Bríd Smith: Demands full redress and accountability on mother and baby homes
Bríd Smith addressed the Dáil on failings around mother and baby homes, urging stronger redress, accountability and political will. She criticised provisions in the bill that allow unilateral ministerial decisions, the six-month eligibility limit for redress, the projected costs, and the Commission report's findings.
Campaigners and the Toome case
She acknowledged campaigners and relatives around the Toome case and welcomed changes taken on by the minister in response to their concerns. She noted that Catherine Corliss and others had highlighted issues with the original draft, and she welcomed the dis-application of the Coroners Act and commitments to involve relatives in exhumation and identification processes.
Exhumation powers and advisory panel concerns
Smith raised concerns relayed by Sally's separation, appropriation and loss initiative about a retained provision that empowers ministers to unilaterally decide whether a site is exhumed or memorialised. She described the proposed advisory panel as unambitious and said it severely limits input from survivors and representative groups.
Redress scheme eligibility and cost criticisms
She criticised the proposal to limit redress eligibility to those with six months or more in a mother and baby home, calling the threshold arbitrary, unscientific and unjustified given lasting trauma. She noted a report estimating that including all 58,000 survivors would cost 1.6 billion and said civil servants warned such costs could derail attempts to support the most in need.
Assets of institutions and the Woods deal warning
Smith argued that many orders and institutions that ran the homes possess substantial assets and land, and she urged seizing those assets rather than repeating the "Woods deal" dynamic. She warned against allowing institutions to set the terms, delay, or manipulate redress contributions.
Critique of the Commission report
She was highly critical of the Commission's report, saying many victims found excerpts of their evidence misrepresented or inaccurate and that the report downplayed institutional culpability by referencing wider society. She contrasted that with claims that some 9,000 children died in the homes and rejected suggestions that the findings should absolve institutions of responsibility.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
I am all ears listening to the concerns that Holly Cairns has raised and they are very detailed and I will be looking forward to your response to them. On the way in here, I am sure most of you would have noticed that Sheila is yet again outside with her display on the question of mother and baby homes and the suffering that has went on. Within that, she mentions the 9,000 children who are alleged to have died across 18 homes. Sean Ross has mentioned Bespera, Castle Pollard, Dunboyne and more. It just reminded me, about a year ago, I think it was, I watched a very interesting documentary on Al Jazeera where they showed you aerial archaeology of Castle Pollard and the graves around it, what they suspect are graves around it. And I think that whatever comes out of all of this and the legislation and the complications around it, it cannot just stop at Toome. But I do want to start by acknowledging that you have listened to the campaigners and the relatives around the Toome case. And that Catherine Corliss has said that you have taken on board issues that she and campaigners had with the original draft of the bill. And I welcome that, specifically issues around the dis-application of the Coroners Act to those sites. And to listen and involve relatives in the process of the exhumation of remains and the identification of those remains has been hugely important. However, I also want to raise just a couple of issues quickly that were brought to my attention today from Sally's separation, appropriation and loss initiative. And they have concerns around the bill. They say that you have retained a highly controversial provision that empowers ministers to unilaterally decide if a site is to be exhumed and investigated or subject to a process of memorialisation. It also says the proposal of an advisory panel is unambitious and severely limits the input and guidance for so many survivors and their representative groups. So I think that notwithstanding these concerns, it is important to acknowledge that the bill is a much changed bill from the original one that we saw. And that legislation that continues to ignore the wishes and views of those directly involved in this terrible travesty of our history cannot proceed. And that it is very good that you have listened to survivors and their campaigners and this. But I hope it also shows that where there is a political will to respond to witnesses and those affected, we can also bring it into other aspects of legislation around the mother and baby homes and the legacy. Because having acknowledged that in relation to this specific bill, there are serious questions on the wider issues connected with Toome, other sites, the loss of all these children and their mothers and what happened to them. And the first issue I just want to mention to you is the redress scheme itself. The attempt to place a time limit on it to those who can access it. The idea that those with less than six months spent in a mother and baby homes cannot access it. I have to say that you should listen to campaigners on this issue also, like you have done on the specifics of this bill. It is certain that trauma and lifelong effects follow all those who have been less than six months in these homes. And to choose that is an arbitrary and unscientific limit without any justification, either morally, ethically or legally. And the second issue is the predicated costs of the redress scheme. A redress scheme, according to a report, including all 58,000 survivors of mother and baby homes would cost 1.6 billion. Civil servants have alleged to have warned the government and could derail attempts to support the survivors most in need. But let us be clear about this and I really want to emphasise this. Many of the institutions and orders that ran these homes have enormous assets and land. Others have built medical and hospital facilities, empires really, on the graves of those infants. And again, if we have the political will, we can and should seize the assets of those orders, and whatever remains of the legal entities that they have evolved into. We cannot repeat the disaster of the Woods deal, where a subservient state and political class allowed the Church and its institutions to put a figure on what they agreed to donate for the torture and abuse of children in this state over the decades to a redress scheme. They were allowed to manipulate and drag their heels for years and are still allowed to do so. And lastly, I want to comment again and urge the Minister to show the political will to deal with the gaping wound that the Commission's report has inflicted on the people affected by this entire episode in our history. Be clear that the findings of the Commission report are not acceptable to many, many victims and survivors, full stop. Not even at a political level by TDs and Senators, but by the people who are mostly affected. Several witnesses who testified to the Commission found that excerpts from their evidence were taken out of the report. It contained inaccuracies, misrepresentations, etc. We all know how seriously damaging it was. In stark contrast to those reports, we know that 9,000 children died in the homes under investigation. It is said that we found little evidence on issues such as forced adoptions, abuse and involuntary detention. Survivors have told us that the Commission's findings ignored flatly and contradicted their personal testimony. That cannot be allowed to stand. Moreover, Minister, it is not acceptable that a State-conducted Commission should leave on the record the findings that institutions and religious orders were no more culpable for the torture and deaths in these homes than was general society. The attempt to lessen the responsibility of those directly responsible by referencing societal views is and remains the most egregious aspect of the report. It is one that we need to see a political will in this House to address and correct. The attempt to absolve the sins of religious orders by blaming us all is further abuse of those victims. I will finish by asking you to show the same political will in addressing those issues that you have done in the extent that you have addressed the TUM issue in the details of this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you So. Thank you.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
