Almost a decade ago, on 3 February 2016, then taoiseach and Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny cleared his throat, rose to his feet, and prepared to give an important announcement to the Dáil.
A pressing issue, he explained, had been to the forefront of his mind for days, if not weeks.
One, he argued, which went to the very core of the nation.
An expectant Leinster House already buzzing with anticipation presumed his serious tone would herald the long-awaited dissolution of the Dáil and kickstart the 2016 General Election.
But that would have to wait another few hours.
Instead, he felt he had a far more immediate issue to address.
Explaining that "words don't exist to adequately address the depth of volume of revulsion" he and others felt over allegations of foster home abuse in the southeast which had dominated months of Dáil Public Accounts and Health committees debates, Mr Kenny said a State investigation into the 'Grace' case was now needed.
Mr Kenny explained that a commission of investigation was the "right way to address" the allegations, telling the Dáil: "Those who left her to her fate pressed the mute button on her young life and her appalling experience. Above all, the mute button was pressed on her dignity, her humanity, on her civil and human rights.
"Was the system blind, was the system deaf? Did the system possess so little awareness and so little accountability that it could become a stone to Grace?
"The Commission of Investigation, I expect, will answer these questions. It will get the answers the people need."
The Commission of Investigation - subsequently known as the Farrelly Commission - was eventually established in March 2017, and began its work under the chairing of senior counsel Marjorie Farrelly in May of that year.
However, while its final report into the allegations, published after nine separate deadlines were missed in recent years, spans almost 2,000 pages and has cost at least €13.6m, nearly a decade on from its commencement, it has raised as many questions as it has answered.
The answers, or at least the official answers, should be noted first.
The State investigation into the case has made findings of neglect in her care, dental neglect, financial "mismanagement or abuse", and an absence of oversight and monitoring from officials meant to ensure her safety.
Despite referencing the word "abuse" 342 times and the word "bruising" 72 times in its own report, the Farrelly Commission has concluded that:
- It is not satisfied the evidence was such to establish that marks or bruises sustained by Grace were due to her being subjected to physical abuse
- The evidence did not establish that Grace had been subjected to sexual abuse over the years she lived with the foster family
- The commission is satisfied there was neglect in the standard of care provided to Grace, in relation to her general care, dental care and personal hygiene
- It has also said there was a level of financial mismanagement or abuse in relation to Grace's disability allowance
- And that there was an "absence of oversight and monitoring of Grace in her placement"
It separately concluded that a planned second phase of investigation into the placement of 47 other children at the home should not now go ahead, despite previous sexual abuse concerns involving two of these individuals.
Announcing the findings at the Government press centre yesterday, Minister for Children, Disability and Equality Norma Foley repeatedly stressed that the findings were made by the independent Marjorie Farrelly rather than by the Government.
Asked if she accepted the findings, Ms Foley said she accepted the work conducted by the independent commission, and that there are questions for the HSE to answer.
However, the minister would not be drawn on whether previous whistleblower claims of an initial cover-up of the case held any credence, why plans to remove Grace from the foster home in the mid-1990s were reversed, and what possible other logical reason there could be for Grace's extensive injuries.
The Minister did make it clear she was frustrated at Ms Farrelly's decision not to contact the whistleblower or the 47 families whose cases will not now be examined to tell them of the recommendation.
However, her overriding position was a formal one: the commission by its nature must be politically independent, and therefore it would be wrong to overtly question or second guess its findings.
It is certainly a view in line with any straight and narrow definition of a commission of inquiry's role in the political battlefield.
However, it's not a view shared by all parties.
A fact underlined by Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald, who gave a very different interpretation of the findings when asked by reporters for her perspective in Dublin hours after the report's publication.
"I am deeply, deeply shocked and deeply disappointed at what appears to me to be a lengthy report with no answers in it and certainly with no accountability for Grace and for others
"I feel that Grace and the others are being let down all over again," Ms McDonald said, before following up her comments with a stinging press release that evening:
"I am profoundly shocked by the report. Eight years after this investigation began, we still have no answers and nobody is held to account for a child, later a young woman, being left in danger despite people coming forward to voice serious concerns.
"Grace, a person with profound intellectual disabilities, was failed catastrophically by the State.
"It is appalling that the Government chose to publish this report a few days after the Dáil went into recess. It has been sitting on the Government's desk since last year. The Government's handling of this scandal should be scrutinised in the Dáil."
In other words, fighting talk from the main Opposition party.
If the Government was hoping for a universal coalition front to help defend Ms Foley's view of events, a sometimes friend-sometimes foe was waiting in the wings to make it clear that would not be the case.
On RTÉ's Prime Time programme yesterday evening, Fianna Fáil TD and former Dáil Public Accounts Committee chair John McGuinness gave an equally damning verdict.
The Carlow-Kilkenny TD was, alongside former Fine Gael TD John Deasy, so crucial to bringing the Grace case to prominence in the first place, and is now the Leas-Ceann Comhairle of the Dáil.
Asked for his opinion on the Farrelly Commission, Mr McGuinness said: "The State has failed miserably not only Grace but the others [the other 47 children who were placed at the foster home]."
Citing the HSE-commissioned Dignam and Devine reports from more than a decade ago, as well as the 2017 High Court decision to award Grace €6.3m from the HSE for what happened, he continued: "The HSE have their own reports indicating that there was sexual abuse, reports made to the HSE or the South Eastern Health Board at that time, and there is furthermore the settlement that the HSE made.
"They didn't settle €6.3m having discussed the case with the President of the High Court for a person that was bruised.
"There were serious issues here and the HSE must come clean on why they settled at that figure.
"I knew that word in the terms of reference (of the Farrelly commission), 'evidence', would be a source of problems. But I thought that would be overcome by the input of professionals explaining you couldn't have evidence because it was so long after the event," Deputy McGuinness added.
Outside of the division over the findings, a wider political issue is also now in play.
Last week, Taoiseach and Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin for two days straight responded to Opposition calls for a public inquiry into the separate Children's Health Ireland scandal of unapproved springs being used in child spinal surgery by firmly saying the inquiry route does not always represent value for money.
Speaking in the Dáil, he argued that seeking public inquiries should be a last rather a first resort, and that Ireland should "reflect" on how often they are used.
"Inevitably these inquiries last years," the Taoiseach said.
"They don't give you the closure, they don't give victims the closure they want, they cost millions, the legal profession and I don't mean this in any negative way to the legal profession, but there's huge fees involved."
"Since 1998, half a billion has been spent on inquiries... Inevitably, victims of those who seek inquiries don't get closure from inquiries," Mr Martin added.
At the time, the comment seemed unexpected and out of kilter with the mood of the moment - a risky step for any politician to take.
A week later, and with the presumption he was likely to have been aware of the incoming Farrelly commission findings, his reasoning at least may be more apparent, and could influence how quickly or not politicians seek out commissions of inquiry in future.
That, it could be argued, is a wider discussion for another day.
Read more:
Grace' report comes after years of concerns and scrutiny
Key findings from €13m Farrelly Commission report
Report: Volumes 1, 2 | Volumes 3, 4, 5, 6
For now, two more pressing matters are the immediate political consequences of the Farrelly Commission findings.
The first is that, whether it is universally accepted or not, it cannot be disputed that the Farrelly Commission has now made its findings public, and as such has drawn a line - of sorts - over the Grace case scandal.
The second is that it is a near certainty that those findings will be supported and derided in equal measure when the Dáil debates the conclusions next month, a planned debate confirmed at Ms Foley’s press conference.
Almost a decade ago, Enda Kenny asked the Dáil as he committed to a State investigation into the Grace case: "Was the system blind, was the system deaf? Did the system possess so little awareness and so little accountability that it could become a stone to Grace?
"The commission of investigation, I expect, will answer these questions. It will get the answers the people need."
While politicians who accept the findings of the Farrelly report as fair and accurate believe those answers - regardless of how uncomfortable they may be - have been given, those who oppose the commission's conclusions believe just as firmly that questions still need to be clearly and definitively answered.
