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

Debate contribution by Miss Áine Murphy on 19 May 2026.

MLA: Miss Áine Murphy
Party at the time: Sinn Féin
Date: 19 May 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5549291

Text

I declare an interest: my mother resided in a mother-and-baby home that is referenced in schedule 2 to the Bill. I warmly welcome all those who have joined us in the Public Gallery and the many who will be watching online. Many of them have been with us throughout the process, and their continued presence is absolutely testament to why getting the legislation right matters. They have shown enormous courage in sharing their experiences, and I pay tribute to all of them. As we debate the amendments, we must keep their voices and the need to deliver truth, recognition and accountability at the centre of the process. With your indulgence, a Cheann Comhairle
, I will make some general remarks before progressing to discuss the amendments. Today marks another significant step in what has been for far too many victims and survivors a long and painful journey towards truth, recognition and justice. We welcome the next stage of the Bill. The Bill carries not only legal significance but a moral responsibility for us all. For decades, those affected and impacted on by those institutions were ignored, dismissed or simply not believed. Many carried trauma, shame, separation and loss in silence. That was often because societies, institutions and the state failed to listen. Too many had to fight to have their experiences even acknowledged. As we discuss the amendments, we must recognise that the legislation goes way beyond structures and processes. At its heart, it is about people: women, girls, children and families whose lives were shaped by the institutions that exercised control, authority and power. Care, compassion and accountability are owed to them all. Victims and survivors have shown extraordinary courage, many of them at enormous emotional cost, reopening painful memories and experiences in the hope that future generations would not have to experience the same silence and denial. We owe it to them to ensure that the process is worthy of their bravery, and that means ensuring that the Bill is as robust, transparent, inclusive and survivor-focused as we can make it.
We particularly welcome amendment Nos 2 and 3, which would strengthen and widen the scope of the inquiry. Confidence in the process will depend on whether people feel that their experiences are genuinely recognised. Too many people have spent decades feeling that what happened to them fell outside of official definitions or was beyond institutional recognition. If the inquiry is truly to command the public confidence that it needs, it must be broad enough to capture the full, abhorrent extent of institutional involvement and the systemic failures that have enabled abuse, coercion and injustice to persist over generations. The inclusion of women and girls who became pregnant while in the care of those institutions is particularly important. They were in environments in which they should have been protected; instead, many faced sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse and mistreatment. Their experiences matter, and those women and girls deserve to be fully included in any process that seeks to determine accountability and recover truth. We also welcome the amendments that replace the term "assessor" with "expert adviser". At first glance, they may seem technical in nature, but the language in the Bill matters. People deserve to have confidence that those involved in the inquiry will approach their experiences with compassion and a deep understanding of the trauma that they have carried. Every interaction has the potential either to support the healing process or to reopen old wounds. That is why it is essential that the inquiry be grounded in trauma-informed, survivor-sensitive practice from the beginning through to the very end.
We also support amendment No 8, which would recognise the need for consultation with panel members. That is an important safeguard that would strengthen collective decision-making and ensure that a wide range of expertise informs how the inquiry proceeds. Given the scale and complexity of the work, meaningful consultation should not be discretionary in this case and needs to be embedded throughout the process. Amendment No 10 is equally important. Financial contributions cannot undo suffering or return the years that were stolen through trauma. Accountability must be meaningful, and people should not be left feeling that institutions can, on the one hand, acknowledge harm publicly but, on the other hand, avoid any practical steps to address that harm or the consequences of it. Recognition without accountability risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive. Victims and survivors deserve more than words. They deserve meaningful action. We also support amendment Nos 12 and 13, which would strengthen the inquiry's ability to gather evidence beyond this jurisdiction. Throughout the Committee Stage, victims and survivors were clear with us that the process cannot be narrow, partial or bound up in bureaucracy and red tape. The truth does not stop at borders. We know that records, decision-making, institutional relationships and responsibilities extended well beyond the North and that actors across these islands were involved. If the inquiry is genuinely committed to truth recovery, it must be empowered to pursue evidence wherever it exists. Many seek answers not only for themselves but for children, siblings, parents and relatives whose stories remain hidden, denied or unresolved. Truth recovery matters, because acknowledgement matters. Acknowledgement that is incomplete can deepen hurt rather than heal it. Finally, we strongly support amendment No 22 on core participant status. Victims and survivors should not have to observe a process that is designed to address the harm done to them: they must be recognised as playing a central role in the process. Core participant status is vital, because it recognises lived experiences and ensures that people have a meaningful voice in proceedings that concern their lives, their experiences and their histories. As legislators, we should never lose sight of the fact that no Bill that is passed in the Chamber can fully undo people's hurt and trauma. We cannot erase that trauma, return lost years, repair every fractured relationship or remove the stigma that many continue to carry. However, we can choose to listen; we can choose to acknowledge wrongdoing fully; and we can choose to build a process rooted in dignity, truth, compassion and accountability. Our responsibility today is not just to pass legislation or amendments but to begin restoring trust to people who were profoundly failed by institutions, systems and, too often, the state.

1,054 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

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

Challenge this classification