Áine Murphy
Fermanagh and South Tyrone · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“<BR /> <BR />To those who are following today's debate, I say this: the wounds left by rejection, secrecy and institutional mistreatment run too deep for any statute to fully heal. What we can do, however, is to confront that history honestly.”
“As is the case with so many families across Ireland, the legacy of those institutions has echoed through our family history. I am delighted that she is in the Public Gallery to see the legislation reach its Final Stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />During Committee Stage, we worked constructively across party lines, because we recognised that survivors deserved legislation that reflected their experiences. When survivors highlighted ways in which the Bill could be strengthened, we took those seriously.”
“Many had experienced rape, abuse or exploitation even before arriving at those institutions, yet, too often, they were treated as though they were the ones who should carry shame. <BR /> <BR />Throughout Committee Stage, we listened to testimony that was difficult to hear but impossible to ignore.”
“For decades, many victims and survivors believed that nobody wanted to hear their story, and they often carried shame that was never theirs to bear, grief that society expected them to live with and secrets that were forced upon them by institutions that were supposed to care for and protect them with compassion.”
“<BR /> <BR />We heard the frustration of many survivors who spent years trying to obtain the most basic information about their lives. As one group said to the Committee, survivors were told that their records could re-traumatise them. It is worse not to know such vital information.”
The complete record
Every one of 419 lines we hold for Áine Murphy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“It can ensure that future generations understand and acknowledge what happened, and, in some small measure, it can replace silence with acknowledgement, secrecy with truth and shame with dignity. For those reasons, I am immensely proud to support the Bill at its Final Stage today.”
“As is the case with so many families across Ireland, the legacy of those institutions has echoed through our family history. I am delighted that she is in the Public Gallery to see the legislation reach its Final Stage. Today is about recognising generations of women and children whose lives were forever altered by decisions made in places that denied them compassion and dignity. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I remember the victims and survivors who are not here to witness today's debate. Many campaigned for years; many told their stories repeatedly so that others might one day receive recognition; and many never lived to hear the Assembly say, "We believe you". <BR /> <BR />The Bill cannot rewrite the past, but it can ensure that the truth is never hidden again.”
“<BR /> <BR />To those who are following today's debate, I say this: the wounds left by rejection, secrecy and institutional mistreatment run too deep for any statute to fully heal. What we can do, however, is to confront that history honestly. We recognise that those who endured such experiences were failed by systems that should have protected them. We reject the prejudice and judgement that were imposed on them, and we will ensure that their experiences are no longer hidden, dismissed or forgotten. Most importantly, we can offer what should have been given long ago: recognition, dignity and the assurance that their place in our history will be acknowledged with truth and respect. <BR /> <BR />From a personal point of view, the debate carries deep significance. My mother was born into a mother-and-baby home.”
“<BR /> <BR />During Committee Stage, we worked constructively across party lines, because we recognised that survivors deserved legislation that reflected their experiences. When survivors highlighted ways in which the Bill could be strengthened, we took those seriously. We sought to broaden the scope of the inquiry to ensure that more institutions and victims were recognised, and we acknowledged the importance of posthumous recognition for those who died waiting for justice. Not every amendment could be accepted and not every aspiration could be delivered through the Bill, but I hope that survivors know that their voices shaped it and that every contribution that they made strengthened the Bill and made it into the final version before us today.”
“<BR /> <BR />We heard the frustration of many survivors who spent years trying to obtain the most basic information about their lives. As one group said to the Committee, survivors were told that their records could re-traumatise them. It is worse not to know such vital information. Imagine being told that someone else knows more about your life, your medical records and your history than you ever will. Imagine spending decades searching for your birth records, your family history and the truth about what happened to you as a child or to your child. That is why the Bill is about so much more than financial redress; it is about restoring identity and, importantly, dignity.”
“Many had experienced rape, abuse or exploitation even before arriving at those institutions, yet, too often, they were treated as though they were the ones who should carry shame. <BR /> <BR />Throughout Committee Stage, we listened to testimony that was difficult to hear but impossible to ignore. Survivors reminded us that the legislation could never be about compensation, which has been alluded to by other Members, but had to be about truth. As one witness put it, "Without the truth, we do not have any recovery". Those words stayed with me throughout the Committee's consideration of the Bill, and they remind us that acknowledgement without truth is incomplete and that justice delayed must not become justice denied.”
“For decades, many victims and survivors believed that nobody wanted to hear their story, and they often carried shame that was never theirs to bear, grief that society expected them to live with and secrets that were forced upon them by institutions that were supposed to care for and protect them with compassion. <BR /> <BR />The research undertaken by teams from Ulster University, Queen's University and others across Ireland exposed the scale of what happened here. Around 10,500 women entered mother-and-baby institutions, and approximately 3,000 women entered Magdalene laundries in the North between 1922 and 1990. Some were girls who were only 12 years old — they were children.”
“For the final time, I declare an interest: my mother resided in a mother-and-baby home that is included in schedule 2 to the Bill. I pay tribute to all birth mothers, adult adoptees and family members, some of whom join us in the Public Gallery today, and, of course, to those watching online. <BR /> <BR />Today belongs to the women and girls who were told that they should remain silent; to the children who grew up without knowing who they were; to the families who carried many unanswered questions across generations; and to those who fought for justice but did not live long enough to see the legislation finally pass.”
“At the most vulnerable moments in their lives, they were judged, marginalised and failed by the institutions, the state and society as a whole. The consequences of those failures have echoed across generations. It is my sincere hope that the legislation and the truth recovery and redress processes that will follow can offer some measure of recognition to those who have suffered. No payment can ever compensate for the trauma that was endured, but acknowledgement matters, and it will ensure that the survivors are believed, that their experiences are properly recorded and that society finally states clearly and without qualification that what happened to them was wrong.”
“The correspondence highlighted significant, wider legal and policy concerns that the amendments as currently drafted could create inconsistencies in the Bill. There is also a real concern that such complex changes at this stage could "jeopardise" the delivery of the legislation. Hopefully, junior Minister Bunting will offer some further clarity later in the debate. <BR /> <BR />Throughout the process, the survivors have engaged with honesty, dignity and, of course, immense patience. I thank them sincerely, including all who contributed to the inquiry process, those who engaged with or made submissions to the Committee and the many who undertook advocacy on their behalf. <BR /> <BR />For far too long, women who found themselves pregnant in difficult circumstances were made to carry a burden that was never for them to carry alone.”
“Ideally, we would not like to see any date attached to posthumous claims. The amendment represents a genuine effort to reach agreement across the Chamber and, importantly, to ensure that as many victims and survivors as possible can be included in the scheme. It reflects the engagement that has taken place since the Consideration Stage and demonstrates a willingness to respond to concerns expressed by survivors and their families. <BR /> <BR />I also recognise the intention behind the further amendments tabled by Gerry Carroll. They are clearly motivated by a desire that nobody who has experienced trauma should be excluded from redress. Members across the Chamber share that objective. However, as the Chair of the Committee said earlier, Committee members received correspondence from TEO that addressed some of Gerry's amendments.”
“I thank everyone for joining us today for the second group of amendments. I will touch on the disappointment and hurt that were caused during the Consideration Stage regarding the amendment on the posthumous eligibility dates that was not selected for the previous debate. I am sure that every Member in the Chamber has been contacted by survivors and family members who expressed their frustration and distress. For many, that amendment represented an opportunity to ensure that all victims and families could access recognition through the scheme. For that reason, I welcome amendment No 11, which proposes a revised date that has emerged as a consensus position. No date will ever satisfy every concern that has been raised. I know that the Committee Chair has just touched on that.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 8 will give the inquiry chair greater flexibility to publish reports earlier, where necessary or appropriate. Survivors have waited far too long for answers. Where findings are ready to be shared, unnecessary delays should be avoided. Amendment No 8 will help ensure that information can be made available in a timely manner and where it is in the public interest to do so. <BR /> <BR />Taken together, the amendments strengthen the inquiry's ability to establish the truth, secure relevant evidence and provide survivors with the answers and accountability that they have sought and fought for for so many years. For those reasons, we will support all the amendments in group 1.”
“Throughout the Committee's scrutiny, survivors highlighted concerns about records being held beyond this jurisdiction and the difficulties that they had faced in accessing information about their lives and experiences. The amendments recognise that reality and help ensure that the inquiry can follow the evidence wherever it leads it. <BR /> <BR />I also welcome amendment No 6, which provides for the recording and reporting of instances where documents or other pieces of evidence are not provided without reasonable excuse. Transparency will be critical to the credibility of the entire process. Survivors deserve to know not only what evidence has been made available to the inquiry but where efforts to obtain information have been frustrated or, in some cases, refused.”
“At the outset, I declare an interest, as my mother previously resided in a mother-and-baby home that is listed in schedule 2 to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Before I address the group 1 amendments, I pay tribute to the victims and survivors whose experiences have brought us to this point. I know that many are watching, and some are with us in the Public Gallery. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the group 1 amendments, which will strengthen the Bill's truth recovery elements. In particular, I welcome amendment Nos 4 and 5, which will enhance the inquiry's ability to seek documents, records and evidence from outside this and other jurisdictions.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Minister, do you accept that if childcare providers are receiving large sums of public money, parents, at the very least, should be able to expect a cap on costs and more affordable prices? More affordable childcare is the lens that many, many parents have to look through.”
“Does the First Minister agree that having the voices of our young people reflected in government policy is a vital aspect in delivering for them?”
“As we move to Further Consideration Stage, will you commit to further engagement with NILGA?”
“First Minister, it was great to see you and the deputy First Minister meeting hotel and hospitality businesses in my home county of Fermanagh recently. As always, I acknowledge the vital role that those businesses play in driving tourism, attracting visitors and, of course, supporting our local economy. Do you agree that our hospitality sector deserves a level playing field and that the British Government should align the VAT rate for hospitality in the North with that in the South?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I am glad to hear that the legislation is progressing. Does the Minister agree that, given that we hope to see, due to graduated driver licences, a reduction in the number of collisions, insurance companies should reduce the ridiculous premiums that they are quoting for many young people?”
“Deputy First Minister, many businesses in my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, especially those on the high street, are struggling at the moment, particularly with overheads. What additional support can be provided to address that?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Given the concerns that many had even before Christmas about bluetongue and the fact that we will most likely be entering a vector high-risk period in the coming months, what engagement did you have with your colleagues at the NSMC on an all-island approach to disease prevention and control, and what, if anything, has been agreed?”
“I urge the Minister of Health to listen and, most importantly, to act and work urgently with the Western Trust to deliver a stand-alone, short-term respite service facility in County Fermanagh, alongside the community support that children and families need and deserve.”
“<BR /> <BR />Respite care is not a luxury; it is essential for the well-being of children, for the stability of families and to prevent more serious interventions being needed later. Families in Fermanagh have waited long enough. They deserve local access to respite services and meaningful community-based supports and to know that their children's needs are being prioritised. Crucially, that must include proper post-19 provision, so that those young people and others with complex needs are not left facing a cliff edge when it comes to getting support into adulthood.”
“Of course, no one disputes the need to support children in crisis, but the reality is that families are left without the respite that they rely on to keep going and to prevent crisis in the first place. <BR /> <BR />The situation has only worsened with the loss of community-based interventions and support, such as the Brighter Futures programme, which provided safe activities and outings for children at weekends and during the school holiday period especially. Many families are staring into the summer months with little support and few opportunities for their children to take part in activities that others simply take for granted. We all know that our health service is under pressure and that budgets are stretched, but those families cannot continue to be treated as an afterthought.”
“The ongoing crisis facing families of children with complex needs and disabilities across Fermanagh is driven by the severe lack of short-stay respite services, particularly the lack of community-based services. For years, families in Fermanagh have had to fight for respite provision in their community, yet many are still expected to travel significant distances to access basic support, with Omagh and Derry often being the nearest available options. Even then, support is not guaranteed. When a family reaches breaking point, an emergency intervention is required. Respite beds that were offered to families on a short-term basis have been repurposed for medium- or long-term care.”
“That engagement will be vital to ensuring that we achieve the right balance in protecting animal welfare whilst recognising the practical realities of rural life.”
“We should be exploring how alternatives to traditional hunting can be supported, such as trail hunting and drag hunting. That approach would recognise the social and cultural importance of those activities, which have been embedded in rural communities across Ireland for generations. <BR /> <BR />We must also be mindful of unintended consequences, as was touched on by the Chair of the AERA Committee. For example, concerns were raised with most of us over the weekend about the criminalisation of dog walkers in rural areas whose dogs may unexpectedly break free from a leash and pursue a mammal. As the Bill moves through its Committee Stage, we will want to hear from all stakeholders, including animal welfare organisations, farming representatives, rural and countryside groups, legal experts and, of course, members of the public.”
“As drafted, the provisions relating to hunting mammals with dogs, including the prohibition of terrier work, do not sufficiently account for the realities facing farmers or the practicalities of wildlife management. Removing the ability to properly flush out a mammal that will naturally retreat underground risks ignoring the real challenges of protecting livestock. It also fails to reflect fully the complexity of managing wildlife populations in rural areas. We are, however, willing to work constructively with the Bill's sponsor, and with colleagues from across the House, to strengthen the exemptions and make any necessary improvements at Committee Stage. <BR /> <BR />We have concerns regarding the Bill's treatment of activities involving animal-based scents that do not involve the hunting of mammals, such as trail hunting.”
“The Bill includes important exemptions for hunting with dogs in circumstances such as, as has been referenced, protecting livestock and managing wildlife. Those exemptions are welcome, however we have concerns that, as currently drafted, they are not sufficient. More work will be needed to ensure that hunting with dogs can continue, where necessary, to effectively and practically protect livestock and manage wildlife populations. Protections for farmers to defend their livestock from predators must be clear and workable. Equally, exemptions relating to hunting for the purposes of obtaining food or managing species' populations must be robust and practical.”
“At the outset, I declare an interest as a firearms licence holder for sporting purposes and vermin control. I know that related issues have been raised during the debate, so I want to get that on the record. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin MLAs will support the Bill's progressing to Committee Stage, when it can be fully considered, scrutinised and, where necessary, strengthened. We support the protection of high animal welfare standards across the island of Ireland. In that context, we support the principle of a targeted ban on fox hunting with dogs for the purposes of leisure, as part of a broader approach to regulating hunting. <BR /> <BR />The intention of the Bill is to tackle unnecessary cruelty to animals caused by hunting with dogs, and we support that objective. It is important to be clear that it is not an outright ban on hunting.”
“<BR /> <BR />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.”
“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. <BR /> <BR />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.”
“Recognition without accountability risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive. Victims and survivors deserve more than words. They deserve meaningful action. <BR /> <BR />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.”
“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. <BR /> <BR />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.”
“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.”
“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. <BR /> <BR />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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“, 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. <BR /> <BR />As we discuss the amendments, we must recognise that the legislation goes way beyond structures and processes.”
“I declare an interest: my mother resided in a mother-and-baby home that is referenced in schedule 2 to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />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. <BR /> <BR />With your indulgence, a Cheann Comhairle”
“They need to start listening and understand the all-island nature of our hospitality and tourism sectors. The current VAT rate here means that hospitality businesses in the North face higher taxes and are therefore at an unfair disadvantage compared with neighbouring businesses in the Twenty-six, where the lower VAT rate will increase footfall across restaurants, pubs and cafes. <BR /> <BR />I call on the British Government to reduce the VAT rate for hospitality businesses here. That would be a vital help to the hotels, restaurants, cafes and, of course, pubs that have struggled in recent years with rising bills, supporting them to thrive and attract more customers through their doors. A harmonised VAT rate would represent a positive step forward and ensure a level playing field for all hospitality businesses across Ireland.”
“The hospitality sector is vital to our economy, with tourism being particularly important across our rural areas. Great progress has been made in my constituency with the extension of the Ireland's Hidden Heartlands brand into Fermanagh, which was announced by my Sinn Féin colleague Minister Caoimhe Archibald, but we need to see the British Government step up and reduce the VAT rate for hospitality across the North. We want to see VAT rates harmonised across our island. The gap is set to widen on 1 July, when the VAT rate in the South will be reduced to 9%. It currently sits at 13·5%, which is significantly lower than that of the North, which sits at 20%. My Sinn Féin colleague Minister John O'Dowd has been pressing the British Government consistently on the issue.”
“What value does the delivery unit provide that could not be provided by Departments?”
“That means sharing data, aligning strategy, working together on wildlife management and recognising that only an all-island approach can deliver the lasting progress that our farmers and their families deserve. <BR /> <BR />Our families do not need or want any more reports or any more delay, and they do not want any more promises that lead us nowhere. They want action and leadership and to know that the Assembly understands what the disease is doing to rural farm families.”
“Any wildlife intervention must, of course, be evidenced-based, properly planned and proportionate, and it must command public confidence, because farmers need to see that all sources of infection are being addressed if we are to have any realistic chance of getting to grips with and controlling the issue. <BR /> <BR />Just as important, any long-term strategy must be organised in collaboration and cooperation with the Republic. Disease does not recognise borders; wildlife does not recognise borders; and cattle movements certainly do not stop at the border. An island divided by two different approaches cannot effectively tackle one shared disease. If eradication is the goal, as it should be, coordination between the North and South is not optional; it is absolutely essential.”
“<BR /> <BR />The wider impact on rural communities must also be recognised. It is not just an animal health issue but, as has been referenced by nearly everyone who has spoken today, a rural economy and rural family issue. Many farmers feel that they have carried the burden while government has moved far too slowly. <BR /> <BR />If we are serious about eradicating the disease, we must be honest about what is required. The Minister must now move forward with the wildlife interventions that are necessary to bring the disease under control. That can be controversial, but tough decisions have to be made and cannot be avoided for ever, given that the current situation is causing so much damage to farming families and the wider rural economy.”
“They have told us about the frustration of doing everything right and still finding themselves trapped in an ongoing cycle that seems never-ending. For those families, it is not just about cattle; it is about their livelihoods, family farms that were built generations ago and the fear that another TB outbreak could be the one that pushes a farm family beyond the brink. The financial cost is serious, and we simply cannot afford not to get to grips with the issue. However, the emotional cost is often harder to measure. The stress that bovine TB places on farmers and their families can be enormous. It impacts on mental well-being, affects family life and creates a level of uncertainty that no family should have to carry year after year without seeing any meaningful progress.”
“I thank everybody for taking part in the debate. It was a useful debate. Declan referred to the fact that we had brought a similar motion to the Chamber in November 2024. <BR /> <BR />In my constituency, as is the case in many rural areas across the North, bovine TB is not just something that farmers read about in reports; it is something that families have to live with. It is a threat that hangs over every farm family. Many of us in the Chamber have spoken directly with farmers who are at their absolute wits' end because of TB. They have told us about the stress and the sleepless nights that they have leading up to testing. They have told us about the heartbreak of seeing cattle removed from herds that they have spent years, sometimes decades, building.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”