Tá mé ag filleadh ar árais na máithreacha agus naíonán. Tá mé ag impí ar an Taoiseach ag an bpointe seo, ciall ceannaithe a bheith aige, an rud ceart a dhéanamh, agus an scéim lochtach seo a tharraingt siar. I am wearing a jacket that is ill-fitting. I wear it out of respect for a woman who spent time in a mother and baby home. I wear it to be in touch with her spirit. She was allergic to the doublespeak and hypocrisy that this Government and previous Governments have persisted with. Perhaps the fact that it is ill-fitting stands as a metaphor for the ill-fitting scheme the Government is bringing in. It is telling us that the scheme is based on human rights when it is completely and utterly the opposite.

In 2003, some 20 years ago, the redress scheme came in. It was judged as being inefficient, long-winded, inadequate and wrong. People who availed of it had to waive their rights. I participated in that scheme, and it was and remains an offence to tell any of the Deputies here the amount of money the person I represented got. That was in 2003 and we were supposed to learn from that experience. Fast forward ten years to 2013 and the advent of the issues relating to the Magdalen laundries. Did we learn? Did the High Court beg us to learn and to plan out the next scheme in a fair and just way? Did we what?

Here we are again. Later this evening we will be pushing through legislation that is discriminatory, divisive and utterly based on cost-containment measures. The apology given by the State recognised that it failed the mothers and children in these homes. What should come from that is a universal scheme following on from the Oak consultation. Members of the Government have told us that it is monetary and that there are other ways of making it up to people. We have been told that the Government is going further than the commission of investigation and the interdepartmental committee recommended. All of that is disingenuous.

The report from the commission of investigation is utterly flawed. The commissioners refused to come before an Oireachtas committee, while one of them thought it proper to attend a seminar in Oxford. Various survivors were obliged to go to court. As a result, 64 paragraphs of the report are now acknowledged as being inaccurate. Reference has been made to the interdepartmental group's report. The group provided a number of options, one of which was that everyone should be included. The Irish Examiner used the freedom of information legislation in order to elicit information as to how the arbitrary, cruel and unacceptable six-month cut-off point was arrived at. Does the Taoiseach know the answer we got? The assistant principal in the Department said, in this regard, that it was not the appropriate time to provide that information while the deliberative process was ongoing. I would have thought that this is the very time we need information from the Government as to how it reached its decision on this arbitrary cut-off point and how those who were boarded out and those who suffered as a result of being mixed race were ignored. At the very least, we deserve honesty at this point - 20 years after the establishment of the first redress board.

I do not accept the Deputy's characterisation of what this Government and previous Governments have done. This Government and the one before it decided to deal with this issue, which has been a scar on our society for many decades and generations. Sadly, institutions such as these existed in other jurisdictions. I refer, for example, to the jurisdiction north of the Border and to those in other parts of Europe and the world.

We are one of the few countries, to my knowledge, that has actually faced up to this past and has at least tried to do something to put things right and put right some of the wrongs of the past. I do not think it is solely a matter of money. There is lots being done that goes well beyond financial redress. We estimate that the cost to the taxpayer will be €800 million, which is €800 million that could otherwise be spent meeting the needs of today or trying to build a better future but we have decided that, because of the wrongs that were done in the past, this is an appropriate amount of money to spend trying to put right the wrongs of the past, at least in some way. If we were only interested in cost containment, we would have left these matters to the courts. That is something we did not want to do. We wanted to put a redress scheme in place and not require anyone to have to go to court or prove their case. We thought that would be cruel. That is why we decided to have a non-adversarial scheme of this nature, notwithstanding the cost.

A little humility would not go amiss. The Government was forced every step of the way to do something. Catherine Corless, who has fought gallantly, raised this back in 2012. Survivors have come here repeatedly and educated us. We have gotten over 1,500 emails, at a conservative estimate, about the madness of progressing with this divisive and discriminatory scheme. How dare the Taoiseach take pride in what the Government has done when it has been forced every step of the way? A more humble Taoiseach might learn, as he has been implored to do by the High Court and by various international and national bodies including the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, and base any redress on fairness and human rights. The Government is not doing that. At the very least, I ask the Taoiseach to tell us what the justification was for the six months if it was not money. At the very least he should tell us that part and stop boasting that this is the best scheme. We have brought in schemes for mica and all the other things and we have not batted an eyelid. Indeed, I have joined with my colleagues in those debates. This is an acknowledgement that we had an architecture of containment for a century, from start to finish, from which various classes in this society benefited. With regard to those people who ended up in mother and baby homes, how dare the Taoiseach quote the commission as saying they walked in there or their families put them in there? That is complete nonsense and utterly ignores what happened in terms of the powerful and the powerless.

Hear, hear.

I appreciate that the Deputy feels very strongly and passionately about this. I appreciate that this is an issue of genuine interest and concern to her but I do not think it is right for her to put words in my mouth. I did not quote the commission of investigation at all. I did not even mention the interdepartmental group and yet the Deputy has tried to put words in my mouth. She then moved on from that to try to criticise my character, attack me personally and misrepresent-----

The Taoiseach without interruption.

-----the Government.

So you are the victim.

When it comes to politics, it is in all of our interests that we do not engage in that sort of personalised criticism of each other where we question people's character and motivations. I do not think that serves anyone's interests, quite frankly, and I do not think it is the way politics should operate. The reason we took the decision we did during the previous Government and this Government was because we listened to people like Catherine Corless and because we engaged with survivors. It was because Katherine Zappone, who was a Minister in that Government, went down to Tuam, looked in the tank and the graves and came back and reported to the Government. She said to us that we needed to be the Government that tried to do something about this. That is what happened. I remember her addressing that Cabinet meeting and almost breaking down in tears as she read out a poem she wrote herself on that day. It was that that convinced the Government to act. I do not think it is right for the Deputy to try to demonise us in the way she is trying to do now. It is not right.

I call Deputy Mattie McGrath on behalf of the Rural Independent Group.

Go raibh maith agat-----

I am sorry you are a victim, Taoiseach.

I am neither a victim nor a demon. We should not demonise each other here.

Absolutely. Hear, hear.

But you should justify the six months because there is no justification.

The Taoiseach was asked a very simple question but he has not answered it.

Members, please.