Debate contribution: Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Carál Ní Chuilín on 24 June 2025.

MLA

Ms Carál Ní Chuilín

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

24 June 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5046678

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis na hAirí as an Bhille seo. Lá róthábhachtach atá ann.

This legislation is very important, and, as other Members have said, this is a momentous day. No doubt, it is a day that many individuals and their families have been waiting for, for their whole life. In my time here — I have been here since 2007 — this is one of the most momentous pieces of legislation that I have seen. Every Member who has spoken in the debate has been able to give only a glimpse of some of the issues that have disturbed and infuriated us, made us cry and made us angry; in particular, the way in which injustices and shame were inflicted on many women and girls and their families. For me, today is a start: this will shine some light on what happened to women and girls in so-called mother-and-baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. This legislation, as others have said, will provide the basis for a full public inquiry, and that is really important. The victims and survivors and their families have been campaigning for that for decades. As has already been mentioned, no one should be in any doubt that, because of the way that our society was, it not only allowed those scandals and, in my opinion, crimes to happen, it actually facilitated them. Women and girls who became pregnant were treated disgracefully , and their families were treated disgracefully. Other Members have talked about the pathway from which the women and girls entered those institutions — some were sexually abused and raped, all were traumatised and all were alone. The context that allowed that to happen was patriarchy, gender bias and misogyny against women and girls, where women and girls were viewed as "less than" and as "others", and what they experienced, as has been proven in other jurisdictions, was forced adoptions, coercion and control, cruelty and barbaric practices in institutions that showed a complete lack of compassion for women and girls that were in their care. As Sinéad and others have said, no care was shown whatsoever. There was no sensitivity and no regard for the women and girls and their experiences. Many of the girls who entered those institutions were children. By today's definition, they were children, and no one questioned why 14-year-old girls, 13-year-old girls and 12-year-old girls went into those institutions pregnant. No one questioned that. For me, that was a complete indictment on us. It is imperative that the stories and the lived experiences of those women and girls are front and centre. As Junior Minister Pam Cameron said during her introduction, the legislation is an opportunity for a public inquiry to start. That is really important. I do not think that any of us would even try to say that it could completely replace or eradicate the trauma experienced then and the trauma that is lived through every day of their life, but it is an important start, and there is a lot of work to be done. A lot of Members have concerns already, and some of those have been mentioned. It is appropriate for us all to acknowledge the bravery of those women and girls and their families in coming forward. Acknowledgement must also be given to TEO officials, the truth recovery panel and the consultative forums for all the work that has been done to try to support people up until now. It is important for us all to say, "We see you, we hear you, and we want to ensure that recognition is realised through this legislation, which will end in a public inquiry that is just and fair". Aspects of the Bill have already been flagged up, and I will not repeat what other Members have said. I just want to say that. It is not that I do not think that they are important; there is no point in repeating them. However, other things that really concern me are aspects of the Bill that look at the possibility of institutions and others giving evidence to any public enquiry with anonymity. That is grossly unfair, and it flies against everything that we want to do. It is important that if victims and survivors and their families feel that the flexibility of giving evidence in private is the only way that they can do that, then so be it. However, no institution that was responsible for the cruelty, hurt and pain should be allowed the luxury of giving evidence in private. None of us should allow that to happen. We understand article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), on the right to respect for your private and family life. We get that, but let no institution use article 8 to duck out of facing people. They may not have been personally responsible, but the institutions, which they work for and are part of, were responsible.

The concerns that I have raised relate to clauses 14, 15, 16 and 17. They are also there in clause 40 specifically. We raised those with the officials who attended the Committee, and I believe that they are going to look at them with careful consideration.

Another aspect of the Bill that has been raised with us — it was raised in previous legislation, particularly the Adoption and Children Act — is access to public records. When I say "public records", that is what they are. It is someone's life; it is their history; it is their story. They need to have that access, and we need to ensure that they get it and that no stone is left unturned to ensure that people get whatever information they have not got until now. That is really important. We all agreed on that in Committee. Sinéad and Paula pointed out that our Executive have stepped up and stepped forward in introducing this legislation to establish a public inquiry. They have also tried, in some way, to look at redress schemes. Everyone spoke about posthumous claims, and I concur with that. I believe that the mother-and-baby institutions, the Magdalene laundries, the workhouses and, indeed, the state-run institutions need to step forward. As Paula mentioned, they refused to come to the Committee. They sent letters. In fact, I specifically remember one piece of correspondence in which they said that running those schemes cost them money. No compassion, no love — an absolutely disgraceful response. I know that we all on the Committee — indeed, those who are not on the Committee — will be steadfast in ensuring that, with whatever means we have, not only will they be held to account, but they will pay. They must pay. It will never replace anyone or address the hurt and trauma, but, for me, voluntarily contributing what they think to be appropriate should not be allowed. I understand that some of the institutions have been listed simply because of the research that Brian outlined by Queen's University and Ulster University. I know that, even in my constituency of North Belfast, where two of the institutions were listed, there were others. There were private hospitals and private homes. That was where all the middle-class girls were sent. The middle-class girls were sent to the private hospitals. I am not saying that they were not traumatised. They absolutely were. Were they under coercive control? Yes, they were. Were their children adopted against their will? Yes, they were. We need to look into that, and I hope that the inquiry will shine a light on those practices as well. We, and our Executive, are now in possession of the ending violence against women and girls strategy. The Department and the Minister of Justice introduced legislation around coercion and control. These women are one of the best examples of a lived history of violence against women and girls and coercion and control. The worst injustice that we can do to them and their families is not to recognise that. It is essential that we find out what happened, as laid out in the Bill, why it happened and who was responsible. We need to know, and others have raised that before. It includes the high mortality rates of wee babies who were either born dead or died shortly after birth. Where were they? Who took them? Where are they buried? Are their graves marked? We need to find answers to all those questions. I firmly believe that although those babies have been buried, none of us will allow their history to be buried. It is really important that that acknowledgement comes as well, because, frankly, all this was done in secrecy in the context of what women and girls faced. What we are all determined to do through this legislation — we will do it, starting with our Committee Stage tomorrow — is try to honour those people as best we can by fighting to ensure that we get some sense of justice. None of us will even try to say, "We will get you full justice", because we cannot do that, but we will do our best. We guarantee that we will do our best. We will support you right through. Above all else, we need to make sure that nothing like this ever, ever happens again. I thank the families and individuals who came to the Committee and the many people who met me individually — you know who you are. I also want to assure the adult adoptees that we will ensure that they are not forgotten in this either. That goes from the very birth certificates that had "Adopted" stamped right across them. That needs to be challenged and changed. One thing about this place is that, when it comes to this legislation, there is a cigarette paper between each and every one of us, regardless of political party or complexion. We see you all, we hear you, and we will fight to ensure that you are supported and recognised and, indeed, that you get some sense of justice.

1,680 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:52 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification