Skip to main content
Normal View

Mother and Baby Homes Inquiries

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 20 January 2015

Tuesday, 20 January 2015

Questions (111)

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Question:

111. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the details of all homes and institutions that were excluded from the proposed inquiry into mother and baby homes, including the Magdalen laundries and Westbank; the grounds on which these were excluded; the measures being put in place to ensure survivors of these excluded institutions, now all in their senior years, will be heard, acknowledged and entitled to redress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2199/15]

View answer

Oral answers (11 contributions)

We have moved on to Other Questions and I ask Deputies to watch the clock.

I tabled my priority question as part of the lottery system and, strange to relate, have been seeking the first position for a long time and here we are.

Is the Deputy complaining?

It allows me the opportunity to once again address the issues we addressed during the priority question moment and the focus is again, of course, on those entities and people - that is what this is about - who consider they are currently excluded from the terms of reference for the upcoming work of the commission of investigation. I would like to explore this issue further with the Minister.

The proposed terms of reference for the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes and certain related matters were announced on Friday, 9 January 2015. Since the announcement, there has been a general acknowledgement of the comprehensive scope of the proposed investigative framework which reflects the range of matters the Government was asked to consider by the House and is a fair and balanced response to the many requests for related issues to be included.

During the course of consultations with those most centrally affected by these issues and political colleagues across the spectrum a clear consensus emerged on the need to thoroughly examine the experiences of those who had spent time in mother and baby homes. These institutions have not been the central focus of previous statutory investigations. The approach taken, therefore, places a deliberate emphasis on the experiences of women and children who spent time in mother and baby homes in the period 1922 to 1998. Accordingly, the terms of reference focus on institutions which can be identified as having both the primary function of providing sheltered and supervised ante and post-natal facilities for single mothers and their children and an ethos which those running the institutions considered to promote a regime of work, training or education as part of an overall approach to either rehabilitating single mothers before they left the institution or giving them training to live independently. The commission will also investigate a representative sample of those county homes which had a considerable focus on these services.

On the basis of the information available, I am satisfied that the institutions included in Schedule 1 to the draft order meet the above-mentioned criteria, whereas the institutions referred to by the Deputy do not as they did not provide this specific range of services. However, it is not accurate to describe these institutions as being excluded from the commission's work. The commission is tasked with examining the extent to which other institutions were part of the entry or exit pathways for single mothers and children entering or leaving these mother and baby homes. It is certainly open to it to give consideration to the role of the institutions referred to by the Deputy as part of the pathways and, in particular, the practices and procedures for the placement of children outside mother and baby homes.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

This will be a significant strand of its investigations. The issues to be examined in the social history module also explicitly cite adoption societies, homes for infants or children and Magdalen laundries.

It is important to be clear and realistic as to our expectations. The commission is not intended to, nor could it, investigate every type of institution where it is considered there might have been past deficits or failings; rather, my objective is to establish a focused commission with all of the necessary powers which is capable of establishing effectively relevant facts in a reasonable timeframe. This specificity is required under the enabling legislation. It is also the case that other inquiries have examined concerns about a wide range of settings, including children's homes and Magdalen laundries. The proposed arrangements, in particular, Article 6 of the terms of reference, ensure the commission will have sufficient opportunities to identify additional matters which it considers may warrant investigation. It is specifically tasked with reporting to me recommendations necessary in this regard.

The commission will be critically important in coming to terms with our history. Some of what we learn will be painful, but the commission will establish how we, as a society, responded to single women and their children who needed support and assistance, rather than judgement. Details of the commission are available on my Department's website, including a number of explanatory documents.

I was hoping my anticipation that the Minister would give the same answer would be wrong, but there we are. Given the reference to institutions that were not the subject of previous State address, it is more than sad that the Magdalen laundries will be excluded because of the McAleese report which was a huge disappointment for those who had gone through the Magdalen laundry experience. The Minister cannot be unaware of its failings, how it failed those who had gone through that experience and the need to include the Magdalen laundries in the list of those institutions that should be in the address of the commission of investigation to get under way.

I emphasise to the Minister that there are a number of Protestant related entities that are not included and that there is great disquiet among that community and the cohort of people directly affected.

I have already spoken about Westbank Orphanage and also want to speak about the Nursery Rescue Society which was linked with the Church of Ireland Magdalen Home and Braemar House, all of which have been excluded. I use the word again and invite the Minister to give an assurance that that is not the case. Given that they are not on the list of entities, there is a great degree of concern and real, compounded hurt for those who feel they have, once again, been ignored and marginalised.

Although I do not have the full list, the Protestant Magdalen Home which was a mother and baby home is included and named. It is open to the commission to give consideration to the role of the institutions referred to by the Deputy as part of the pathways and particularly the practices and procedures for the placement of children outside mother and baby homes. This will be a significant strand of its investigations. The issues to be examined in the social history module explicitly include adoption societies, homes for infants or children and Magdalen laundries. It is important to be clear and realistic as to our expectations. The commission cannot investigate every type of institution where it is considered there might have been past deficits or failings - God knows, there were many - rather, my objective is to establish a focused commission with all of the necessary powers capable of establishing effectively the relevant facts in a reasonable timeframe. The timeframe involved is critically important to many people involved who do not want it to go on for years. That is why I have set a limit of 36 months, with an interim report to be provided at 18 months and a facility for the commission to issue earlier reports if it so desires and a right retained by the Minister to seek earlier interim reports, if desired.

The Minister will agree, as he has done previously, that this is a last opportunity for many. In his response to me, Deputies Sandra McLellan and Robert Troy who are present he was specific when he afforded us a briefing in advance of the media briefing on Friday a week ago. Those who went through the experience of being in any of the institutions or locations not listed in the terms of reference should be able to seek an opportunity to come before the commission of investigation, either through the confidential committee or any other mechanism the commission will provide. This must happen in order that they can be heard, have their pain acknowledged and, I hope, the commission can recommend to the Minister that they not be excluded from any subsequent redress scheme. Will the Minister, please, confirm that this was the answer he gave us on Friday a week ago? Having asked the question earlier about the trafficking of children throughout the country by various interests, mainly religious, how does he expect the commission of investigation to notify all potential witnesses? How widely will the net be cast? Does he expect all means of media communication and others to be employed? Will it apply across the entire island of Ireland and in all of the other international settings where the possible illegal adoption practices resulted in the placement of children?

I have just found the list of institutions to be examined and No. 6 is Denny House, Eglinton Road, Dublin 4, originally the Church of Ireland Magdalen Home, 8 Lower Leeson Street, Dublin 2.

I understand, but the Nursery Rescue Society linked with it is not on the list.

The issue of the trafficking of children is open to being considered by the commission which will decide how it is to be examined and how the media will be used to contact people. It will be open to the commission to recommend redress or otherwise. For me to do so now would be to prejudge the outcome of the commission's inquiries, which would be utterly wrong and would undermine it.

I take this opportunity to thank Judge Yvonne Murphy, Dr. William Duncan and Professor Mary Daly of UCD for taking up this onerous task. I am sure they will do a good job. They will have nothing but the well-being of the people concerned to the fore and I have no doubt but that they will be comprehensive and open in their dealings, except where it comes to the confidential committee where people's right to privacy will be respected. It will be important that people have the right to speak in private when obliged to relive the horrors they had to endure many years ago. Equally, it will be open to anybody from these institutions, including those mentioned by the Deputy, to approach the commission for a hearing and it will be open to the commission to hear them.

Top
Share