Kathleen Funchion: Calls for Action on Mother and Baby Institutions Report

Okay, thanks very much, Cairn Comhairle, and thanks, Minister. At the start, I want to say, and I think I've said this in here before, that sometimes I feel you were left with an awful lot of the legacy issues. The cynical part of me thinks possibly other ministers didn't mind leaving the stacks of files on their desk for somebody else to deal with. And I do acknowledge that you've dealt with a lot of the outstanding issues in relation to the mother and baby institutions. We haven't always agreed. In fact, we've disagreed on lots of parts of it. But I do acknowledge that, that you have tried to push it on, at least unlike previous ministers who held the post before you. So the comments I make, I make in that, I suppose, spirit. When I was thinking about today and exactly what I wanted to say, because sometimes there's so much that you can kind of, you don't even know where to start. And then other times, I think when we talk about this topic, I feel like I've, I say the same thing time and time again. And for me, I suppose, a lot of it goes back to, there is a terrible patriarchal mindset at the heart of all this. First of all, if we look at the history of the institutions and how or why they were even allowed to exist. But if we also just take a look at some of the timeline in relation to the report, the commission of investigation report, first of all, we had the leak. At the time, we actually called for a guard investigation into it. There was an internal investigation launched. But as far as I'm aware, we have no information on that or what exactly happened. Then we had the actual report itself. And I will never forget sitting upstairs in the office waiting for the report to be handed around to us or put into our pigeonholes. I will never forget reading that report because I just was dismayed from the very start. I tried to say, okay, look, I've only started this. There's obviously a lot in it. Let's see how it goes. But honestly, the dismissive tone and the disingenuous language just was a disaster. And that's, you know, saying something. I really do believe, and I think a lot of survivors felt this, that maybe not the authors of the report, but everybody else understood, you know, the torture, the deprivation and the humiliation that was hidden behind the walls of those institutions. When you think of 15%, which is the equivalent of 9,000 of all of the babies that were born into one of these institutions died, that just tells its own very, very sad and very horrific story. There was a call from some quarters to repudiate the report. We asked, as a children's committee, we invited the authors of the report to come in. They, of course, declined. There was then an investigation. RTE did a programme in relation to illegal adoptions. I believe there is a report due from Dr Niall Muldoon in relation to that as well. And I just say all this just to see, like, we already know how much people who are sent to these institutions or born into the institutions were failed. And then they had all of this as well. Then Professor Daly, to add insult to injury, went and spoke at an event in Oxford. Again, they were asked to come into the committee to give some explanation of their findings. No, they would not do that. They totally refused any of those invitations. Then we had the information and tracing bill. And while I acknowledge it is a step forward for a lot of people, there is still that mandatory information session. And that brings me back to this whole patriarchal mindset that it is sort of like people who were sent to the institutions or born there have to be constantly told, well, now we are not really sure if you are going to be able for all of this. And that is just inherent in all of this, this, you know, we kind of know best attitude. We then had judicial cases which were successful. And then in contrast to that, we had the Burials Bill, which I actually think was a really good example of legislation being done the right way. Stuff that was discussed in pre-ledge being taken on board, amendments, not all of them, but some of them at committee stage being taken on board. And that is in contrast, I believe, to this piece of legislation and also to the information and births legislation. So, in relation particularly to this piece, I kind of give that, and I know nobody in here necessarily needs a history on the situation, but I just think it is important for us to realise how time and time again people have been failed by the state and failed by the religious organisations, failed by the system. And unfortunately, you know, we are going to be added into that failure if we, as this generation of politicians, don't take this properly on board and actually make the proper recommendations and ensure that it isn't just words on a page and it isn't just nodding heads of sympathy and, you know, it's terrible what happened and we can all apologise. But we actually have to see the proper action. And by that, I mean a lot of the stuff that was in the Oak consultation report, which survivors were very, very happy with that process. So, the specific things I want to mention are in relation to the six-month rule. For me, I just, I will never understand that. I cannot understand how, you know, you could be seven or eight months in an institution and because you were maybe five months, all of a sudden you are totally left out. I totally disagree with that and we will be bringing forward amendments at committee stage. I don't like the inclusion of a legal waiver. Again, I think it goes back to that mindset of we start to know best and there is an issue of trust. I also want to take the opportunity to put on the record that I know of some legal firms who, since the report was published, are writing to survivors, trying to kind of say to them that they potentially need legal assistance with some of the stuff. And I think that those legal firms should take a good long look at themselves because in some cases they are just trying to get people to sign up and get money from very, very vulnerable people. And those firms know exactly who they are and I think that they should absolutely stop in that situation. The exclusion of the boarded out is just horrific. I know you made reference to it in your own speech as well, Minister. I particularly want to mention, and I know you are aware of them, the two brothers that Deputy Pah Daly regularly refers to, James Sugru, and his brother that were in the boarded out. And it says, you say in your own speech about how they would be able to apply if they were six months. Of course, that does not take into account the fact that in most cases they were used as slaves in this situation. And I also want to ask a question in relation to that. Is it still just a list of institutions that were in the mother and baby investigation or has it been expanded? Also, the UN human rights experts, you know, they spoke a lot about systemic racism faced by mixed race people who were resident in the institutions. And I think a lot of that does not seem to have been taken on board. 58,208 mothers and children passed through one of the mother and baby institutions. And this is the total number of people who should be supported through any proposed redress scheme. And that brings me on to the pharmaceutical companies and the religious orders who have come out and who have publicly apologised. So therefore they have acknowledged their role in all of this. And yet they seem to think that they have absolutely no part to pay when it comes to writing a cheque. And I think it's absolutely disgusting, particularly when we think of the amount of wealth that religious organisations have. And when we look at the pharmaceutical companies and the amount of wealth that they have too. And I think that they should be pursued strongly. And I actually think that we should be looking to see, is there any way of pursuing them through the courts? Because I think if somebody acknowledges and apologises for something publicly, surely they are saying publicly they have a very strong role to play. And I think that is just absolutely disgusting to think that those companies felt it was okay to use people as human guinea pigs. And they can just walk away from their responsibilities now. I just want to again acknowledge absolutely everybody that has ever contacted me or anyone I have ever met. And a lot of the time, you know, we acknowledge and we say, and I know it's meant sincerely in relation to the bravery and the courage of people. But I always think as well, and I think particularly for women who were sent to these institutions, when they come in and they feel they need to tell you all their very personal medical stuff. But just because they're trying to get access to medical services, that is just totally and utterly wrong. A lot of the time, they're very, very personal situations that you would potentially not even want to discuss with your own family. And then you're coming into a total stranger, because you're so desperate to get medical services being left on waiting lists. And I hope that whatever medical card is being proposed, it's going to be strong enough that they're not just going to join the back of the queue of a three or four or five or six year waiting list, that they actually will get the services, particularly for women who are left to give birth in the most horrific of circumstances and who physically have never been the same since. I think I feel strongly about that. And I feel strongly about all of it, to be honest, but I really, it really bothers me about the religious institutions and the pharmaceutical companies. And I hope they're watching today, not that they probably care, but I really, really hope that we can go after them in some way, shape or form, and that they are made to pay their fair share of everything. But there is no price that can be put. And we all know that. But the very, very first thing you do is you don't start by excluding people. Everybody needs to be included in this scheme. And the Oak recommendations that survivors trusted, they really, really trusted that process. And anyone I spoke to actually was, I don't know if happy is the right word, but they, they, they were very satisfied with that process. They felt they were listened to, they felt they were given time. And those are the recommendations that we should be looking at today for the redress. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.