Fix this mess!
Catherine Corless says government must take blame for mother and baby homes crisis
THE Government must shoulder the blame for the deepening crisis over the controversial Mother and Baby Homes Report, historian Catherine Corless said this weekend.
Ms Corless, who uncovered the Tuam baby scandal, spoke out amid the fallout from the decision of the three members of the Mother and Baby Homes Commission to refuse an invitation to appear before an Oireachtas committee.
Tánaiste Leo Varadkar and Children’s Minister Roderic O’Gorman have both called on the commissioners to reconsider their decision, while Mr Varadkar said it was ‘deeply regrettable’ that they decided not to appear.
However, Ms Corless said the Government must take responsibility for the limited terms of reference the Commission of Investigation into the Mother and Baby Homes was asked to work under.
She told the Irish Mail on Sunday: ‘I blame the Government more so than I blame the commission as the terms for the inquiry were set by the Government before the commission was assembled and therefore the State has responsibility over the outcome of the report.’
Ms Corless said she considers the focus on the commission’s decision not to appear before the Oireachtas as ‘a distraction’ from what could be done to finally reach a resolution for the ageing survivors of the homes.
When asked about the commission’s decision not to appear before the Oireachtas, she said: ‘I’m just wondering, is it in any way important at the end of the day? The
Government are apparently latching on to it.
‘The way I see it at the moment is that next month the Dáil will be at recess and time is running out and they seem to be putting a lot of effort into the need for the commission to come before the Oireachtas.
‘I would prefer the Government to get down to business and take action by putting in an amendment to the report to officially acknowledge the testimonies of the survivors.
‘Do we really need the commission to sit before the Oireachtas and acknowledge the inquiry was not survivor-friendly in order to do that? This is stalling things further. The terms of reference were set out by the Government and was backed by the Government, so responsibility lies with them.’
The historian said she no longer holds trust in the Government as she and survivors have experienced continuous delays in promises made, particularly with regard to adoption legislation to allow survivors access to records.
Sources told the MoS this weekend the Cabinet is set to consider plans to appoint an independent expert who will carry out a review of testimonies given by survivors to the commission.
Ms Corless said she would be in favour of a move to form a separate report reflecting those testimonies to sit alongside the commission’s report. But she insisted this would need to be done within a short timeframe, adding: ‘All of this should have no impact on the redress programme for survivors or slow it down.’
Chair of the Oireachtas Children’s Committee Kathleen Funchion also stressed there could not be any further delays to redress and medical cards for survivors.
The Carlow-Kilkenny TD told the
MoS: ‘The minister and his department must immediately engage in close and intense consultations with survivors and listen to what they have to say.’
Deputy Funchion questioned the efficacy of any review carried out by an independent expert if it focuses only on the commission’s
‘Commission row is just stalling things further’
report. She said: ‘There is no going back for the report – it’s dead in the water. The question now is how can we move on and ensure survivors’ voices are heard.
‘I won’t support a review that is going to just look at the report – it needs to look at the entire process and see what we have and build on
that rather than starting all over again and putting survivors through that process all over again.’
Sources said this weekend support was growing within Government for a ‘Scally inquiry’ option to resolve the deepening controversy.
The Scally Report consisted of a four-month review into failures in
the governance structures of the cervical cancer screening programme. Critically, one minister said: ‘This was a scoping inquiry and not a Commission of Investigation.
‘This meant that there was no requirement to offer each person or body who is named or referred to in
the report an opportunity to comment on the report… or the opportunity to cross-examine or test the sources of information made available to the scoping inquiry.’
The Scally review, which was commissioned with all-party support by the then-health minister Simon Harris, provided a 170-page
report with 50 recommendations which were generally accepted by the victims of the CervicalCheck cancer scandal.
Critically, the initial report was completed within four months.
One minister told the MoS: ‘That is what we need, a well-resourced single-person inquiry. All the evidence is there, both in the main report and in the confidential committee. It just has to be interpreted in a more sympathetic way.’
Another minister warned: ‘What is needed is a report by a trusted guide, someone who commands the confidence or at least the neutrality of the survivors; someone like a Geoffrey Shannon or a Maeve O’Rourke.’
Meanwhile, Labour leader Alan Kelly hit out at the commission’s
refusal to appear before the Oireachtas committee.
Mr Kelly told the MoS: ‘If they don’t [appear], then the Oireachtas Committee must look at all the options, including repudiating the report, or how the report can be relooked at.
‘These issues must be teased out and a number of options have been floated. The committee should hear again from advocates for survivors such as Maeve O’Rourke and the Clann Project, and Máiréad Enright.
‘We need confirmation from the Government that a redress scheme will proceed, and immediate access is needed for survivors and adopted people to their full personal data and administrative records.’