Liz O'Donnell
Question:14 Ms O'Donnell asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform his ministerial priorities for the remainder of 1993.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Law Reform.
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:36 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform his priorities in respect of law reform in view of the Programme for a Partnership Government 1993 to 1997; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14 and 36 together.
My ministerial priorities are outlined in the Programme for a Partnership Government and I will be seeking to progress these generally. In particular, I will be giving special attention to legislative proposals relating to anti-discrimination in employment and to family home protection legislation. I will also be introducing legislation on adoptive leave.
In consultation with my colleagues in Government, I also intend to draw up and agree a priority programme for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission on the Status of Women and to monitor their implementation.
The preparation of an equal status Bill, which will afford anti-discriminatory protection in relation to education in the provision of goods, facilities and services and in the disposal of accommodation will also be on my priority list. However, this measure raises very complex issues and extensive consultation with affected groups must take place before details of legislation are formulated.
I am also pressing ahead with arrangements to appoint a task force to monitor implementation of measures in favour of travellers.
In regard to my co-ordinating role in relation to disabled persons, I intend to achieve a sharper focus and increased effectiveness in the delivery of the services provided by various public sector agencies.
The Minister is going to be very busy for 1993.
With the Deputy's help, we will achieve a great deal.
That is good. I intend to be a watchdog on all the Minister's recommendations and progress.
I am delighted to hear that included in the Minister's hierarchy of projects for 1993 is the implementation of the recommendations in the report of the Second Commission on the Status of Women. I recommended to the Minister — I hope he will confirm this — that he set up a monitoring committee to link with the respective Ministers so that they will take a pro-active role in implementing the recommendations of the report. That is vital. The Minister did not mention reform of the law on nullity. How far down on the Minister's list is that?
The reform of the law on nullity is at an advanced stage of preparation. It will probably be broadly in line with the proposals contained in the White Paper on marital breakdown. We are looking at that and advancing it to the legislative process.
So far as monitoring the implementation of the recommendations of the report of the Second Commission on the Status of Women is concerned, I confirmed to the House on Friday last that it is my intention to set up some form of monitoring arrangement to oversee the implementation of the 210 recommendations. Deputy O'Rourke, the Minister of State, indicated that she had set up a small monitoring group in her Department. I will be encouraging other Departments to set up either a similar type of monitoring group or at least designate one senior official to monitor those developments within their Departments.
In addition, I have asked my programme manager to accept responsibility and he has agreed to keep a constant watch on other Departments and ascertain from them from time to time what progress they are making on the implementation of the recommendations. It is a major task but, with the co-operation of the Departments concerned and of the Members of the House who are interested, we hope to make substantial improvements during the term of office of this Government.
Does the Minister propose to have discussions with his ministerial colleagues who also will have a huge bearing on the implementation of his equality proposals, particularly equality of opportunity in relation to housing? I note his recommendations in relation to the family home. However, I would like to hear what he has to say in relation to access to housing by particular groups in society such as the travelling people and sections of the settled community who do not have anything like an equal opportunity with people in other social strata of society.
That is precisely why that is provided for in the agreed programme for Government. The Labour and Fianna Fáil parties in this agreement for Government, recognised the necessity for those provisions. Certainly, we will be preparing legislation which will deal with the question of discrimination in relation to access to premises. All relevant Departments will be consulted in the course of the prepartation of that legislation, particularly the Departments of Justice and the Environment. We are working on that legislation. I look forward to bringing it before the House soon and, in particular, to the debate on Committee Stage. Due to its complexity we will need to examine it carefully and, perhaps, one of the special committees will be in operation then. I will look with sympathy at constructive amendments to the Bill.
I should like to pay tribute to the Minister for his short and frank answers, unlike almost all his colleagues who have come into this House since the Dáil resumed after Christmas with ten minute answers.
Would the Minister agree that it is important, that all of the matters in the White Paper that require legislation be legislated for well in advance of the public debate on the divorce referendum? Would he agree also to pursue within Government, perhaps with the Government Chief Whip, the possibility of having a debate in this House, such as we had last Friday, on the White Paper as that would be very useful for all the Members? Perhaps we could have such a debate some time in the next six weeks.
I want to thank Deputy Harney for the kind comments which I very much appreciate. Obviously it will be essential, in the context of the divorce referendum, that the necessary legislation be in place.
The main item will be the Matrimonial Home Bill, as it will be called, to put the family home into joint names. That is at a very advanced stage and, hopefully, it will be possible to introduce it, if not this term, certainly next term. The Family Law (No. 1) Bill, as scheduled in the White Paper, will be the other item, having regard to the fact that it sets out the property position and the position that the courts would have in dealing with property distributions on separation. The same situation will apply in relation to divorce.
It is important, and I agree absolutely with Deputy Harney, that the debate on the issue in the country as well as in this House, get under way as quickly as possible so that people will be given the opportunity to understand what is involved. I think that was one of the problems on the last occasion. Deputy Harney's suggestion about a debate on the White Paper in the House is a very good one. Such a debate could play a very important role in advancing the debate generally in the country. I will certainly have a word with the Chief Whip about it and I suggest that Deputy Harney also ask her party Whip to raise the matter at the next Whips meeting. It would be appropriate to put aside a Friday as soon as possible to debate it.
That disposes of questions for today.