There are many issues relating to the mother and baby homes generally and their role in Ireland over a long period.
I echo what my colleagues said about the Minister meeting the committee known as the Children's Home Graveyard Tuam. This committee also has concerns about the terms of reference for the commission of investigation. Other speakers have referred to the information about children buried in Tuam or maybe not buried in Tuam and whether the mother of the child was married or not. However, there are many more issues to be dealt with. The committee referred to the need for the commission of investigation to investigate the cross-referencing of all the names of children in the Tuam project and to establish for certain that they are buried in the children's graveyard in Tuam only. It is only then that these children will be recorded for the Tuam project.
Another issue raised was the fact that no reference had been made to the committee in the document. I understand that the committee was mentioned in the report of the interdepartmental group. In my view the committee should be recognised for the work it is doing and for its past work. It brought this issue to the public and to the media and the committee must be recognised and included in all the works and documents relating to the Tuam project. The committee wishes to meet the commission and to be represented.
This committee has done great work, as have many people in Tuam. Clarification is needed on when the group can move forward with other works such as a garden and plaques of remembrance, the question of the road entrance and mapping of the area. The committee is of the view that the site and the children's graveyard at the Dublin Road, Tuam, should not be excavated as it is a major concern for the people of Tuam.
This site has been well minded for more than 40 years by the community and the residents. They will continue to do so and they are on standby to finish the work they started. I refer to various media reports about the site being much bigger than the one actually discovered. These genuine questions need to be answered. I know that people have tended those plots over the years and there was annoyance that the media talked about the dumping of bodies and the use of septic tanks as graves. That kind of language does not show the true reality that between 1925 and 1961, almost every fortnight children were buried in this plot at the back of the home. This fact is shocking and horrible but it should be reported like that and not in the manner and language in which it was reported. The sad reality is that in the decades of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, child mortality rates were very high. Children in their early years succumbed to a variety of what we now call minor illnesses.
I refer to a proposal in the Seanad to introduce new legislation to give adoptees a right to their birth certificates. I mention this in reference to my earlier remarks about people being very disappointed and saddened that their birth certificates do not seem to relate to the age at which they received their education. Senator Averil Power, along with Senator Jillian van Turnhout and Senator Fidelma Healy Eames, sponsored a Private Members' Bill in the Seanad which is very good legislation. Senator Power stated:
[F]or too long adopted people have been robbed of our identities, denied basic information about ourselves and our parents that others take for granted ...Thousands of Irish adoptees do not know their original names, who their parents are or even if there is a serious illness that runs in their family. Not knowing is a source of great pain and anxiety. Our Bill is designed to change this.
I hope that legislation will be adopted by the Government and that it will become law. Women who gave birth in the 1950s and the 1960s have spoken about their children being taken from them by force. This situation is very relevant with regard to the mother and baby homes. We do not have enough information about what happened with regard to adoption.
I refer to another Galway man, Fr. Edward Flanagan, an internationally acclaimed hero of "Boys Town", who was born in Ballymoe on the Galway-Roscommon border. He visited the land of his birth in the 1940s and he talked about the treatment of children in church and State care as being "a scandal, unChrist-like and wrong". Fr. Flanagan is often described as a reluctant celebrity because he was the central character in the film, "Boys Town", starring Spencer Tracy. He was very interested in education and he provided shelter and education for poor and neglected boys in Omaha, Nebraska.
His philosophy was very simple and powerful: "There is no such thing as a bad boy." When he visited Ireland, Fr. Flanagan commented: "You are the people who permit your children and the children of your communities to go into these institutions of punishment. You can do something about it." He called Ireland’s institutions "a disgrace to the nation" and said: "I do not believe that a child can be reformed by lock and key and bars, or that fear can ever develop a child’s character." His words were very true.
I will finish with a comment by the late John Cunningham, who was former editor of The Connacht Tribune and who spent his early years in the Tuam home, as his mother died in his infancy. He spoke of the women there stating: "They nursed the child and looked after it for a year and then they went one way and the child stayed to be adopted, or to be boarded-out a few years later. I don’t know if many of them ever recovered from the heart-breaking parting ... It was heart-rending."
A few months ago I was invited to an artistic event in a building next door to the Clarence Hotel on Wellington Quay. Let me tell the House there could not possibly be two more contrasting perspectives on Irish life than the interior of those two adjoining city centre buildings. The art installation beside U2's hotel was called Forsaken and was inspired by the lives of tens of thousands of women and children abandoned behind the walls of Ireland's church and State-run institutions, babies and mothers who were buried secretly and meaninglessly in unmarked graves, adopted children whose identities were stolen and lost for their entire lifetimes, and vulnerable people who were offered no protection against great injustices. The message in the art is that each and every one of these people deserves recognition of their person and recognition of the wrongs done to them. I share this viewpoint.
While other countries manage to confront and address their terrible histories, we in Ireland continue to hide from the full extent of the darker parts of our past. Germany is taking every opportunity to shine bright lights into the darker corners of its Nazi past and Australia has faced up to the wrongs inflicted on that nation's stolen Aboriginal children. I am saddened that our modern and otherwise progressive Irish State has not reached the level of self-awareness necessary to confront the past as it should be confronted.
Appendix 1 of the terms of reference defines just 14 named institutions and a representative sample of county homes to be afforded the full scope of inquiry. There is no guarantee that a former child resident of an orphanage or a mother who worked in a laundry under threat of hunger and violence and without pay will get the opportunity to tell their story to anyone. This is not only deeply wrong, it is short-sighted. How did some so-called mother and baby homes make the favoured list and others did not? There seems to be a fundamental problem of consistency in the selection criteria used. We have been told that only those institutions having a certain self-professed ethos have been listed. Am I the only one to spot a difficulty with selecting institutions for investigation based on their own self-professed ethos? At least one institution on the privileged list of 14 does not seem to meet the stated requirements of the Minister's selection criteria if its own website material is to be believed. Based on the facts in my knowledge I can see little difference between the operation of Miss Carr's institution, which is on the list, and the Westbank home, which is not. Both institutions accepted a small proportion of mothers, no more than eight at a time, into what historically had been an orphanage. The lack of objectivity in the selection of institutions undermines this inquiry from the get go.
When faced yesterday with the constitutional implication of prioritising single women over married women, the Minister correctly withdrew support for the indefensible. This was a small win and I am glad I pushed for it. Will it have much effect? It probably will not. In my own case I can have very little evidence to offer on my short few days as an infant in one of these homes and my mother and adoptive parents are now dead. The simple fact is that for the most part of the duration of the scandal there are few or no remaining adult witnesses in the categories of institutions prioritised by these narrow terms of reference.
The inquiry as structured may well result in recommendations for more inquiries down the line, but this would be too late to properly involve many of the very elderly former residents who could add real value to a real process now. Just before I left the Forsaken exhibition, one of the artists very kindly asked me to put my first-born daughter's name to one of the hundreds of tiny hand-sewn baby dresses that formed part of the display. It was a beautiful idea, but even after all these years I could not bring myself to share the baby name of the little girl who was taken from me. Instead I put my own name on the dress.
This inquiry process requires great sensitivity, an open door and a listening ear for all the witnesses to this dark corner of Ireland's past, regardless of the title above the door of the institution where they once lived. The sorrow and cruelty was equally real to all involved. As legislators we cannot and should not discriminate, and sadly I cannot put my name to this proposal.
I acknowledge all of those women, children and men who are survivors, advocates and campaigners, some of whom are with us in the Visitors Gallery, most of whom are not. They have brought us to this point and at long last the Government has finally agreed to establish an independent commission of investigation into mother and baby homes. It is welcome that the commission will have the remit to receive testimony directly from victims and survivors in private or in public, the necessary powers to compel witnesses and documents and to recommend prosecutions in the event of obstruction, and the freedom to produce a report including such recommendations as it sees fit. These are all welcome, but it is not enough to do the right thing on a superficial level. The right thing must also be done in the right way.
It is not for the Opposition or for me to congratulate the Government on its late conversion to the need for this commission of investigation. That it can and has done itself. Rather, it is for us to represent the concerns of citizens who are not present on the floor of the Chamber, the victims and survivors of serious and widespread human rights violations for which the State bears at least partial and, in any event, ultimate responsibility. Other Deputies have focused on the positive aspects of what the Government has brought forward. I will, therefore, use my time to focus on the many outstanding concerns.
The political backdrop to this debate is decades of official denial and the stubborn refusal of successive administrations to take this issue seriously despite available evidence. This has been due to the inexcusable lack of determination and even outright refusal by a series of Ministers, including some former Ministers who have served in this very Administration, to do the right thing in the right way despite the repeated pleas of victims and survivors.
The legal backdrop to this debate, and to considering the adequacy of the proposed provisions under the terms of reference contained in the ministerial order which we seek to amend, is the recent strong criticism of Ireland at the United Nations last year. This commission must be established and conducted in accordance with accepted international standards and Ireland's obligations under international human rights law. It must not bear any resemblance to previous wholly inadequate and tokenistic processes, such as the widely discredited McAleese committee, which helped bring Ireland's human rights record into disrepute.
It most emphatically cannot end with a craven secret indemnity deal such as that brokered previously with the religious orders by an outgoing Fianna Fáil Minister actively seeking to shelter them from the full extent of their liability for institutional abuse of children.
However, most important is the real human backdrop to this debate, that is, the life experiences of tens of thousands of our fellow citizens, both living and dead, some of whose deaths we now know were unforgivable, untimely, preventable, in many cases due to official neglect, and in an as yet unknown number of cases were compounded by deprivation of even the dignity of a decent burial. Some of these life experiences are so harrowing they are barely imaginable to those of us who have not lived them. They include the perverse and malicious cruelty of deliberately depriving a child of his or her mother's care, against her will, by forcing the mother to give up her baby as a punishment for her unmarried status. These women and children were systematically stripped of their very identities as unique and valued individuals, and as human persons with equal rights. The women were reduced to house names and numbers. Their babies' original identities were stolen and hidden behind new names and case numbers, with some only discovering their real birth names as adults in their 50s and 60s. In addition to their varying individual experiences of malnourishment, medical neglect, psychological and verbal abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, forced labour, medical experimentation, human trafficking and undignified burial, all of these victims in common were deliberately deprived of the right to family life with their biological children or with their biological mothers, siblings and extended families. Moreover, all who went through this system of interlocking institutions deliberately designed to subjugate them were callously stripped of their self-esteem and self-worth, and forced to endure a lifetime of stigma that these institutions imposed on them by virtue of their status as an unmarried mother, or as a child born outside wedlock.
My welcome for this commission is strongly qualified. I consider it to be, in crucial ways, a missed opportunity to finally make things right for all these fellow citizens, our equals. It was a chance for this House to make an honest collective pledge that no victim would be left behind by this process. It was a chance to take a rights-based approach by directing the inclusion of all victims and survivors through proactive notification, by guaranteeing the right to public hearings in the public interest, and the right to representation. It was a chance to commit wholeheartedly to the State taking responsibility and ensuring effective remedy for the wrongs these fellow citizens experienced when the State either failed to protect them from harm or actively colluded in their harm. We had the chance to commit to finally holding accountable under law those who may be either criminally or civilly responsible, and to ensure those responsible make adequate and appropriate reparations where necessary in the service of justice. This was a chance to heal these victims and the nation as a whole by way of this, and by way of official recognition, apology and memorial.
Unfortunately, as demonstrated by the detail of the proposed Sinn Féin amendment to the Government motion outlined by Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin and also most eloquently by our colleague, Deputy Anne Ferris, we are not satisfied with the terms of reference for the commission, not least because it will surely and by design exclude from its remit and consideration literally thousands of victims of serious human rights violations.
There is no guarantee here for the Magdalen women, previously and wrongly deprived of the right to a full commission of investigation into their particular institutional experiences. There is no guarantee for the illegally adopted or fostered or boarded out children, whose very worst experiences may well fall outside the express terms of the commission's remit. If all these victims and survivors represent an experience of second class citizenship, then those who the Minister chooses to exclude are now doubly hurt as second class victims. This is the main reason some of the advocacy concerned have described the terms of reference as "flawed", as a "deep disappointment" and as ultimately "failing the standard for such inquiries".
We all understand that public resources are finite, but this commission must not be about exclusion for the sake of expediency. If that is the result, it will come back to haunt us. The abdication of full responsibility means that future Administrations will be forced into dealing with separate successive sets of victims, that is, if any are left alive to vindicate by that time. Repeating this whole fraught process with various victims will not ultimately save the State or the taxpayer money. Moreover, what money it may save is at disproportionate and unacceptable human expense.
While I welcome the confirmation that there will be an investigation into those institutions expressly included in Appendix 1, I cannot accept, and none of us should accept, that any institution or any victim will be left behind. I appeal to the Minister in that respect. I know he has made some move towards amending a provision by way of definition within the order. I appeal to him to go the extra steps, to accept our amendment and to ensure that this commission is what it can and should be, and that it ensures that no victim, no survivor, is left behind.
After listening to Deputy Anne Ferris, I feel inadequate in terms of addressing this issue but there are certain things that I want to say. It is very important that this investigation takes place and I welcome the fact that this commission will be established. It will look at the underbelly of a very repressive society which existed in this country and which was not in keeping with the Christian principles that it so vociferously promulgated. We can see that in some of the statistics which are appalling, particularly when we put faces on them. For example, in 1940, some 26% of so-called illegitimate children died as opposed to an equivalent figure for the previous year for England and Wales of 8%. That points to huge neglect, pain and hardship. It is very important that this story be told and be allowed to be told and for that reason I welcome the establishment of this commission.
Not having direct experience of this in my family situation, I was struck by an incident that happened recently where one of my constituents, an elderly man, approached me. He had no birth certificate and knew very little about his origins and he was seeking guidance as to how he might find something out about where he came into the world and so on.
This was something he had lived with for many years. I have known him for some 20 years and this only came to my attention recently because he wants to try to get to the bottom of the situation before he dies. In that individual story one can see the story of many people. It is important that the inquiry goes ahead.
When I read some of the documentation, I found it staggering to realise how many people were involved. A number of Members of the House have, in one way or another, experience of the situation we are discussing.
In regard to the examination that will take place, it is very important that the stories of people in institutions which may not be listed are told. I ask the Minister, in his reply to the debate, to explain whether it is possible for contributions to be made in that way. I have been asked by former residents of some Protestant institutions whether their stories can be told. I welcome the fact that the Bethany Home is listed, but it is important that the stories of people in other homes are told, no less than the stories of those who lived in many Catholic institutions which are not listed in the appendix.
I welcome the publication on 9 January of the terms of reference for the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and related matters, which will be constituted under the Commission of Investigation Act 2004. This is another step by the Government to deal with the failures of the past. The past was a period when Ireland was ruled politically, for the most part, by Fianna Fáil leader Eamon de Valera as Taoiseach and later as President. This period is often referred to as "De Valera's Ireland". In his book, John Charles McQuaid: Ruler of Catholic Ireland, the writer and journalist John Cooney describes very well what a dark place Ireland could be at this time. It was repressive, autocratic, overbearing and heartless.
The treatment of women and children in these institutions and society at large is a dark chapter in our history, but it is something we must all now face up to no matter how difficult. A transparent and effective investigation by the commission into the manner in which women and their babies were treated in these homes is essential in coming to terms with the past. It is important that what happened to these women and children after their time in the homes is investigated and documented, and that justice is seen to be done. The experience of survivors of these institutions and their families deserves our recognition, although unfortunately many of the survivors have passed on and will not have an opportunity to see the State recognising their situation.
I would like to read into the record of the House the story of Terry Harrison, who has already spoken to the media about her experiences. She gave birth to her son Niall at St. Patrick's home on the Navan Road in Dublin in 1973, having run away from Bessborough House in Cork. Both places are to be investigated by the commission. Her son was adopted through a private adoption society run by the Catholic Church after being taken from his cot in the Dublin home. She said: "My son is now in his 42nd year and I live with it every single day. You think it'd get easier. It gets harder because the further the days go by against me ever, ever being able to hold my son again and give him one hug." She has also said that she has spoken to many women who went through the same ordeal as she did: "Many of them are terrified of showing their faces. In 2015, they still hold the scars, the chains of abuse. We were treated like criminals. No court, no law."
I understand it is proposed to examine 14 mother and baby homes and related institutions, which I welcome. However, I must note that the terms of reference are not perfect and, ideally, all institutions should be investigated.
I welcome the Minister's nomination of Judge Yvonne Murphy as chair of the commission and the experts, Dr. William Duncan and Professor Mary E. Daly. Their expertise, experiences and sensitivity will be essential in achieving a comprehensive assessment of the traumatic and terribly sad stories that will be uncovered and discussed.
This is an important step in delivering on this Government's commitment to establish an effective statutory investigation which can provide a full account of what happened in and around mother and baby homes. I hope there will be enough flexibility and latitude within the terms of reference of the commission to investigate these experiences completely. I wish the commission well in its task.
I wish to share time with Deputies Boyd Barrett and Halligan.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the discussion on the terms of reference presented by the Minister. Ireland has a deplorable record on women's rights, which has, correctly, received severe criticism from international bodies such as the UN committee on human rights, the UN committee against torture, the Council of Europe, the Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN committee on the elimination of discrimination against women. The widespread abuse of vulnerable women in State institutions such as mother and baby homes, the horrors of symphysiotomy and the anti-women legislation on abortion rights in this country are just some of the horrific examples of this. It is high time that the Government took active steps towards righting a serious wrong in order to finally bring justice and accountability to the victims of mother and baby homes.
This commission of investigation is well structured and has potential through the allocation of a dedicated budget, the recruitment of qualified staff, in particular Professor Daly and Dr. Durkan, and, crucially, the engagement and dialogue with interested parties in advance of setting the terms of reference. I would like to draw a comparison in this regard to the structure of the Guerin commission of investigation, which is still completely lacking in clarity in each of these areas and has correctly been hailed as parochial for its narrow focus which glosses over the profound systemic issues in An Garda Síochána which so urgently need reform. In contrast, the Minister, Deputy Reilly, is displaying a genuine appetite for justice.
As I have argued before, in order for the survivors of mother and baby homes to get justice for the abuse suffered, this investigation must be as wide-ranging as possible; otherwise, it could be yet another missed opportunity. In this regard, I reiterate the disappointment of Justice for Magdalenes by the omission of Magdalen laundries from the terms of reference, particularly given that previous reports into the abuse carried out were completely inadequate. Survivor testimony was not included and the current draft legislation to assist survivors of the laundries represents a considerable paring back of the recommendations of Mr. Justice Quirke in his proposed restorative justice scheme.
I note article 13 of the terms of reference presented today allows for the commission to exercise discretion in regard to the scope and intensity of the investigation. This is a welcome provision and I hope the commission will exercise it if necessary. In any case, an independent inquiry should be carried out into the Magdalen laundries. It is not sufficient to investigate them solely in the context of being exit pathways for women leaving mother and baby homes.
Another concern I have relates to the length of time, three years, allocated to the investigation, particularly in light of the age profile of the survivors. The fact that there is no mention in the terms of reference to a redress scheme for the victims means that justice could still take a long time and may come too late for some survivors. Securing justice and providing an effective remedy for these women must remain at the heart of this investigation. This commission will never be able to attempt to make up for the State-sponsored abuse of these women, the illegal adoptions and the vaccine trials carried out on their children, but it is a very important step. I sincerely hope it will live up to the task with which it has been entrusted.
I commend the various organisations representing the survivors of the vast array of institutions that formed this architecture of oppression, abuse and persecution which ruined the lives of tens of thousands of women and children.
It abused them, robbed them of their identities and histories and inflicted a crime on tens of thousands of vulnerable people and children. The damage that was done can never be fully undone. All those groups, organisations and individuals deserve credit for finally forcing these issues to the forefront, getting the State and political system to acknowledge that a crime against them has been committed and that as much as possible must be done to detail the full scale of the crime and provide redress and support to the victims of survivors of that great crime. These groups are the Adoption Rights Alliance, the Irish First Mothers group, Justice for the Magdalenes, the survivors of the Bethany Home and Westbank orphanage and other such institutions. Many individuals have not survived and will never see justice on this matter. All of those deserve great tribute for bringing events to this point, where finally the Government and the State has acknowledged the need for some sort of redress.
It is still hard to get one's head around the scale of what was done. Most of the history of this State was one where this great crime was being committed and the most powerful people in church and State were overseeing this horrendous treatment of tens of thousands of women and children on the basis of the extraordinary notion of legitimacy and illegitimacy. It was an incredible thing for a State and church to have in mind when the founding document of that State, which we will celebrate next year, details the cherishing of all children equally, and a church would outline principles of humanity, decency and the ten commandments, etc. At the same time these people would hold in their heads this notion that some people were legitimate and some were illegitimate. On the basis of that notion, they could then stigmatise, abuse, imprison and incarcerate those people, treating them as sub-humans. All the normal rights and dignities that would have been accorded to legitimate people would have been simply denied to them and they were treated like animals. It is just extraordinary that such a position could persist for so long. Even when I was a young person growing up, the notion was still around of stigmatising single mothers and it persisted until the 1980s and 1990s. It was an extraordinary, barbaric and uncivilised perspective on life that justified horrendous crimes.
I was adopted through St. Patrick's Guild and my mother was forced to go to England and give birth to me in a mother and baby home. Many of the mothers who were in a similar position will not be included in this because the birth and adoption took place in England. They will be outside the terms of reference for this commission. I was relatively lucky because I was adopted by a good family and, although my birth mother faced very considerable resistance for many years from the institutions that had facilitated these adoptions, she fought through that resistance, was persistent and was finally able to make contact with me. Therefore, I was lucky in a way that thousands of other people have not been. They will never get to see their children or biological parents and they may never fully recover their history or identities because of the unbelievable architecture of oppression and abuse that existed. There was political cowardice in the failure of successive Governments to address this issue and give redress to the people who were victims of this system.
As a result of pressure and persistence from the survivors of this, we have got to this point so could we please not fall at the last hurdle and deny people the full justice and redress that they are asking for? There is an idea that we can partially deal with this matter, decide that we will look at particular institutions or shine a light on specific parts rather than the entire architecture. All these institutions, including the State, the church and various other bodies, were part of an integrated whole. They were a system of oppression that led to a denial of rights. We need to shine a light on all these so that full justice and redress can be given to all those who seek it. This must come without partiality, restrictions or limitations. As we have got this far, can we not go the entire way and ensure nobody is left outside? We must get all the truth, redress and justice for all the victims in those institutions. None should be excluded from this belated process of justice and acknowledgement of a great crime.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this important issue as the publication of the terms of reference for the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes is a step - but only a step - on the path of coming to terms with Ireland's tragic past. It is a step in delivering on this Government's commitment to establish an effective statutory investigation which can provide a full account of what happened in and around mother and baby homes and other relevant issues.
At this stage I thank the Minister for a reply to a question I put down to him regarding people I have sought to represent over a period. I asked the Minister for a definition in the submission I made. It asked in regard to the terms of reference for a commission of investigation for mother and baby homes and certain related matters ordered for 2015, whether the commission will investigate children admitted to institutions without parental presence in the institutions, such as convents, and where such children had to work in laundries, and if they would be permitted to make a submission. I have tried every channel to get information from a Department for these people without success. I have used freedom of information requests and written to various organisations seeking records. I usually have the cheque returned with a note indicating there is no information or the request is not applicable to the Department, etc.
I ask the Minister to ensure there can be a possibility that these people will not be denied once more. They have been denied too often and they now want ways and means of telling their story, as they are entitled to do. In many instances, these people were put in such institutions because of difficulty at home or because of a status as a single parent. They were brought to convents by gardaí, nuns or parents. These people were placed in homes in Dublin to work as cleaners or assistants without any agreement with parents or link to family. These people must be given an opportunity to contribute.
In the reply the Minister gave me, I certainly saw hope that this can happen and I thank him for that. The mother and baby homes commission of investigation shows the commitment of this Government dealing with the problems of our State's history. We have already seen that progress is being made on many of the recommendations arising from the Ryan report on the commission of inquiry into child abuse in institutions in this State. New child protection guidelines and the Children First Bill 2014 all form part of that. We also had the much-needed public apology by the Taoiseach. This recognition starts the ball rolling. We must look into all the aspects of these homes and many other aspects as well where children were so badly treated.
I always remember a story told on "The Late Late Show" one night by a young man who had come back from America and who had done well for himself. He came out of one of those homes and was sent to a farm. To ensure he stayed there night and day, he was tied to a chair. When he reached the age at which he could get away, he emigrated to America and did well for himself and was able to come back and tell the story. There are thousands of cases like that where unfortunates were sent to private homes, farms, etc., which are not part and parcel of this. We will not be doing the right thing unless we give those people the opportunity to tell their stories. That is how tragic Ireland's history is. We must now look forward but the only way we can do that is to look at the tragic past we allowed to happen, whether through Departments, the church and the law, which saw it happening but did nothing about it. It is unbelievable to think that the church is now in such a state but when one reads the history of what happened, one knows why that is case.
I remember being told a story by my mother who is 96 years of age of the people who cared. There were people who kept the child at home but they had to walk through the fields at night if they wanted to visit grandparents, brothers or sisters so that the prying neighbours would not see them. Those people were supposed to be neighbours but they were far from what is a true, realistic, honest and becoming neighbour. They put those people through such an ordeal that they had to walk through the fields in the dark to get to their loved ones or to ensure the child could be cared for while they went to work. We must ensure their stories can be told because that is what this is about. It is about being honest with ourselves but if we cannot be honest with ourselves, then the next generation will have to deal with the same story. This is an opportunity we should not miss. We should use every opportunity to address what we can.
I listened to the Opposition name homes at which we are not looking. It is not fair to do that. All the cases mentioned in the House should be looked at and if there is a mechanism to investigate them, it should happen. A man from County Down wrote to me to see if the home in County Wicklow would be investigated. As a survivor of the Westbank home, he wanted his history to be told. Why should he be denied that if this is a transparent investigation? Why should anybody be denied the right to tell his or her story because many people just want to tell their stories? There will be no financial gain for these people. They want to put the record straight on how they suffered, how their families suffered and so on. That story needs to be told. If this investigation is to be right and final, all those stories told will make the difference and we can move forward with pride so that the next generation of Deputies and Senators will not say we were negligent in our duties but will say that the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs moved forward with all the information to ensure that this investigation would finally deal with all the situations which I and others have mentioned.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. Listening to Deputies on all sides of the House welcome the fact that we have eventually, as a Parliament and as a people, faced this very difficult historic issue that affects many people today is something I welcome. We must acknowledge that society itself, along with the institutions, facilitated the abuse of many people. The fact that women who were pregnant outside of marriage were seen in an appalling way not only by the institutions, but by broader society and encouraged by churches, has left a terrible stain on Irish society and, more importantly, on the people directly affected.
In the context of the establishment of the mother and baby homes commission of investigation, we should not put barriers in place, preventing people from coming forward to tell their stories of how they were victimised by the State, institutions, mother and baby homes and society itself. When we shed light on the dark past, we should acknowledge and deal with it in a very sensitive manner.
I have met some of the victims of mother and baby homes who were treated in an appalling fashion, very often by their families as well by the institution in which they were placed and by broader society when they left that institution. That is something we have to acknowledge in a non-partisan and a non-political way but as a mature society and deal with it accordingly. That is why we must put no roadblocks in front of any individual who believes his or her story must be heard. I hope people avail of the facilities in place to bring forward their opinions and tell their stories of what happened to them or their siblings in the context of mother and baby homes and other institutions.
Coupled with that, there is another stark issue with which we, as a society, must deal, namely, the issue of forced adoptions, private adoptions and child trafficking. It happened on an industrial scale in this country for many years. This is an opportunity for us to allow the light to shine on this very disturbing part of history, namely, adoptions and how families were torn apart at the behest of institutions, with the encouragement of churches and at the behest of, with the encouragement of and maybe with a blind eye being turned by society at large. That is an area with which we must deal in a very sensitive and sympathetic manner to ensure that people who were trafficked, adopted or taken from their mother without her consent have an opportunity to have their views and opinions and their stories listened to. We must facilitate that.
The Minister has been very positive in listening to the views of Deputies on all sides of the House in terms of bringing forward a commission of investigation into mother and baby homes in a non-partisan way and in a way that reflects how we as a mature society must deal with the stains of the past. I hope that continues in a consensual way. I hope the views of Deputies on all sides of the House, of broader society and the many lobby groups and individuals who have had their lives torn apart in the context of living through and surviving mother and baby homes and who were torn from their mother without her consent and not knowing where they came from many years, are heard. We cannot deny them that opportunity.
I read the first edition by Paul Redmond of the standard reference guide and timeline of mother and baby homes adoption and the treatment of single mothers and their children from 1739 to 2015. It was harrowing to read how society dealt with families, how they viewed single motherhood and the way many people were forced to leave this country to hide what would be seen as a stain on a family or on a community. That is something we have to ensure is unearthed and dealt with.
There is a broader issue in that when people tell their stories, we have to react to them in a meaningful way. It is fine to shed light on them but we must allow that light to highlight the fact that many of these people were wronged by the State, wronged by institutions and wronged by society, and we will owe them something. As a society, we will have to look at the entire area of medical care and assistance as a result of which many people might have been traumatised. To put it bluntly, we must put our money where our mouths are by making sure people are adequately looked after in terms of medical care, for example, in some cases where people may need it. Some people have asked me to raise the specific issue of people who were traumatised by that experience and victimised and abused in the context of how they were dealt with in mother and baby homes, and who as a result had psychological conditions, psychiatric conditions and physical conditions. We should look sympathetically at them and not give them something just because it would make us feel better, but because they deserve it, and they need it in many cases.
For all those reasons this commission is a start. The end will be a journey not only for this country, but also for many individuals who were dealt with in an appalling manner by society and by the institutions, and we will have to address the fallout that will come from that.
I referred to adoptions earlier. Outside the institutions named in the debate tonight, there were many private hospitals and other institutions that are not named that facilitated forced adoptions and private adoptions. Whatever way we want to dress it up, it was child trafficking of some form or another and that is an area we have to unearth with great sensitivity. Some people have come to me and expressed the view that they want a light to be shed on this area as well. They want to be able to tell their story but equally to have their anonymity preserved if they so wish. That is something we have to take on board because in years to come we cannot decide that we did not deal with this matter when it was brought to our attention in a sympathetic, timely manner because time runs out for everybody. People move on in life, and we should do this as a matter of urgency to ensure that they can come forward, tell their story, have it listened to and acted upon if they so wish. As previous speakers said, that area is critically important.
Fianna Fáil welcomes the publication of the terms of reference of the independent investigation into mother and baby homes. We will try to encourage the Government to ensure that it moves in a direction that opens up this debate to facilitate all those who feel aggrieved and who have been aggrieved and hurt by the neglect of the State and by society's views at that time. While we cannot change what happened in the past, we can acknowledge it and try to provide redress to the people who have been victimised and damaged because of it.
We have had previous discussion in this Chamber over many years about the State's failings in other areas, such as child abuse in institutions. Some dark passages in our history have only come to light, and very often there is still resistance not necessarily by a political party or Government, but always a wall of resistance at times to people who have been victimised or damaged in the past. As a Republic that should cherish all its citizens, we should lead from the front in terms of facilitating a broad, open debate on many of the dark chapters in our history. The Minister has been very much to the fore in that regard. I have been deservedly critical of him in other areas but in this area he has been open and forthright in trying to ensure that we facilitate this debate and encourage as many people as possible to come forward.
I commend the motion. I hope that people can engage but, more importantly, that they will be facilitated to engage in a meaningful way so that we can once and for all shed light on this dark past.
Today is another step in a process of blowing away the locked doors to the hidden Ireland, the locked doors behind which lay decades of neglect, abuse and lives devastated, if not destroyed. Women were subjugated and shamed for so-called sins. For the longest time, society's answer was simply to lock their stories behind a door and throw away the key. Efforts were made to ensure that the keys would never be found, but no matter because we are blowing away the doors. This commission's purpose is to ensure that what was hidden and covered up will be exposed and brought into the light.
Two years ago, the Government acted decisively to address the issue of State involvement in the Magdalen laundries, rightly apologising on behalf of the State and setting up a redress fund. I said at the time that the laundries were one of the last - not the last - unresolved issues of the hidden Ireland. The State should not rest until every such last issue is brought to light.
I greatly welcome and support this motion to establish a commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and certain related matters. We already have a deeply traumatic picture of what happened in these homes because of the testimony of many brave women who had been sent to the homes, because of the testimony of those born in the homes and because of the advocacy of those campaigning on their behalf - women like my own party colleague, Deputy Anne Ferris, who tonight in this Chamber spoke so movingly of her own story and who expressed her difficulty with the draft order because she does not believe it goes far enough. We see this issue slightly differently because while some institutions may not specifically be included in the terms of reference - such as Westbank - I have sought advice and I am confident that there will still be scope for stories from those institutions to be heard. The institution I was in myself is not mentioned and I have told Deputy Ferris that I know people who were in that institution, co-graduates so to speak, of Temple Hill, and I know many people will go forward to the commission to tell their stories.
In addition to the main investigation methods of the commission, a confidential committee will allow former residents to provide accounts of their experience in private. The chair of the commission has confirmed that cases from institutions such as Westbank will not be excluded from the confidential committee and that anybody with anything of relevance to contribute can do so. While Deputy Ferris and I see this issue slightly differently, I fully respect her views and greatly admire her as a trusted colleague and a brilliant advocate for the women and children - like her mother, herself, and her sister - who went through these homes.
I think tonight of women like Sally Mulready, also born into a mother and baby home, who has stood with and fought for the women and children of the homes so passionately. I also think of women like the late Mary Raftery, who worked so hard as a journalist to bring the scandal of the industrial schools, the laundries, the homes, and similar institutions to light, and Susan Lohan and all the people in the Adoption Rights Alliance and similar organisations who have campaigned so strongly for those affected by the secret adoption system that was another feature of the hidden Ireland. I think of June Goulding, who in her memoir of her brief time working as a midwife in Bessborough, revealed in heartbreaking detail the trauma inflicted on women there. She told of how one nun running the labour ward forbade moaning or screaming when women were giving birth.
When she asked what painkillers were available for the women, she was told that "nobody gets any here, nurse, they just have to suffer". I honestly do not know what there is to say in response to that. Dostoyevsky once wrote that "compassion is the chief law of human existence", but it seems the only law in these homes at times was an inhuman one, where compassion was scorned just as much the women and children were. Compassion was also lacking outside the homes. The interdepartmental group report on mother and baby homes came about after historian Catherine Corless raised deeply troubling questions about the deaths and burials of almost 800 children in Tuam. The report set out the context for the establishment of the mother and baby homes and the stigma that surrounded so-called illegitimate births in post-independence Ireland. It gives a picture of what was known about the homes and when.
In 1939, Alice Litster, an inspector in the then Department of Local Government and Public Health, compiled a report on unmarried mothers in Ireland. She wrote in relation to mother and baby homes:
In theory, the advantage should lie on the side of the child institutionally born [because of] pre-natal care, proper diet, fresh air …. cleanliness [and] medical attention... Yet any infant born in any other circumstances [including a slum] appears to have a better chance of life. I have grave doubts of the wisdom of continuing to urge Boards of Health and Public Assistance to send patients to the special homes so long as no attempt is made to explore the causes of the abnormally high death rate.
Sally Mulready once said "comfortable Ireland for me should be quite ashamed about never asking questions". Today is an important step towards finally asking those questions and getting the answers.
It would be trite of me to suggest that this will be part of a healing process because for many of the women and children involved, it is coming too late. The children who needlessly died in infancy had no chance at life at all. There was no formal acknowledgement of the suffering of others who left the homes and died before the State embarked on this process. Nonetheless, I hope the commission will serve to belatedly put their truth on the record in a way that honours their memory. I hope the commission will represent welcome progress for the many women and children who are still alive to see this investigation announced. I hope that progress will ensure their voices are heard and their truth is told.
I thank everyone who contributed to the terms of reference. I hope they will engage further with the commission of investigation when it is established. Separately and in tandem with the establishment of the commission, work is continuing on the adoption (information and tracing) Bill to provide greater access to information for those affected by adoption who want to know their own stories. This is a complex process. To be frank, the Government is not there yet. There are differing views. We have more work to do. It is important to get it right. I am determined that we will do so.
It is important to remember that having been in a mother and baby home does not define a person. It is an aspect of that person's life. It is part of their story and their journey, but it does not and should not limit them or others' views of them. Such people should not feel limited by the manner in which their lives started. My journey involved spending my earliest years in Temple Hill and in foster care before being adopted by my family, the Burtons. I know quite a few other members of these Houses over the years who had similar experiences and for whom this was part of their story.
There are many adopted people in Ireland. They have birth mothers, fathers and families. Their adoptive parents, for the most part, have given all their love, care and attention throughout their lives to the children they adopted. Hundreds of thousands of people are affected by adoption. It is part of every extended family's story. There is an adopted child, someone who went away to have a baby and then gave that baby up or someone who adopted a child in every family. It is now time to shine a light on all of those stories.
I would like to particularly remember the former Deputy Maureen O'Carroll - the mother of all the O'Carrolls, including Brendan O'Carroll - tonight. If Deputies have a chance, I advise them to read the Official Report of the debates on the adoption law that was brought into Ireland in 1952. In the 1930s, adoption was opposed by many different forces. Even in those debates, there were conservatives who worried that the stranger child coming into the family could be after the farm or the house. The contribution made by Deputy Maureen O'Carroll, who was the first woman Labour Deputy, on this issue was full of the care and compassion that has absolutely been expressed in the contributions to this debate made by Deputies from the Labour Party and, in fairness, all the different parties in the House.
When I came into this House in 1992, adoption was not a subject that was easily spoken about. In fact, I never spoke about it publicly until 2007. Anybody who knew me knew about the story. The whole population where I lived knew about the story because people swapped stories about adoption. It was well known where I lived in Oxmantown Road. We have come a long way. I have to say I always focused on institutional redress. There was a Magdalen laundry in the school I attended. There was an orphanage there as well. I believe this commission will set about doing very important work. It is important that we get the work started, get the stories and shine the light.
I thank Deputies for their contributions to the debate on this motion. I acknowledge the constructive input of Deputies on all sides in assisting the Government's consideration of these sensitive issues. I am sure the commission of investigation will be keen to get all the information that has been gathered by the local committee in Tuam, which was mentioned by Deputy Connaughton. I will be very happy to meet the members of that committee. I would like to state my personal appreciation of those who have shared deeply personal accounts of their experiences with me. I hope they continue to find the resilience and courage to assist the commission in establishing the truth of what happened.
The valuable work that has been carried out by a number of historians and advocacy groups has informed public debate on this issue. In particular, I commend the research undertaken by Ms Catherine Corless, which brought these matters to public attention. I share her desire to have the dignity of deceased children who lived their often short lives in these homes respected and recognised.
The motion before the House deals with the arrangements agreed by the Government on 8 January 2015 in respect of the establishment of a commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and certain related matters. This debate is about much more than the arrangements for an investigation. It is an opportunity for us, as a society, to start to acknowledge and address the often harrowing manner in which women and their children were treated in mother and baby homes, how they came to be there in the first place and the circumstances of their and their children's departure from these homes.
I would like to deal with one matter before I respond to the issues and amendments raised by Deputies in the course of this debate. The draft order defines "single women" as pregnant girls or women and mothers who were not married, as the phenomenon of mother and baby homes was to address the needs of unmarried women who became pregnant. I am aware that a small number of women who were widowed, or who were married but no longer living with their husbands, may have spent time in these homes in order to receive sheltered and supervised antenatal and postnatal care. There is no suggestion that the treatment experienced by these women differed in any material way from that of women who had not married. I am satisfied that the terms of reference allow the commission to fully investigate these experiences and to make any findings and recommendations it feels warranted in relation to this group of women.
However, for the avoidance of doubt and as I outlined in the Seanad yesterday, I will make a small amendment to the definition of "single women" to include widows and married women living separately from their husbands explicitly.
I am disappointed that Deputy Anne Ferris feels she cannot put her name to the motion approving the terms of reference. In the wake of their publication, the Deputy expressed certain concerns. We met to discuss those concerns a few days ago and painstakingly worked through each to provide reassurance. Yesterday, the Government deemed it appropriate to make a technical amendment in response to one of those concerns. Accordingly, we will make a change to a definition to ensure that it is explicit that the investigation of mother and baby homes will take account of women who were unmarried, widows or married but separated.
The Oireachtas was clear that the focus of this commission of investigation was on the treatment of women and children in mother and baby homes. The commission will investigate such homes, covering an 80-year period. It is an enormous amount of work. This focused investigation is likely to produce information and evidence of profound value. The Government is satisfied that to characterise institutions such as orphanages as mother and baby homes would dissipate the commission's focus in a manner that would make an already mammoth task so dilute that the very answers we seek for those at the centre of this work - mothers and babies - would be unattainable. I recognise that Deputy Anne Ferris is disappointed that the Westbank orphanage is not included, but the decision supporting this position has been considered at length and has the Government's support. Nonetheless, Article 6 will allow the commission to hear the stories of those who were in those orphanages and to make a further determination as to what recommendations to make to me. The commission is due to make a recommendation after 18 months on the social history module, but it is open to it to make recommendations at any time. It is also open to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to request an interim report at any time.
Deputy Anne Ferris mentioned the Miss Carr's home. There was a number of Miss Carr's facilities. The one included in this investigation comprises the flatlets at 16 Northbrook Road. Others were not included. We are satisfied that this home should be included because it shared similar functions with the others listed in the appendix. I know that it is very difficult for the Deputy, but my sincere hope is that she will afford the commission the opportunity to do its work and thereby perhaps see that some of her concerns are not founded.
Deputy Naughten raised issues concerning vaccine trial records and wondered whether the commission would have the power to compel them to be made available. The commission has all powers to compel vaccine companies and others to appear before it as well as to compel the production of documents.
Deputy Boyd Barrett mentioned a number of issues. They can be included in the social history module, which is different from any other, in that it is backed up by the commission's powers to compel people to produce evidence. The module will be a key focus of the commission's work.
This debate has demonstrated the complexity of these issues and the degree to which society turned a blind eye. I have listened to the contributions of Deputies and the issues raised emphasise the challenge of seeking to define the wide range of public concerns in this investigation. I am satisfied that this independent commission has sufficient scope to examine many of these concerns, to make a determination on their relevance to the central issues in question and, where appropriate, to make any recommendation to me that it deems necessary. In this regard, I draw Deputies' attention to the provisions of Article 6, which allows the commission to make recommendations on any matter that it considers may warrant further investigation in the public interest. It may do so at any time in any of its reports. In particular, on completion of the social history module, the commission is required to report to the Minister on any matter not included in the existing scope that it feels warrants further investigation as part of its work. I hope that this provision will reassure those who feel that the process to date has not fully uncovered information relevant to their specific circumstances.
A number of Deputies have tabled amendments seeking additional matters, particularly additional institutions not listed in the appendix of mother and baby homes, to be included in the text. I do not propose to accept the amendments sought, but I will comment briefly on some of the issues raised.
The draft order before the House reflects a clear and deliberate emphasis on mother and baby homes. I want to ensure that the critical focus of this investigation is on the experiences of women and children who spent time in these homes. The State has never before brought such investigative power to the issue. The women and children affected deserve such a focused approach.
The Government has identified the 14 institutions on the list on the basis of the application of clear criteria. That is not to deny the harsh conditions experienced by many, particularly vulnerable women and children, in other settings over the course of our history. At least one of the institutions listed in the amendments is already prescribed in the appendix. It is important to reiterate that religious ethos or private status did not feature as a criterion in the examination of relevant institutions.
I thank the Minister.
I am sorry, but I feel I must finish, given that this matter is of such importance and there are three minutes remaining.
Is it agreed to allow the Minister to continue? Agreed.
The amendments tabled also request me to consider listing particular children's homes and orphanages alongside mother and baby homes. I am satisfied that the terminology being used, together with associated definitions, provides the commission with the opportunity to examine all relevant entities, whether they be care settings, agencies, societies or individuals who engaged with mother and baby homes for the purposes of placement or adoption of children from same. We know this will involve a wide range and number of different types of entities. Prescribing a list from the outset could risk limiting the extent of this strand of the investigation. Furthermore, and in the interests of maintaining the required focus on mother and baby homes, it must be recognised that other inquiries have examined related concerns, including allegations of abuse in a wide range of children's care settings and State involvement in the Magdalen laundries. I acknowledge that some may have wished to include an even more diverse range of matters within the terms of reference, but we must be clear and realistic in our approach and expectations.
Given that the matters within the scope of this investigation have not been central to any previous inquiry, it would be premature at this point to consider redress in respect of any matter within the scope of this investigation. This is part of the rationale for a commission of investigation. In the absence of relevant information, it would be difficult to make determinations on issues as potentially complex as the question of redress. Although not explicitly tasked with considering that question, the commission has the authority to make recommendations in respect of the matter in any of its reports.
This motion is another tangible step in delivering on the Government's commitment to establish a statutory investigation, with all of the necessary powers, to provide a full account in a timely manner of what happened to vulnerable women and children in mother and baby homes. I will echo Deputy Buttimer's comments. We as a society judged these women and children when what they most needed was support and help. He was right - it is our shame as a society, not theirs as individual citizens. What happened was presided over by us, no one else. This commission will be of critical help to us in understanding ourselves. I commend the motion to the House.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 48; Níl, 75.
Tá
- Adams, Gerry.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Coppinger, Ruth.
- Cowen, Barry.
- Creighton, Lucinda.
- Daly, Clare.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Donnelly, Stephen S.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Fitzmaurice, Michael.
- Flanagan, Terence.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Mathews, Peter.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Mattie.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O'Brien, Jonathan.
- O'Sullivan, Maureen.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Ross, Shane.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wallace, Mick.
Níl
- Bannon, James.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Carey, Joe.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Collins, Áine.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Conlan, Seán.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
- Costello, Joe.
- Creed, Michael.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deasy, John.
- Deering, Pat.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Feighan, Frank.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Hannigan, Dominic.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Kelly, Alan.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lawlor, Anthony.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McEntee, Helen.
- McFadden, Gabrielle.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Donovan, Patrick.
- O'Dowd, Fergus.
- O'Mahony, John.
- O'Sullivan, Jan.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Phelan, John Paul.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Twomey, Liam.
- Varadkar, Leo.
- Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Seán Ó Fearghaíl and Niall Collins; Níl, Deputies Joe Carey and Emmet Stagg.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann:” and substitute the following:
“having regard to the motion passed by Dáil Éireann on the 11th June, 2014 which recognised the need to establish the facts regarding the deaths of children at the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home in Tuam, Co. Galway between 1925 and 1961, including arrangements for the burial of these children, and which further acknowledged the considerable public anxiety as to the conditions generally in mother and baby homes and related institutions and agencies operational in the State in that era;
noting that it is the opinion of the Government that these matters of significant public concern require, in the public interest, examination by the establishment of a Commission of Investigation;
noting that the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has led the Government’s consideration of these sensitive matters;
noting the factual information compiled, and the specific matters identified for further consideration, in the Report of the Inter-Departmental Group on Mother and Baby Homes, which was laid before Dáil Éireann on the 16th July, 2014, and which has assisted to inform Government considerations on the scope, format and terms of reference for a Commission of Investigation;
noting that a draft Order proposed to be made by the Government under the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 (No. 23 of 2004) has been duly laid before Dáil Éireann on 16th January, 2015 in respect of the forgoing matters referred to, together with a statement of reasons for establishing a Commission under that Act; and
noting the deficiencies of the Schedule to the draft Order (Terms of Reference for Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order 2015), establishing the Commission, as follows:
— in Article (1), the absence of express reference to ‘related institutions and agencies’ after the reference to ‘Mother and Baby Homes’, and the consequent exclusion of a list of such institutions in Appendix 1;
— in Article (1)(I), the absence of an express reference specifying inclusion of inter-institutional transfer across the island of Ireland, north and south, and elsewhere, after the words ‘and the exit pathways on their leaving these institutions’;
— in all instances in Article (1)(III), the absence of the words ‘and morbidity’ after the word ‘mortality’;
— in Article (1)(IV), the absence of an express provision directing the Commission, where evidence of mass or otherwise unmarked graves are found, to endeavour to identify the remains, notify relatives where possible, establish cause of death including by use of scientific methods, and otherwise enable arrangements to be made for more appropriate reburial;
— in Article (1)(VIII), the absence of the words ‘including marital status, socio-economic status,’ before the words ‘religion, race, traveller identity or disability’;
— in Article (2), the setting of the timeframe as ‘1922 to 1998’ rather than ‘1922 to present’ and the absence of the words ‘or increase’ after the words ‘may reduce’; and
— the absence of the following provision, which should appear after Article (2):
— ‘The Commission shall take proactive measures to alert individuals affected by its inquiry, in person where known, or through advertising and by means of public statements, in both jurisdictions on the island of Ireland, in Britain, in the United States, and in such other jurisdictions where those affected may reasonably be thought likely to reside, to ensure that they understand their rights to testify in private or in public.’;
— the absence of the following provision, which should appear before Article (3):
— ‘Pursuant to the provisions at section 11 of the Act, the Commission shall provide for public hearing of testimony by persons who were formally resident or who worked in, or who were otherwise affected by, the institutions listed in Schedule 1 during the relevant period, as of right, if such persons so request, or if the Commission is satisfied that it is otherwise desirable in the interests of both the investigation and fair procedures to hear in public all or part of the evidence of a witness that the Commission has called. In this regard, the Commission shall make recommendations to the Minister as to necessary arrangements regarding the right to legal advice and/or other advocacy of those testifying before the Commission.’;
— the absence of the following provision, which should appear after Article (7):
— ‘The Commission shall, in making its interim and final reports, make recommendations as to ensuring effective remedy to the victims and survivors of the institutions and practices identified in its report. As one component part of its consideration of the question of effective remedy, the Commission shall make recommendations as to official acknowledgment, apology and memorial. In making its recommendations as to all aspects of effective remedy in its reports, the Commission shall also consider the question of timing of remedies, taking into account the advanced age and infirmity of many of the identified survivors, ensuring justice is not denied them as a consequence of unnecessary delay.’;
— in Appendix I, the absence of a provision for ‘Related institutions as follows’, which should appear after the list of ‘Mother and Baby Homes as follows’ at (1) of Appendix I, and which should read:
— ‘(1) Avoca House, Co. Wicklow;
(2) Braemar House, Co. Cork;
(3) Saint Gerard’s, Herbert Avenue, Dublin 4;
(4) Saint Philomena’s, Leeson Street, Dublin 2/Northbrook Road, Dublin 6;
(5) St Joseph’s Babies Home, Stamullen, Co. Meath;
(6) St Kevin’s Institution, James Street, Dublin 8;
(7) St Patrick’s Infant Dietetic Hospital, Temple Hill, Blackrock, Co. Dublin;
(8) St Rita’s Nursing Home, Sandyford Road, Dublin 4;
(9) The Nursery Rescue Society, Fermoy, Cork;
(10) Westbank (Mayil) Orphanage, Co. Wicklow;
(11) and any others as the Commission may identify during the course of its investigation.’; and
— in Appendix I, the absence of the following provisions after paragraph (2), which should read:
— ‘(3) Magdalene Laundries
The Magdalene Laundries constituted a significant “exit pathway” referred to in Article 1(I), as part of the institutional architecture of containment of “problem” women and girls together with the Mother and Baby Homes listed at (1) above, the Related Institutions listed at (1.1) above, and the County Homes referred to at (2) above. As there has not been a previous Commission of Investigation or other statutory inquiry regarding these institutions, and as the McAleese Report was limited to the question of State involvement, it is therefore specified that the Commission should also have specific regard to the experiences of the women who resided and worked in these institutions, and shall exercise its discretion to extend the scope and intensity of the investigation as provided for in Article (13) to include the Magdalene Laundries in its inquiries.
(4) Registered Adoption Agencies and Related Institutions
Registered adoption agencies constituted a significant “exit pathway” referred to in Article 1(I), as part of the institutional architecture for dealing with children born to unmarried women and girls, together with the Mother and Baby Homes listed at (1) above, the Related Institutions listed at (1.1) above, and the County Homes referred to at (2) above. It is therefore specified that the Commission should also have specific regard to the agencies, hospitals and other institutions, and related professionals alleged to have been involved in facilitating illegal or forced adoptions and/or illegal birth registrations, and shall exercise its discretion to extend the scope and intensity of the investigation as provided for in Article (13) to include registered adoption agencies and related institutions in its inquiries.’; and
noting the deficiency in the second paragraph of the Statement of Reasons, whereby the words ‘a comprehensive account of these institutions’ should instead read ‘a comprehensive account of these and related institutions and agencies’; and
approves the draft Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and Certain Related Matters) Order, 2015, but strongly urges that the Government amend the terms of reference of, and the statement of reasons for establishing, the Commission of Investigation at the earliest opportunity, in the manner outlined above.”
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 48; Níl, 74.
Tá
- Adams, Gerry.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Coppinger, Ruth.
- Cowen, Barry.
- Creighton, Lucinda.
- Daly, Clare.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Donnelly, Stephen S.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Fitzmaurice, Michael.
- Flanagan, Terence.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Mattie.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Mathews, Peter.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O'Brien, Jonathan.
- O'Sullivan, Maureen.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Ross, Shane.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wallace, Mick.
Níl
- Bannon, James.
- Barry, Tom.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Carey, Joe.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Collins, Áine.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Conlan, Seán.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
- Costello, Joe.
- Creed, Michael.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deasy, John.
- Deering, Pat.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Feighan, Frank.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Hannigan, Dominic.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Kelly, Alan.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lawlor, Anthony.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McEntee, Helen.
- McFadden, Gabrielle.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Donovan, Patrick.
- O'Dowd, Fergus.
- O'Mahony, John.
- O'Sullivan, Jan.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Phelan, John Paul.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Varadkar, Leo.
- Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Aengus Ó Snodaigh and Sandra McLellan; Níl, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Joe Carey.
Amendment declared lost.
Question, "That the motion be agreed to", put and declared carried.