I will raise a very sensitive matter this morning relating to the mother and baby homes. Yesterday I raised with the Taoiseach the decision of Professor Mary Daly, one of the members of the commission, to appear at an academic event in Oxford, having previously refused to come before the Oireachtas children's committee. She appeared at the event yesterday. Devastating revelations and evidence were given about what went on as regards the report and the recommendations from the commission. There is evidence that survivors' testimony given confidentially was not taken on board. This was clear to many once the report came out but we have now heard it from one of three people on the commission. This was discounted for very tenuous legal reasons.

I have a very clear question for the Tánaiste. Does he accept, based on what we now know, that the report must be repudiated? As Dr. Maeve O'Rourke of the Clann Project, a supporter of the survivors, said, we cannot accept this report. It is not valid, fully truthful, a historical record and accurate. The stories that were told in a confidential fashion by women who went through such suffering, with such a stain on our society and country, were not taken on board. This is not acceptable.

The Tánaiste sat beside the former Minister, former Deputy Zappone, but I have no idea what she was at. It is quite clear the construct of this commission was flawed from the beginning. These survivors - their lives, stories and honesty - needed to be reflected in the report but they were not. It is not like people were not asking questions over the years. In fairness to a former journalist, Mr. Conall Ó Fátharta, he asked all these questions numerous times over nine years and never got the answers. The commission did not spend half its budget and it did not, in interim reports, indicate these issues. It is completely flawed.

I ask these questions on behalf of a number of people who have always been in touch with me on this matter. Does the Tánaiste accept this report must be repudiated and the work should be done again? We may be able to use aspects of it but the report must be done again. Does the Tánaiste accept the construction of this commission was fundamentally flawed from the beginning, limiting the quality, comprehensiveness and accuracy of the report? Does he accept that Professor Daly appearing at the Oxford event yesterday has essentially retraumatised the survivors? Will the Tánaiste please stand up to represent those women and families who have been affected and give them hope that we can, as a country, do right by them once and for all?

I thank the Deputy. I want to be careful with my remarks because, as the Deputy said, it is a sensitive issue. I know many survivors have been very upset by what they read today and yesterday, coming out of this academic seminar in England.

The Government decided we should carry out an investigation into what happened in mother and baby homes and, as the Oireachtas, we united to agree terms of reference for that commission, which has made its report. To my mind, what happened after that was not acceptable. Essentially, the report was left on the desks of the Government and Oireachtas Members alike. The commission's members did not engage with the Oireachtas or the survivors either to explain the report, tell us how they came to their findings or answer any questions. That was not the correct course of action on the part of commission members. That has now been compounded by the fact that one of the commission members felt it appropriate to do exactly that in an academic seminar. That was disrespectful to the Oireachtas and particularly to survivors and their advocates.

It is now necessary for the commission members to come before an Oireachtas committee as they have been asked to do. They should do so without delay and allow us, as Oireachtas Members, to hear from them why they came to the findings they did and answer appropriate questions. This should be done in a non-adversarial way. It should happen now. They should also have a similar engagement with the survivors. It was done previously for reports of this nature, including the Ryan, Scally and McAleese reports. Perhaps they did not have the same legal structure but the same essential process was followed that people commissioned to make a report by the Oireachtas were willing to explain that report to the Oireachtas and the people who were the subject of that report, namely, the survivors and those involved. Given that this academic symposium happened yesterday, I can see no excuse or valid reason for the commission members not to be willing to do this without delay.

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. He went much further than the Taoiseach yesterday and I respect that. There are two aspects to this. Calling on the commission members to appear in front of the Oireachtas children's committee should absolutely happen but we know we are limited in whether they will or will not do that. They should do that. However, there is a more fundamental issue here on which the Government must reflect.

Given the evidence at yesterday's symposium, this report is fundamentally flawed. The simple fact is that evidence given by so many women who went through such trauma has not been countenanced or used. It is not part of the report and what these people went through did not form part of the recommendations. We suspected that and now we know it. It is a hard fact. We need those members to give evidence in front of the committee but this Government must put forward proposals for a new commission to finally give some justice for these women. They all deserve it, so please do that.

Only the commission members can clarify how they treated the evidence and testimony given by women survivors to the confidential committee. If they discounted it entirely, it is a serious problem and it would put a question mark over the validity of the report. If, however, they took it into account, it amounts to a different question. The Deputy and any fair-minded person in this House would appreciate there is a difference between evidence and testimony on one hand and proof and the establishment of fact on the other. Evidence can be true and testimony can be valid but it does not constitute proof or a fact unless it has been open to challenge, dispute, contradiction-----

Why not tell people that?

-----and meet a burden of proof. This is not my report or that of the Government. The report came via a commission set up by all of us in the Oireachtas. It was given to an independent commission to do.

In light of what happened in Oxford, it behoves the members of the commission to do the right thing, to speak to the Oireachtas, to speak to the survivors, to explain their report, to explain their findings, to tell us how they came to the conclusions they did and to take any reasonable questions in a non-adversarial manner. That is the very least they should do at this point.