It is the duty of a republic to be willing to hold itself to account, to be willing to confront hard truths and to accept parts of our history which are deeply uncomfortable. This detailed and highly painful report is a moment for us as a society to recognise a profound failure of empathy, understanding and basic humanity over a lengthy period. Its production has been possible because of the depth of courage shown by all those who shared their personal experiences with the commission. The report gives survivors what they have been denied for so long, namely, their voice, their individuality and their right to be acknowledged.

Before going into detail about the report, it is important to say that it would not have been possible without the steady determination of the former residents and their advocates and researchers, who campaigned with them. I particularly want to acknowledge the critical part played by Catherine Corless, whose work at the Tuam mother and baby home site led directly to the establishment of the commission. On behalf of the Government, I thank the three commissioners, namely, the chair, Judge Yvonne Murphy, Professor Mary Daly and Dr. William Duncan, as well as their team.

Their report reveals the dominant role of the churches and their moral code and lays bare the failures of the State. They have produced the definitive account of how this country responded to the particular needs of single women and their children at a time when they most needed support and protection. This should have been forthcoming from the fathers of their children, their family and friends, their community, their churches and their State but so often, it was not. The often painful and distressing testimony of many survivors is presented in detail in the report of the confidential committee prepared by the commission.

Reading the commission’s findings and the report of the confidential committee, the most striking thing is the shame felt by women who became pregnant outside of marriage and the stigma that was so cruelly attached to their children. Testimonies from the women speak of the pressure to make sure that no one in their locality would find out about their pregnancy. One woman speaks of not being allowed to return to school after becoming pregnant because it would bring shame on the school. Extracts from witness accounts shine a light on the attitudes that women encountered such as, “I was being treated like I was a second class citizen" or "Society had an obsession with hiding everything”. “Nobody will want you now!”, said the mother of a witness who was 14 years old when it was discovered that she was pregnant. “Get her put away!”, were the words of a father of a 19-year old when told of her pregnancy.

In the earlier decades covered by the report, witness testimony describes how a dearth of sex education often left young women confused and unaware of how and why they had even become pregnant. Some of these pregnancies were as a result of rape and incest. Children born outside of marriage were stigmatised and treated as outcasts in school and wider society. Some children who were subsequently boarded out experienced heartbreaking exploitation, neglect and abuse within the families and communities in which they were placed. This was unforgivable. The sense of abandonment felt by many of these children is palpable in the witness accounts. The circumstances of their birth, the arrangements for their early care, the stigma they experienced and the continuing lack of birth information is a terrible burden in their lives. Many mothers, children and fathers left these shores to escape this unfair judgement and life-long prejudice and because they thought it was the only way to protect their families’ reputations. While many have built good lives for themselves, many did not overcome the impact which these formative experiences had on their lives and they may have suffered and struggled with many serious personal problems.

One of the clearest messages of the testimonies in this report is how this treatment of women and children is something which was the direct result of how the State, and how we as a society, acted. The report presents us with profound questions. We embraced a perverse religious morality and control, judgementalism and moral certainty, but we shunned our daughters. We honoured piety but failed to show even basic kindness to those who needed it most. We had a completely warped attitude to sexuality and intimacy, and young mothers and their sons and daughters were forced to pay a terrible price for that dysfunction. To confront the dark and shameful reality which is detailed in this report, we must acknowledge it as a part of our national history. For the women and children who were treated so cruelly, we must do what we can, to show our deep remorse, understanding and support.

Therefore, on behalf of the Government, the State and its citizens, I apologise for the profound generational wrong visited upon Irish mothers and their children who ended up in a mother and baby home or a county home. As the commission says plainly, "they should not have been there." I apologise for the shame and stigma which they were subjected to and which, for some, remains a burden to this day. In apologising, I want to emphasise that each of you were in an institution because of the wrongs of others. Each of you is blameless. Each of you did nothing wrong and has nothing to be ashamed of. Each of you deserved so much better. The lack of respect for your fundamental dignity and rights as mothers and children who spent time in these institutions is humbly acknowledged and deeply regretted. The Irish State, as the main funding authority for the majority of these institutions, had the ultimate ability to exert control over these institutions, in addition to its duty of care to protect citizens with a robust regulatory and inspection regime. This authority was not exerted and the State's duty of care was not upheld. The State failed you - the mothers and children in these homes.

The report brings a considerable amount of previously unknown information into the public domain. It has exposed the truth, once hidden, to reveal significant failures of the State, the churches and of society. Women were admitted to mother and baby homes and county homes because no supports were forthcoming from any other quarter. They were forced to leave home and seek a place where they could stay without having to pay. Many were destitute. In the personal testimonies of how many women ended up in these institutions, the priest, the doctor and the nun loom large. The sense of oppression, even at this distance, is overwhelming. Mothers, terrified by the consequences of their pregnancy becoming known to their family and neighbours, entered mother and baby homes to protect their secret and the pressure to maintain this secret added insult to injury and was a large part of the mother's trauma.

Conditions in the homes varied. Before the 1960s, living conditions in many private Irish households were generally poor. In the congregated settings of mother and baby homes poor sanitary conditions had much more serious consequences for disease and infection control. County homes, as well as Kilrush and Tuam, are identified as having appalling conditions. Conditions in other mother and baby homes were better and improved over time. Many of the women suffered emotional abuse and were often subject to denigration and derogatory remarks from the religious, with little kindness shown, especially when giving birth. The overall picture is of a hard, cold and uncaring environment.

One of the most disquieting features of the report is that up until 1960 mother and baby homes appear to have significantly reduced the prospects of survival of children. The death rate among infants in mother and baby homes was almost twice that of the national average for children born outside of marriage. A total of approximately 9,000 children died in the institutions under investigation - approximately 15% of all the children who were in their care. It is deeply distressing to note that the very high mortality rates were known to local and national authorities at the time and were recorded in official publications. However, there is little or no evidence of State intervention in response to these chilling statistics and deaths. In fact, a number of reports actually identifying the problems were not acted on.

It will be a disappointment that the report does not answer all the deeply personal questions on the burial arrangements for many of the children who died in these institutions – in many cases the burial location remains unknown and uncertain. There are no records for a number of the large institutions where significant numbers of infants are known to have died, including Tuam, Bessborough, Castlepollard and Sean Ross. While this is difficult, options for dignified remembrance and memorialisation will be implemented where this is not already the case.

While women may not have been strictly legally forced to enter these homes, the fact is that most, especially those who did not have the support of their family or independent financial means, had no alternative.

Overall, the commission concludes that Ireland was a cold and harsh environment for the majority of its residents during the earlier half of the period under investigation. It was especially cold and harsh for women. All women suffered serious discrimination. Women who gave birth outside marriage were subject to particularly harsh treatment.

Emerging from the survivor stories are the horrific accounts of rape, either perpetrated within families or by someone within a woman's community. This led ultimately to entry into a mother and baby home where the woman bore a social stigma but there was no accountability for the men responsible, and the agencies of the State showed little or no interest in addressing these crimes.

The commission acknowledges the additional impact which a lack of knowledge and understanding had on the treatment and outcomes of mothers and children with different racial and cultural heritage, those who faced mental health challenges, or those with physical and intellectual disabilities. Such discriminatory attitudes exacerbated the shame and stigma felt by some of our most vulnerable citizens, especially where opportunities for non-institutional placement of children were restricted by an unjust belief that they were unsuitable for placement with families.

While context is essential to our proper understanding of this chapter of our history, it does not lessen what happened or diminish the responsibility of churches and State for the failures laid bare in what we have learned. For much of the period covered by the commission, women as a group, and regardless of age or class, were systematically discriminated against in relation to employment, family law and social welfare, solely because of their gender.

Children were similarly unequal, and none more so than those who were cruelly labelled "illegitimate". I share deeply the commission's unequivocal view that the existence of the status of "illegitimacy" until 1987 in this country "was an egregious breach of human rights." This was a huge injustice and blighted the lives of many.

It is a sad truth that the history of humankind, even up to today, has largely been defined by a failure to acknowledge and vindicate the rights and status of women and the labelling of those who failed to conform to social norms. We cannot account for what happened elsewhere, but we can and must do so for what happened in our country. An apology on its own is not enough. We, collectively in this House, will be judged by our actions. Actions always speak louder than words.

The Government accepts and will respond to all of the recommendations made by the commission, and this response will centre on four pillars of recognition, remembrance, records and restorative recognition. Recognition begins with this apology and will be followed by commitments to national and local memorialisation and commemoration. The views and wishes of former residents will be paramount and all commemoration will be led by them.

A broad suite of memorialisation, educational and research commitments will support national reflection and enduring remembrance. Future generations will learn of mother and baby homes and of the experiences of former residents, particularly as told through their own words.

With regard to records, the Government is committed to introducing information and tracing legislation as a priority. Access to one's own identity is a basic right. We will also be advancing a range of related actions to support access to personal information and to ensure appropriate and sensitive archiving of institutional records.

On restorative recognition, similar to the Magdalenes, an enhanced medical card will be given to former residents of mother and baby homes and county homes. This will be in addition to counselling, which is immediately available to all former residents, and patient liaison support services, which will be available to all former residents. The Government will also design a scheme of restorative recognition for former residents and an interdepartmental group will report back on this matter as soon as possible. All of these commitments will be advanced in a survivor-centred manner with ongoing communication and engagement as plans are developed and implemented.

As a nation, it is important to understand and accept the failings of our past. This is important but not sufficient. We must also learn from those failings. We have adopted national and international laws which oblige us to pursue a different, more humane and rights-based approach. There is in place, as well as being further developed, a wide range of social services completely absent for much of our history.

Under the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, Deputy O'Gorman, we have a Department dedicated to children, to equality and to working across Government and society to promote and uphold the rights of all people. The Citizens' Assembly is examining further measures to address structural inequalities relating to gender. It is looking in particular at how we can support and respond to the needs of those with caring responsibilities. Through our laws and policies, our systems, structures and services, our actions and our words, we must always seek to create a more just society, grounded in respect, diversity, tolerance and equality. Continued investment in education, especially for those on the margins and the most vulnerable, is the surest way of making sure that we do not repeat the past.

Similarly, we must learn the lesson that institutionalisation creates power structures and abuses of power. This must never again be an option for our country. Throughout this report, former residents spoke of a feeling of shame for the situation in which they found themselves. The shame was not theirs. It was ours. It was our shame that we did not show them the respect and compassion which we as a country owed them. It remains our shame. I reassure survivors, their families and the country that the Government is determined to act on all the recommendations of the report, as well as to deliver the legislative change necessary to at least start to heal the wounds that endure.

We have gone significantly over time but given the seriousness of the subject I have allowed that. Are copies of all the Ministers' speeches available for Deputies?

I will organise that now.

This report is the story of a buried past, uncovering buried lives and a buried truth. In some respects, it confirms what was long suspected. In others, it reveals a more nuanced and more challenging narrative. The commission of investigation has spent many years finding the truth in order that we can now begin to provide some measure of healing and reconciliation, and, above all, make restitution.

As a country, we owe a debt to Judge Yvonne Murphy, Dr. William Duncan, Professor Mary Daly and their expert team. Above all, we owe a debt to the survivors who provided testimony and to the work of people who brought the issue of mother and baby institutions to the fore. A special mention must be made of Catherine Corless, whose painstaking scholarship and humble compassion lit the candle which allowed us to reopen and read this dark chapter of our history.

As Tánaiste, as a former Taoiseach, as the leader of my party, which was in government for some of the relevant period, as a member of the Government which established this commission, as a citizen and as a man, I offer my apology to the children who were hidden away at birth, discarded in death or, in life, treated as a commodity or as second-class citizens, as well as to the mothers for whom there was no other option but to enter a mother and baby institution and give up their child. They may have consented but it was not free and informed consent in the way we understand that concept today. We apologise and we ask for their forgiveness.

This report shames Irish society entirely. Women pregnant outside of marriage, some very young, some the victims of rape, were not supported by their families, communities or by fathers of their children. They turned to the church and State for refuge. While they got a refuge, it was a cold and often cruel one. Church and State ran these homes together, operating hand in glove, equally culpable, doing so with the full knowledge, acquiescence and even support of wider society. Church and State reinforced social prejudice and judgment when they should have tried to change them. It must not be forgotten that illegitimacy was not a social prejudice but the law of the land, a law passed in the House in 1931 by our forebears. As was often the case in those days, it was a law very much guided by the Catholic social teaching of the day.

For too many years Ireland was a cold house for children born outside of marriage. This report exposes the chilling consequences of such a mindset. Too many children were seen as a stain on society. The truth, however, is that it was our society that was deeply stained. As the report shows, this was a stifling, oppressive and deeply misogynistic culture. It was a cold house for most of its people for most of its existence.

It is shocking to read that more than 9,000 babies died in these institutions - I dare not call them homes. In some ways, it is more shocking that this is not a revelation. The statistics were known at the time. It was known that children in mother and baby institutions were more likely to die in infancy than other children, including other children born outside of marriage. There was no public outcry, no Cabinet memos for the first 50 years, no Dáil debates or motions, few media inquiries or interest. These were second-class citizens, lesser mortals, to be treated as such, perhaps for their whole lives, solely due to the circumstances of their conception and birth. It was a conspiracy of shame and silence and cruelty.

I particularly feel for the children who were boarded out. This was not fostering as we know it today. While there were exceptions, children boarded out were not raised as one of the family. Boys were used as unpaid farm labour and girls as carers or house servants. Their interests were not put first or second. Their education unimportant. This was profoundly wrong and they continue to suffer for it today.

The survivors of the mother and baby institutions, alongside the survivors of industrial schools, constitute Ireland's stolen generation. As a society and as a State, we stole from them the lives they should have had, raised by their mothers in their own communities, known to their fathers, brought up to believe they were as good as anyone else and could grow up to be anyone they wanted to be. It is late in the day but now is our opportunity to make restitution on behalf of the generations who preceded us. The means by which we do so should be guided by the men and women who survived these institutions. They should be given time to read and reflect on the report. They should inform us as to the next steps.

The commission, in its recommendations, points the way. As the Taoiseach said, this should include a formal State apology, appropriate memorialisation, better access to health services, counselling and housing, as well as access to records and information about themselves, including birth certificates and medical records, financial reparations, a repository to archive all of the documents relating to residential institutions to ensure further study can be conducted and assistance with advocacy. We should not forget the survivors now living overseas and in Northern Ireland where inquiries are less advanced.

This report teaches us that when good people believe bad things about others, then terrible actions can be rationalised away. There are lessons here for us as a society and a State. A meaningful response has to go beyond denouncing the horrors of the past from the safety of the present. People want to know their own truth, to find the part of themselves that for too long was forbidden or kept secret. We must facilitate that.

The commission was an excavation into our past. It succeeded in uncovering part of our collective history and heritage. What we now know is compelling and crying out for resolution.

As a Government, we will do what we can to provide it.

Today is a day of atonement, when we express our horror and sorrow at the story of Ireland told in this report, and when we promise to do right by those who suffered. In doing so, we should not lose sight of the hopeful story that is also told in the commission’s report. It tells the story of a country that has changed and progressed and that is far from perfect but has got kinder, better and more compassionate, more loving and less judgmental, and less misogynistic as the years passed. The flatlets and houses of the 1980s and 1990s were very different to the mother and baby institutions of the 1950s and 1960s and the county homes and workhouses that preceded them.

The commission tells a story of enormous change. This is a story of social progress as the years and decades moved on: legal adoption in the 1950s; sex education in our schools, social welfare payments for lone parents, which gave them real options from the mid-1970s; the introduction of free healthcare for pregnant women and newborns; changing attitudes to sexual morality and personal freedom; a less deferential view of the church and a more questioning attitude to the State, legalised contraception; the Status of Children Act abolished the concept of illegitimacy from our law; the right to divorce and remarry; the slow but steady dismantling of the architecture of patriarchy on which our State was formed; huge improvements in maternity care and neonatal care, leading to a situation whereby death in pregnancy or in the early years of life is now exceptionally rare in this country; the children’s rights amendment to our Constitution; new laws and new attitudes to consent and domestic violence; Children First and we had the introduction of mandatory reporting of child abuse; and the ongoing decongregation of our residential institutions for people with disabilities or mental illness in favour of community living, often facing objections.

We should not be afraid or embarrassed to reflect on how much we have changed as a society and as a State, and how far we have come. Doing so does not belittle in any way the maltreatment and experiences of women and children in the mother and baby institutions; rather, it reinforces how awful they truly were. The fact that today’s standards are better is not an excuse for the poor standards of the past, nor should we think that today our standards are good enough for the future. Decades hence, people may look back on this time and point to our failings too and have to apologise for them.

As we read this report, both hopeful and shameful, it should spur us on now to do better in the years to come, not just for the women and children who survived the mother and baby institutions but also for the women and children of today and of the future. Today we understand a little better the tears that were shed over many decades by those who were judged so harshly and by those who had their human rights dishonoured. We cannot change the past but we can rededicate ourselves to giving people their truth, recognising the hurt and damage that was caused, saying sorry, making amends and seeking forgiveness.

The publication of the report into the mother and baby homes marks another moment of truth for our State and for our people. Its publication is an occasion to acknowledge the profound wrong visited upon the Irish women and their children who were placed in these institutions and too often left with only grief as a companion. It is an occasion to acknowledge, as the Government, the role the State played in this and to apologise for that, and to acknowledge the neglect, the hurt caused, and, in many cases, the terrible toll this has taken on so many of our citizens across decades. It is an occasion to acknowledge also the strength of those who suffered in the institutions and how for generations they endured, and still endure, the awful weight of their experiences within those walls. It is an occasion to acknowledge that it is their refusal to be silent or to be silenced, their campaigning and their commitment to the truth that has brought us to this day.

With the publication of this report, we are affirming their stories and their truth. We are ensuring that their testimonies are heard, acknowledged and understood. We are affirming clearly, and in the strongest possible terms, that they were wronged and that they wronged nobody. Today is a chance to ask for forgiveness for the failings of the Irish State, failings that were repeated over decades and that had the most horrendous consequences for our most vulnerable citizens.

I would like to acknowledge the work of the commission of investigation, its chair Judge Yvonne Murphy, and the commissioners, Professor Mary Daly and Dr. William Duncan, and their staff. I particularly like to thank all those who, often at great personal difficulty, gave their evidence or their personal accounts to the commission.

The report paints a portrait of a stifling, oppressive and deeply misogynistic culture in Ireland prior to the 1970s, which was ruthlessly reinforced by prevailing attitudes within the church and State. This directly and repeatedly led to women being deprived of choice and agency in their own affairs through coercion, shame and family obligation. Among the starkest declarations by the commission are those concerning the tragic fates of many of the children born in the institutions. The disturbing fact established by the commission is that for children born of mothers who entered these institutions prior to 1960 "the homes did not save the lives of 'illegitimate' children; in fact, they appear to have significantly reduced their prospects of survival". The commission affirms that "infant mortality rates were known to local and national authorities at the time" but the institutions of the State turned a blind eye to them.

In the report, the State was often defined by its absence. Most damningly, during the periods of appallingly high infant mortality within these institutions, the report notes that "There is no evidence that unmarried mothers were ever discussed at Cabinet during the first 50 years after independence".

The report demonstrates that for much of the period it covers the response of State, church and society was one of gross neglect. The report exposes the social, political, and institutional structures that created, colluded in and condoned such a system. These structures, and the attitudes that were fostered by them, generated a fiercely conservative society. This permitted the State to maintain the status of illegitimacy as a status that consigned children so designated to both moral and legal isolation up until 1987, something that the commission describes as an egregious breach of human rights. Where there were concerns brought to Government, those in power acted only to stifle them.

Alice Litster was an inspector for the Department of Local Government from 1927 to 1957. The commission's report states that Ms Litster tried valiantly to have conditions in the institutions improved. It was Ms Litster who wrote the first criticism of mother and baby homes by a civil servant, criticisms that were subsequently watered down by departmental officials. It is from her reports on the institutions that much of the commission's information about them in the decades after independence is drawn. She highlighted the high number of children being sent for adoption in the US. The report makes clear that acts of responsibility from those in power were notable for their rarity, particularly in the early days of the State. As such, Ms. Litster's efforts over many years to shine a light on the failings of these institutions should be recognised and commended.

The report contains a number of important recommendations and I am committed to ensuring that the Government's response to these will mark a profound transformation not only in the State's engagement with survivors but also in its supports for them. The relationship of trust between the State and mothers and adoptees has been broken. In bringing forward this series of actions, the Government seeks to start the process of rebuilding this relationship. The Cabinet has adopted a whole-of-government response to the commission's report. This contains 22 actions based on eight themes. These themes acknowledge the breadth of the issues that the commission has raised and that mothers and adoptees have spoken about to me and colleagues. The process of this response begins with the State apology made by the Taoiseach in the House today. Central to the response is access to personal information. Legislation on information and tracing is being advanced this year, centred on a person's right to information about themselves and founded on GDPR principles.

The Department is working to put in place mechanisms whereby survivors and adoptees can seek personal information via GDPR when the commission transfers to my Department at the end of February. Our response contains a package of health supports, including a form of enhanced medical card for anyone who spent more than six months in one of these institutions, and counselling services. Legislation to allow for the dignified exhumation of the site in Tuam and providing for DNA identification will be brought for pre-legislative scrutiny soon.

We recommit to establishing a national memorial and record centre related to institutional trauma, engaging with survivors regarding its location and to requiring that Departments and State bodies prioritise ensuring that relevant original files are made publicly accessible. The Government has made a commitment to introduce a restorative recognition scheme to provide financial recognition. The details of this scheme will now be worked on by an interdepartmental group which will bring forward proposals for Government by the end of April.

I know that these actions, either alone or combined, cannot undo the immense hurt that has been done to mothers and adoptees nor can they fully recompense for the impact of the State's failings on individuals. They represent the State seeking to start the process of rebuilding a relationship with those that it has so badly let down. It is essential that the religious congregations, charitable organisations and Catholic and Church of Ireland primates also begin the work of rebuilding trust, both in terms of apologies to mothers and adoptees but also in terms of concrete measures like contributing to the restorative recognition fund and making institutional papers available. I have written to them and sought meetings with them in this respect.

The events described in the report took place over a wide span of time. Some occurred decades ago, others happened very much within living memory. Irrespective of when the events happened, the trauma they have caused is very much alive. They form a scar for so many of our citizens in Ireland today. Equally, the events form a scar for many who were sent abroad to be adopted or who themselves fled our country following the manner in which they had been treated. I know that this diaspora, abroad through no choice of their own, are listening closely today. To all those who carry that trauma, this report will bring conflicting emotions. They have waited a long time - too long - for this recognition. I understand that there exists very little trust between the State and those who were so grievously wronged. It was the State that shattered that trust by failing to live up to its most fundamental duties of protection.

The publication of this report does not end this story. My hope is that it will mark the first step in a new relationship where we will reject the policy of denial as the State's response to grievance, where the State will engage with empathy, humility and generosity with those who were wronged and where we will strive to rebuild the trust so grievously shattered.