Register to Comment
Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 170
Like Tree68Likes
  1. #31
    Talk Back Talk Back is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2017

    Quote Originally Posted by McTell View Post
    No, but it was the only parliament in town that could call itself the "3rd Dail". Mad or what?

    Dail 26 counties is obviously not Dail Eireann.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #32
    JohnD66 JohnD66 is offline

    Join Date
    May 2010

    Article here on women, the vote and Irish nationalism.

    Women, the Vote and Nationalist Revolution in Ireland | The Irish Story
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #33
    Malcolm Redfellow Malcolm Redfellow is offline
    Malcolm Redfellow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Just caught this:
    The Isle of Man was the first country in the world to give the vote to women in national elections, 37 years before the opportunity was given to women in the UK.

    This is one of the facts contained in Manx National Heritage’s iMuseum which has launched a special news section on Isle of Man elections from 1866 to 1956.

    In 1881 the right to vote was extended to unmarried women and widows who owned property in the Island, and as a result 700 women received the vote, comprising about 10% of the Manx electorate.
    I rather like the idea of the isle of Man deeming itself a 'country' (for some unfathomable reason its mobile phone network is the one that connects in parts of Galloway).
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #34
    StarryPlough01 StarryPlough01 is offline
    StarryPlough01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010

    Does Catalpast (OP) also believe in SUFFRAGE for women enslaved by the Church and State? What degree of self determination is there for a woman who is not allowed to leave the scrub room except when compelled to attend daily mass whether she is sick or dying? How shall the nuns escort her to the Polling Booth to ensure she does not abscond? So many questions to resolve your conflicted mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by StarryPlough01 View Post
    That's important about her book. I'll edit to include this info. We discussed the plaster casts, etc. on Tuam (I'm thread excluded); it was all over the news. As one survivor has stated, they burned the evidence (cremated...).

    Quote Originally Posted by Catalpast View Post
    But forgot to burn the plaster casts?

    Quote Originally Posted by StarryPlough01 View Post
    Dear TROLL

    Burning bones found in mass graves is not cremation. It is destruction of evidence and incineration.

    You and I both know the press, etc., tried to SANITISE the HORROR by misusing a term 'cremation,' which is a legitimate means of interring an intact body.


    Incinerating bones from a mass grave is carried out by petty dictators TO HIDE THEIR MASS ATROCITIES.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #35
    LookWhoItIs LookWhoItIs is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2017

    Quote Originally Posted by parentheses View Post
    It should be said that before 1918, very many men were not allowed to vote.
    No to mention that Protestant Ulster was late to the party with a magnanimous "one man one vote" in 1969
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #36
    McTell McTell is offline
    McTell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Talk Back View Post
    Dail 26 counties is obviously not Dail Eireann.

    Wasn't it mean of them? We had wanted a catholic-tolerant home-rule parliament in Dublin for centuries, and finally we got one and called it Dail Eireann.

    People do this sort of stuff. Companies will sell you a hamburger without any credit to the great city of Hamburg.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #37
    Talk Back Talk Back is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2017

    Quote Originally Posted by McTell View Post
    Wasn't it mean of them? We had wanted a catholic-tolerant home-rule parliament in Dublin for centuries, and finally we got one and called it Dail Eireann.

    People do this sort of stuff. Companies will sell you a hamburger without any credit to the great city of Hamburg.
    You post woeful sh!te - you really do.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #38
    StarryPlough01 StarryPlough01 is offline
    StarryPlough01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010

    Interesting segment regarding enslaved Magdalene women (1922 - 1996)



    It's extremely important to listen to below, and perhaps take your own notes
    (I recommend download option to iTunes/other if you have that facility - I didn't at time of listening]

    The Late Debate - Magdalene Report
    Wednesday 14 February 2018

    The Late Debate Wednesday 14 February 2018 - The Late Debate - RTÉ Radio 1

    Dr Maeve O'Rourke (Senior Research and Policy Officer, Irish Council for Civil Liberties)

    *1922 - 1996 McAleese Report estimated 10,000 women. It did not have numbers for Galway and Dun Laoghaire Magdalene Laundries

    *Government agencies put pressure on Magdalene Laundries to have competitive rates


    Dr Maeve O'Rourke discussing Ombudsman Peter Tyndall when he was before Justice Committee (a few weeks ago)

    [DR MAVEVE O'ROURKE] Failure to establish a fair administrative scheme since Enda Kenny's apology in 2013. It should have been recognised that the nuns did not have great records (as acknowledged in McAleese Report] and so there should have been a proper system to take evidence from the women but this was not done. Maybe administrative oversights to an extent but to another extent I think failures to implement the scheme that was promised in 2013 are down to the failure of the State to investigate the abuse that happened to the women.

    [MAEVE] Key problem was the narrow Terms of Reference - Mandate of McAleese Committee was to investigate the extent of State involvement with institutions. The IDC didn't have a mandate to receive complaints of abuse or to investigate abuse. It found overwhelming evidence of State involvement in a number of areas and then it said in the public interest we decided to include a chapter on Conditions in the laundries, but we want to say that we didn't actually make findings in relation to abuse because we didn't have the mandate and we also had such a small sample size, they didn't issue a public call for evidence for example.


    [MAEVE] So what happened was because they didn't have a mandate to investigate allegations, there were no Terms of Reference about what they should be investigating. There's actually no category or section in the chapter on 'Conditions' that looks at whether the women were locked in. There is no section in that chapter that looks at whether the women were forced into unpaid labour. There is a section on physical abuse that says not much physical abuse was suffered, but it doesn't actually categorise forced labour as physical abuse.

    [MAEVE] The women have been done a GRAVE DISSERVICE by the lack of an investigation into abuse, and I think that has followed through into the administration of the scheme.

    [INTERVIEWER KATIE HANNON] A Redress Scheme was put in place. There was the Quirke Report, which recommended the Terms for this redress scheme. It was accepted in full by the Government at the time. But 5 years on, a number of women who went through the laundries have failed to get any redress whatsoever, and even those that have gotten redress, some have not gotten what they are entitled to and in terms of their medical benefits that they were promised under that scheme have not materialised in full either.

    [MAEVE] Exactly. Other aspects of the scheme have not been put in place. For example, there was a promise to support the women to meet each other. Really important because their names were changed in the Magdalene Laundries. If they managed to leave it was without notice. Because of the regime they often didn't get to know each other very well. So they haven't been supported to meet each other, and there are not any really any representative groups that are operating at the moment.

    [MAEVE] There was another promise to ensure that they were consulted on the issue of memorialisation and that a proper memorial would be established.

    [MAEVE] There's a whole range of ways that the scheme hasn't been properly implemented. And I do think that part of the problem is that the scheme is actually ex-gratia; it is explicitly stated to be so. So, not withstanding the State's apology, the State hasn't actually accepted responsibility or liability for what happened. Ex-gratia means given as a gift.

    [INTERVIEWER] How is that? Because the McAleese Report was very clear in terms of the direct State involvement in relation to the laundries themselves, giving the laundries State contracts and the fact that some of the girls and the women were brought back to the laundries when they left by the gards. How are we still at a place where there is a question mark over state liability?


    [MAEVE] The State has the power to do what it wants in this area. And it has chosen to set up an ex-gratia scheme which has allowed civil servants, for example, and the Department of Justice to state to the Oreachtas Committee on Justice and Equality that there is actually no legal liability in this area. That there hasn't been a court finding. And the reason there hasn't been a court finding is partly because all of the women who applied to the scheme were forced by the State to sign a waiver, making sure that they couldn't sue the State.

    [MAEVE] There is a very strict Statute of Limitations that unlike in England does not have an exception in the interest of Justice, so people cannot get to court.

    [MAEVE] You cannot get the evidence of the way in which these institutions operated. The archive that the McAleese Committee created is not accessible to the women or to the public. When it came to the religious evidence, the McAleese Committee destroyed its copies and sent the originals back. When it comes to the State archives that the McAleese Committee collected, it is being held in the Department of the Taoiseach for safekeeping and not for the purpose… [interrupted by Interviewer]

    [INTERVIEWER] What's the reason being given for the secrecy surrounding and the confidentiality surrounding those documents?

    [MAEVE] I think the State has got into a pattern over the last 20 years of trying to provide what it calls forms of redress without actually providing the truth.

    [INTERVIEWER] Just listening to Peter Tyndall there he seemed to implying that this was almost a unique situation, and that in his 10 years of acting as Ombudsman he had never encountered such resistance in terms of accepting the recommendations he was putting forward.

    What sense do you have of why this cohort, which is a relatively small cohort of women, and it's getting smaller tragically of course because a lot of the Magdalene women are nearing the end of their lives now?

    Where do you lay the blame for what has gone wrong in terms of what one has assumed was being done right five years ago?


    [MAEVE IN REPLY TO ABOVE QUESTIONS FROM KATIE HANNON] I think the government has failed to take a handle on this and to just make sure that the scheme is implemented in the spirit it was promised, in the spirit of the apology . It would not take much. The women who haven't been let in, I think there is round about 00 who have been rejected because even though the Department of Justice accepts that they worked unpaid as children in Magdalene Laundries, it insists they cannot be let in because the nuns had them registered under different institutions' rolls. Again an example of just not accepting the testimony of women as evidence of where they were for those years.

    VERBATIM ENDS HERE... ... ... ... ....


    Colm is very sympathetic to 100+ women's situation.

    On legal liability, he thinks the State should accept legal liability on slave labour..

    Colm said they come at it on how to limit themselves, how to protect themselves. He thinks they should fundamentally reverse that process, duty of care (not in cost). It needs a mindset change.

    Colm Brophy has spoken to the Minister this evening (14th February 2018) and Colm 'wants to see the recommendations done very quickly.'


    He agrees with Colm that there is a mentality in the Civil Service and particularly in the Department of Justice. This shouldn't have been let near the Department of Justice for the simple reason that even worse than other departments, Justice when situations like this arise regard citizens as people to be kept at the door to minimise costs, rather than an acceptance that these were citizens who are owed a massive debt by the State for what they were put through. Even on the basic level. The other level is historic. [interrupted by Interviewer]

    'MICK ' Irrespective of the dysfunctionality in Justice, there has been an attitude in Justice that goes back to the foundation of the State and the way it's regarded as some form of ' inciteful' [indistinct] against its citizens, a type of culture there because sometimes they encounter the worst of humanity, therefore they rarely think of the best of humanity in dealing with people and particularly when it comes to an issue like this.

    And another element to is Kenny's tears were also on the basis this was an historical issue that was at the door of those who went before him. But when you see basic shortcomings here particularly like the failure to provide the proper health packages to survivors who are still alive, these are people who are still suffering with what happened to them decades ago.


    MAEVE O'ROURKE CONTINUES... PENSIONS NEED TO BE BACKDATED TO RETIREMENT AGE, NOT TO START OF SCHEME, and health care be provided …. NOT BEEN ABLE TO ACCESS HOME CARE THEY NEED... [To be transcribed verbatim later along with Jan O'Sullivan's commentary - and will update]


    Chapter 19: Living and working conditions
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #39
    StarryPlough01 StarryPlough01 is offline
    StarryPlough01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010

    Note in your calendar: 'On the first Sunday in March, people across the country will lay flowers at all known gravesites where Magdalene women lie..'

    Ireland's Perpetual Shame

    McAleese Report, 2013 ~
    Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee to establish the facts of State involvement with the Magdalen Laundries - The Department of Justice and Equality

    Taoiseach Enda Kenny's Apology to Magdalene Women - Full Speech ~
    In full: Enda Kenny

    Audio of Taoiseach Kenny's Apology ~

    Video of Taoiseach Kenny's Apology ~

    'Prime Time' ~

    STARRY: Heartbreaking to listen to Mary McLaughlin's story. Mary was sent to Castlepollard Mother and Baby Home, and once her baby Patrick was adopted, Mary was then sent to Sean McDermott Street Magdalene Laundry (Mary never left the white slavers and their punitive regime … Mary was too institutionalised…). She couldn't return home with the baby due to the shame (aunt and her father), and she had no means of support (financial or emotional).

    Mary spent 27 years between 1967 - 1996 working in two Magdalene Laundries run by Sisters of Our Lady of Charity in Dublin (Sean McDermott Street and High Park). Mary was told that she was going to a lovely job in Dublin. [1996 was when the last Magdalene Laundry closed its doors in Sean McDermott Street]

    Justice John Quirke's Report {The Magdalene Commission Report}
    Report of Mr Justice John Quirke 'On the establishment of an ex gratia Scheme and related matters for the benefit of those women who were admitted to and worked in the Magdalen Laundries, May 2013' ~

    1922 - 1996: The White Slavers who ran the 10 Magdalene Laundries in ROI ~

    Sisters of Our Lady of Charity of Refuge, the Congregation of the Sisters of Mercy, the Religious Sisters of Charity, and the Sisters of the Good Shepherd

    Ombudsman Peter Tyndall's Investigative Report 'Opportunity Lost'
    An investigation into how the Magdalen Restorative Justice Scheme was administered by the Department of Justice and Equality ~

    Ombudsman Peter Tyndall's Speech
    'Magdalen Scheme Investigation - Opening Statement to Committee on Justice and Equality; 31 January 2018' ~

    Magdalen Scheme Investigation - Opening Statement to Committee on Justice and Equality - The Office of the Ombudsman


    *Lack of Restorative Justice

    *Farrago of Lies Inter-departmental Committee's McAleese Report (2013)

    Wednesday, February 21, 2018

    by Maeve O’Rourke

    Monday [19 February 2013] will mark the five-year anniversary of Enda Kenny’s emotional apology to Magdalene Laundries survivors. ….


    Two weeks ago, the Ombudsman’s voice cracked (as Kenny’s had done before him) as he described to the Oireachtas justice committee how the Department of Justice has “maladministered” the scheme set up in 2013 to provide “restorative justice” to Magdalene survivors.

    The Ombudsman’s frustration poured out as he explained that never, in his 10 years in office in Ireland and abroad, had he encountered the present situation where “a department has, prior to the publication of a report, absolutely and categorically refused to engage with the process around accepting and implementing the recommendations”.

    ***The Ombudsman described how Magdalene survivors deemed to lack capacity were “effectively forgotten”, as the department made no concerted effort to admit them into the scheme through an assisted decision-making process.

    ***Another of the Ombudsman’s complaints was that numerous women were denied lump sum payments reflecting the time they claimed to have spent institutionalised because the department overly relied on the nuns’ word (often not even requiring records to be produced) and did not accept the testimony of the women themselves, or their relatives, as evidence.

    ***The Ombudsman’s third criticism was that a number of women whom the department accepts were forced to work in Magdalene Laundries as children have been excluded from the scheme. The nuns registered these girls on the rolls of educational institutions in the convent grounds instead of on the Magdalene books, and departmental officials have therefore decided that the women were not “admitted to” the laundries despite being present and working in them daily.

    According to the Ombudsman, “young and teenage girls could be moved around different sections or institutions within the confines of the convent to which they were admitted without this being officially recorded or reflected in the records”. Through his investigative work, Conall Ó Fátharta of this newspaper has offered crucial corroboration of the women’s testimony in this regard.

    … the UN Committee Against Torture, UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, UN Human Rights Committee, and UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have all stated their grave concern at the denial of justice and redress to survivors of Ireland’s Magdalene Laundries. Last year, the first two of these committees gave Ireland a one-year deadline to comply with our human rights obligations towards the women, such was their recognition of the urgency.

    These human rights bodies have called, not only for full implementation of the government’s redress promises, but also for an investigation into and accountability for the widespread rights abuses committed in the institutions.

    It is clear one reason for the failure of restorative justice over the past five years is the State’s long-standing refusal to establish an independent investigation into abuse in the Laundries. In 2011, the McAleese Committee was tasked only with inquiring into the extent of State involvement with the institutions, and public access to its archive of evidence has been refused by the Department of the Taoiseach.

    The Taoiseach’s department, which currently holds the State records, contends that they are there “for safekeeping” and not for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Acts. In a chapter entitled “Living and working conditions”, the McAleese report suggests that not much physical abuse was suffered in Magdalene Laundries.

    However, that chapter does not question whether the women were arbitrarily deprived of their liberty, or whether they were forced to work unpaid. The chapter fails to classify forced labour as physical abuse, and it characterises several forms of physical assault as emotional maltreatment.

    The McAleese report explicitly acknowledges that it did not have the mandate to investigate and could not make findings of abuse (including because it did not issue a public call for complaints

    Following the Ombudsman’s appearance before the justice committee a fortnight ago, a senior departmental official asserted to the committee that “the issue has not been tried in any court” and that “there is no acceptance of liability” on the part of the State for what happened in Magdalene Laundries. What he failed to explain was that the government has forced Magdalene survivors to sign legal waivers foregoing their right to sue the State in court as a condition of acceptance into the restorative justice scheme.

    Since 2013, the Department of Justice has repeatedly told UN human rights bodies that the McAleese report found “no factual evidence to support allegations of systematic torture or ill-treatment of a criminal nature in these institutions”.

    So is it any wonder that, in the Ombudsman’s words, “failings in how the Scheme was administered served to reinforce [the women’s] feelings of marginalisation and deep hurt, and to undermine the restorative effect of the emotional apology delivered by Taoiseach Enda Kenny”? Is it any wonder that — in addition to the Ombudsman’s complaints — other aspects of the scheme have not been implemented?

    The Irish Council for Civil Liberties, Justice for Magdalenes Research and others wrote to the minister for justice last month calling on him to immediately provide the full package of redress measures recommended by Judge Quirke. This includes pensions backdated to retirement age (not to the scheme’s start date, as at present). It includes health and community care that meets the Health Amendment Act (HAA) card standard. It means access to the scheme for women deemed to lack capacity, and supports such as independent advocacy to ensure that they are enabled to use their entitlements.

    It also includes funding for the women to meet each other and to discuss the issue of memorialisation, as well as the wider questions of how the cultural, political and historical legacy of their treatment ought to be acknowledged. In addition, it means advertising the scheme more widely, particularly in the United States.

    Recently, Dublin City Councillors voted not to allow the sale of the Sean McDermott Street Magdalene site until the women have been consulted on memorialisation. On the first Sunday in March, people across the country will lay flowers at all known gravesites where Magdalene women lie.

    Now is the time for the government to do the right thing and implement its promised restorative justice. The women have waited too long.


    Maeve O’Rourke is senior research and policy officer at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and a voluntary member of Justice for Magdalenes Research


    Thank you Dr Maeve O'Rourke for your comprehensive article and ongoing commitment to the Magdalene women. It's hard to present everything to a third party (e.g., editing, interviewer's interruptions...). Far better to publish your own material. I'm extremely impressed with your work.

    Recommended further reading, in particular for newcomers, to bring you up to speed ~

    Forum discussion on Irish Examiner Article by brilliant Investigative Journalist Conall Ó Fátharta regarding Mother and Baby Homes ~
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #40
    Mick Mac Mick Mac is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2017

    And 100 years later a man can promote the cutting of a young girls clitoris as a public policy and it won't invite any comments from political parties.

    We've not gone past the deference that let the laundries happen.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment