‘Grace’ whistleblower breaks silence: a voice speaking up from the shadows
The HSE and the Health Board simply refused to listen to anyone who spoke up, writes one of the Grace foster home whistleblowers
IN what has become known as ‘the Grace case’, the media has been central to exposing the horrendous abuses perpetrated on vulnerable people and the failure of the State to protect those reliant on it.
The public has borne witness to interview after interview with silhouettes of unnamed people, speaking in the shadows, often with their voices distorted, in order to protect the anonymity of those placed within the foster home.
What we have learned is that, despite most of the children placed in the home being non-verbal, there was no shortage of people willing to speak up about what was happening or, indeed, about the failure of the Health Board and the HSE to protect our most vulnerable citizens.
In 1992, a mother of a child known to us as ‘Sarah’ spoke up and, according to Sarah’s sister, instead of being listened to, the family were ‘bullied’ by the Health Board into thinking it was ‘all in [her] mother’s head’.
In 1996, a concerned mother of another child wrote to the Health Board, outlining the abuse her daughter alleged she had suffered in the home, warning the Health Board to stop using the placement. Again, the Health Board refused to listen.
In 2009, my colleague and I made a Protected Disclosure to the HSE’s Authorised Person, alleging that ‘Grace’ had been left at risk, along with over 40 other children who had been placed there, and further alleging that there had been a ‘cover-up’ of the HSE’s repeated failure to respond appropriately.
In 2010, a HSE employee made a further protected disclosure about the case to the HSE’s authorised person.
There have also been a number of former residents of the home who have made disclosures about abuse they allege was perpetrated upon them in the home.
In 2014, a further protected disclosure was made to the Department of Health by a HSE employee.
In 2015, I again made a protected disclosure, this time choosing a more circuitous route through the Public Accounts Committee on the basis of non-publication of two reports on the foster home commissioned by the HSE, procurement issues and the failure to investigate matters previously disclosed in 2009, namely the allegations of a ‘cover-up’.
The HSE again refused to listen, assuring the Public Accounts Committee that all matters had been fully investigated, there were no procurement issues and insisting that it had been precluded from publishing the reports about its failings because of a direction from An Garda Siochana.
It seems there were countless people willing to speak up over 25 years but we were all talking to people operating in a system that refuses to listen.
Had they listened, Sarah’s sister would not be required to tell her story on Prime Time, pleading with the Minister to finally ensure a timely enquiry into her sister’s case some 25 years later.
Had they listened, ‘Grace’ would have been removed from the home following the allegations in 1996.
Had they listened, a thorough investigation of all disclosures would have been undertaken in 2009, including an investigation into allegations of a ‘cover-up’.
Had they listened, it would not have been necessary for a Committee responsible for public accounts to question the HSE about its failures to respond to allegations of abuse.
Had they listened, TDs John Deasy and John McGuinness would not have been required to use Dail privilege to expose the truth about the most egregious abuses allegedly perpetrated upon most vulnerable children; putting the most private of information into the public domain, in order to force the Government to include all those who were placed in the home in the Terms of Reference for the proposed Commission of Investigation.
The initial Terms of Reference had proposed that Grace’s case would be examined in isolation, with no guarantee that the other 46 cases would be investigated. Furthermore, it did not allow for a detailed examination of how the HSE had handled protected disclosures or, indeed, how those making the disclosures were mistreated.
My colleague and I travelled to Leinster House after work on Tuesday in a desperate attempt to plead with members not to vote for the Terms of Reference as proposed.
Unfortunately, although Labour Party leader Brendan Howlin had taken a considered view that they were too narrow and, ultimately, not fit for purpose, it was clearly a lost cause if Fianna Fail were to back the motion.
Fianna Fail’s Spokesperson on Disability, Margaret Murphy O’Mahony, rose to her feet, as we watched from the public gallery, and stated that her party welcomed the Terms of Reference as proposed by Junior Minister Finian McGrath.
A frantic hour followed, with John McGuinness summoning us to the corridor from the public gallery. An experienced politician knows there is no point watching on as things fall apart, that is time to be a public representative and to do some politicking.
It is rather difficult to articulate the level of desperation one feels when seven years of work, seeking a full and final inquiry into these matters, is reduced to a series of five-minute meetings with opposition leaders and the Minister in the corridors of Leinster House.
As the building emptied for the night, just the odd journalist passed by, eager to hear the hushed conversation between two ‘whistleblowers’ and a clearly exhausted Minister.
It became clear that Micheal Martin was key. Independents and Labour had lined up against the motion, but it was all dependent on Fianna Fail, who had outlined their support for the Government’s motion. ‘New politics’, they say. When I got home, I sent a late night email to Micheal Martin, restating my concerns... one last throw of the dice. The next morning, we huddled around the computer screen awaiting the resumption of the Dail debate. Micheal Martin was nowhere to be seen.
The debate continued with a handful of TDs in attendance and John Deasy and John McGuinness making impassioned pleas to their colleagues. John McGuinness heaped shame upon those willing to leave out the other 46 people from the inquiry, suggesting that, if they were to vote for the motion, those present would ‘become the abusers’.
John Deasy suggested that his colleagues ‘hold off’ on accepting the HSE’s assurances that there was no conspiracy to cover-up its failures. He outlined a chronology of events orchestrated by HSE officials to silence the people trying to speak up. He referred to it as, ‘pretty twisted stuff... almost kafka-esque’.
No one chose to speak after Deputies Deasy and McGuinness. The debate would end prematurely, but not before it had descended into chaos. Enda Kenny was due to take Leaders Questions after the debate and had reportedly sent Simon Harris into the Chamber, instructing Finian McGrath to withdraw the motion before the vote.
After a year of work by Conor Dignam SC, the Department of Health and the Attorney General, the Terms of Reference were ultimately drawn up by representatives of all parties in a room in Leinster House that afternoon. ‘New Politics’, perhaps. All that remains now, is the small matter of an organisation that allowed this to happen to vulnerable people and to those who tried to speak up, without any accountability.
Unfortunately, although shocked by the allegations of abuse within the home, the public seems altogether unsurprised at the failure of the HSE to respond — or, indeed, its treatment of whistleblowers. The HSE seems to rely on the public’s acceptance that we have created an unstoppable monster, which is unapologetic in providing us with a plethora of scandals and yet a total lack of accountability.
The HSE also seems to rely on the fact that those who know about the worst of its failures will only ever be able to speak up from the shadows as nameless, faceless people, prohibited from ever telling the public the true details, owing to the confines of confidentiality.
I am precluded from telling you all of the unspeakable things that are alleged to have occurred. I am precluded from telling you about all of the horrendous examples of failure and incompetence, which have had untold consequences for the children placed in this home.
I am precluded from telling you all of the reasons why I alleged that there was a concerted effort to withhold information in order to protect the HSE and its servants.
Dail privilege, however, has afforded us the opportunity to hear some of this detail laid bare, both on the floor of the Dail and in Committee Rooms of Leinster House.
Deputies Deasy and McGuinness were absolutely scathing in their critique of the Terms of Reference, as proposed by Minister McGrath.
They outlined how, over 25 years, the Health Board and the HSE had failed to listen, failed to act and then engaged in a concerted effort to conceal these failures.
A truly diseased system, for which accountability is the only cure.
Those who failed to protect, those who failed to listen, and those who concealed these failures must account for their actions before the Commission of Investigation and in the ongoing criminal investigation.
But, what of those who defended the actions and inaction of the HSE when they appeared before PAC on a number of occasions in relation to these matters? These exchanges seemed to produce more questions than answers.
The Public Accounts Committee met on Thursday and has offered the HSE an opportunity to come before it to correct the record where it seems less than complete or, indeed, less than accurate information may have been provided by the HSE.
It is an opportunity for the HSE to account for its actions. The manner in which the HSE chooses to respond to this opportunity will be most telling. It will allow the public to decide whether it can be confident that those responding to these questions before the Public Accounts Committee can now be trusted to ensure the system has finally decided to listen.
‘It seems there were countless people willing to speak up over 25 years — but we were all talking to people working in a system that refuses to listen’