Vol. 451 No. 8
16 Dr. Woods asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the further progress, if any, he has made in the last six weeks in his preparations for a referendum on divorce in 1995; the measures, if any, he proposes to tackle the outstanding issues; and when each of the promised legislative measures will be published in view of his announced target date for the referendum of 30 November 1995. [7635/95]
18 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the progress, if any, which has been made in drafting the proposed legislation on divorce; if it is intended to publish the draft legislation before the proposed divorce referendum; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7573/95]
25 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform if he will accept submissions from interested parties for consideration in the context of his Department's £500,000 expenditure on information in the run-up to the divorce referendum; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7553/95]
29 Miss Harney asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform if a date for the holding of the divorce referendum has been agreed. [7517/95]
30 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has for the national development of professional marriage and family therapy services in preparation for the impending divorce referendum similar to and in view of the financial provision for free legal family law services. [7408/95]
38 Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the proposals, if any, he has to expand the network of law centres operating under the free legal aid scheme in view of the expected increase in work following the proposed referendum on divorce; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7616/95]
97 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform in view of the financial provision for the free legal family law services, the plans, if any, he has for the national development of comparable professional marriage and family therapy services in preparation for the impending divorce referendum. [7836/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 16, 18, 25, 29, 30, 38 and 97 together.
I have consistently made clear to the House that the Government's decision on the details of its proposals to remove the ban on divorce contained in the Constitution will be formally announced by way of publication of a Bill to amend the Constitution. The declared intention is to publish, in conjunction with publication of the Amendment of the Constitution Bill, the draft of a divorce Bill, dealing with the financial consequences of divorce for spouses, were the people to vote "yes" in the referendum. The purpose is to allow the voters know about those details at the time they are voting on the constitutional issues of divorce. The Government sub-committee on divorce, which I am chairing, continues to make progress on its preparatory work in relation to the divorce referendum.
I have indicated previously to the House on a number of occasions that the main legislative and administrative measures which I am concerned to have dealt with in the run-up to the divorce referendum are the Family Law Bill, 1994, which is currently awaiting Committee Stage in the Seanad having been passed by the Dáil, the Civil Legal Aid Bill, 1995, at Committee Stage in the Seanad, the Domestic Violence Bill, which will be published shortly, and implementation of further phases of development for the legal aid board, the family mediation service and counselling services, on the basis of the substantial funding provided by the Exchequer to those areas. I can also report continued progress on those matters in recent months.
Other matters which are primarily the responsibility of the Minister for Finance in relation to the tax aspects of divorce, of the Minister for Justice in relation to the courts and of the Minister for Social Welfare in relation to social welfare aspects are also the subject of proposals for reform in anticipation of divorce.
I have also made clear to the House on several occasions that the decision on timing of the referendum will take into account the case before the Supreme Court that concerns the constitutionality of provisions in our separation laws. The court had scheduled the case for hearing on 25 April but I understand that a new date is to be set because of the interruption of certain other work in hand.
In the circumstances, no Government decision at this stage on a definite date for the holding of the referendum is possible. I have, however, set a target date of 30 November next by which time I hope to have the family law programme of legislative and administrative measures in place.
The money which has been allocated to my Department is for a programme of information on the Government's divorce proposals. The information programme will be on similar lines to recent referendum programmes and on that basis it will cover information of a factual kind.
I am aware of concerns raised that the support services of counselling, mediation and legal aid should be adequate in any divorce regime. In each of those areas I am already engaged as Minister in assisting a comprehensive programme of expansion and development to provide protection and support for couples who, for one reason or another, are in difficulty with their marriages.
Where a marriage breaks down I am concerned that immediate resort to the law can affect the prospect of reconciliation or of voluntary settlement. Therefore, where there is a possibility of a reconciliation people should be encouraged and facilitated to avail of counselling. It is equally important that where parties can settle the terms of their separation they should be facilitated to do so by way of mediation. The importance of this was recognised in the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act, 1989, section 5 of which requires a solicitor acting for an applicant for a decree of separation to ensure the applicant's awareness of alternatives to separation proceedings by way of reconciliation through counselling, or by way of agreement on the terms of separation through mediation and legal advice.
Last year I secured £750,000 for organisations involved in marriage guidance and counselling, an increase of 150 per cent over previous allocations. A particular aim of the increased funding was to enable these organisations to expand and develop their services. A total of 54 marriage counselling organisations were grant-aided. These organisations have for many years provided marriage guidance and counselling on a wide scale throughout the State. They are experts in their field and provide a quality service. I am happy to be able to say that a further £750,000 has been provided in my Departmental Estimates for funding of these voluntary organisations this year.
A sum of £300,000 was provided for the Family Mediation Service in 1994, which was more than double the 1993 allocation of £124,000. That increase has allowed for development of the service. Arrangements are in place for the opening very shortly of a second centre to be located in Limerick. Similar funding in 1995 will allow for the employment of additional mediators and, in order to enable the service to be provided on a wider geographical basis, the employment of private mediators on a contract basis.
As Minister, I have overseen an increase in the number of full time law centres from 16 in early 1993 to the present 24. A further six fulltime centres are planned to be opened on the basis of extra substantial funding being provided for the legal aid board, and, of course, I have recently initiated the Civil Legal Aid Bill to put the scheme of legal aid on a statutory basis and to effectively guarantee a system of legal aid.
These developments in the areas of counselling, mediation and legal aid are aimed at providing the necessary framework within which persons whose marriages have broken down can avail of the necessary services to meet their difficulties and those of their children as far as possible. Those difficulties will, unfortunately, continue to exist in the years to come. The important thing is that the State has a comprehensive programme of development of services in relation to the problem of marriage breakdown and of couples who separate. The programme combines both legislative and administrative measures. I am confident that the existing marriage breakdown services in relation to which I have responsibilities and which have been developed financially, administratively and otherwise beyond all recognition in the past few years and continue to be developed, will be capable of responding to any future needs, including divorce.
The first part of my question related to the progress made in the past six weeks. Apart from setting 30 November as a target date for the referendum, it appears that very little progress has been made during that period. Given that 30 November is the target date for the referendum, will the Minister tell us the target date for the publication of the referendum Bill? It is obvious that publication date would be at least 30 days in advance of 30 November. Does that mean the referendum Bill will be published before the summer recess or in October? It would be preferable if it were published as soon as possible.
The Minister stated that the divorce Bill will be published, though not necessarily taken, in advance of the referendum. If I understand him correctly that Bill will be published at approximately the same time as the referendum Bill.
The Deputy should not ask too many questions together.
They are precise questions about dates. The Minister dealt with a number of matters. Based on the target date for holding the referendum, will he give us target dates for the publication of the divorce and referendum Bills?
As I indicated, the target date — which, for the reasons I outlined, can be no more than a target date at this time — for holding the referendum will be 30 November. Deputy Woods made retrospective calculations in so far as the publication of the amendment of the Constitution Bill and the divorce Bill is concerned. I am not in a position to give a particular date for the publication of either of those measures, but both will be published in adequate time to enable discussion and debate on the divorce referendum to take place and for interested parties and groups to consider all aspects of it. At the appropriate time and in the usual way the measures will be announced and introduced.
Does the Minister agree it is extraordinary that this is probably the fourth target date set for holding the divorce referendum and that he cannot give us a specific date for the publication of the draft Bill on the consequences of a "yes" vote? Have the various proposals been agreed between the Government parties and, if so, are they the same as those agreed between other partners in Government? If they are not, in what way do they differ? It is important that the draft proposals are published well in advance of the referendum and, therefore, I ask the Minister to agree to publish them as soon as possible and give us a date in that regard.
In his rather lengthy reply the Minister referred to the area of counselling and so on. Will he ensure that funding for counselling is put on a statutory basis? I am sure the Minister agrees it is most unfair that voluntary agencies, in particular, receive notification of funding from year to year. Funding in this regard should be planned further into the future.
Grants to counselling agencies are made each year in a budgetary context and the Deputy should know it would not be possible to commit future Governments or Departments in regard to the moneys that might be available for items such as counselling grants, other than for the year under consideration. Since taking up office I have been at pains to ensure that in the Estimates the maximum possible funding is made available for the very important work carried out by numerous counselling agencies and I have been reasonably successful in that respect. The moneys allocated this and last year have enabled counselling agencies to expand considerably the level of service they provide. Approximately 54 agencies were grant-aided last year and I am sure the same will apply this year. I pay tribute to them for their great work, but it would not be possible to give a budgetary commitment for future Governments in regard to available funding.
In so far as the first part of the Deputy's question is concerned, I see nothing extraordinary about the arrangements for holding the divorce referendum. I accept there have been delays, but they were occasioned by matters outside the Government's control. The target date is 30 November and, again, I assure the Deputy that there will be adequate time for the House and the public to debate those issues and make up their minds in regard to how they will vote.
The Minister did not answer a specific part of my question.
The Minister previously gave us several target dates; dates in May and June were mentioned and 30 November was announced at a great gathering of the Labour Party for a special conference.
That is so.
While I understand the Minister's good intentions in setting a target date, up to now his calculations have not been very accurate. In the context of the date of 30 November, publication of the Bill will probably take place in October, leaving very little time for debate in the Dáil or Seanad. The Supreme Court was supposed to commence examination of the Judicial Separation Act, that has been postponed.
I think it will announce a new date on Thursday next.
In the meantime work could progress. For example, there is no reason the Social Welfare Bill could not come before the House at an early date.
I ask the Deputy to put brief, relevant questions.
When will the Social Welfare Bill come before the House and what contingency plans does the Minister have in the event of the case being lost in the Supreme Court?
Deputy Woods is correct in saying that much work could progress in the meantime; much work is being done in the meantime. Legislation is proceeding apace and discussions are taking place with interested groups, including the Deputy's party and others. The Deputy's question on contingency plans is hypothetical and does not arise now. We must await the outcome of the appeal to the Supreme Court in connection with the Judicial Separation Act. When the court gives its judgment — I hope sooner rather than later — it will have to be studied with great care because of the implications for the divorce question. I am not prepared to enter into hypothetical considerations as to what might be in it. That matter is sub judice and we must await the outcome. The Attorney General will be requesting a date for the hearing at the earliest time for which the Supreme Court can provide. These are matters outside the control of any of us. I understand the referral of the abortion information measure is what threw the planning of the Supreme Court on that issue out of gear and caused this delay. As soon as the Supreme Court decision is given it will be considered and any necessary adjustments will be made. That is the present position. The work continues apace in the meantime and the target date has been set. In that regard I look forward to the co-operation of the Members of the House. I understand the Social Welfare Bill will be introduced quite shortly by the Minister for Social Welfare.
I would like the Minister to reflect on the core issue in relation to the divorce referendum, namely, the grounds for divorce. I ask for a straight answer from the Minister to this question. Has the Government agreed on the proposal for specific issues such as the grounds for divorce? If so, can we have at least that part of the proposed legislation put before the Dáil or can the Minister make us aware of his views in that area?
The details of the grounds for divorce will form part of the draft divorce Bill which will be published in advance of the divorce referendum. It is at that point that those particular details will be published.
I urge the Minister to publish details of that Bill in advance of the summer recess so that people will have every opportunity to examine it and give their views on it so as to achieve as much consensus as is possible. Will the Minister consider publishing the referendum Bill at the earliest possible stage so that people will have an opportunity to consider it well in advance? Finally, in relation to Question No. 25, my colleague, Deputy Callely asked a question——
The Deputy knows the procedure at this time. Only those Deputies who tabled priority questions may put supplementaries.
I am putting a supplementary, a Cheann Comhairle.
Fair enough but you did mention another Deputy.
I did not hear the Minister's answer to the question as to whether he intends to accept submissions from interested parties for consideration in the context of his Department's £500,000 expenditure on information in the run up to the divorce referendum. Is it intended to take submissions in relation to that?
I repeat that the money being allocated to my Department is for a programme of information on the Government's divorce proposals. The information programme will be on similar lines to recent referenda programmes and, on that basis, it will cover information of a factual kind. Expenditure of that money will be to disseminate information on the Government's divorce proposals. That is what the money is being provided for.
Is the Minister saying no, in effect?
I am telling the House what the money is to be expended for. It is for the dissemination of information in exactly the same manner as was done in all previous referenda.
If voluntary organisations make recommendations in regard to ways of getting across the information, will the Minister consider those?
It is the Government's responsibility to ensure dissemination of the fullest possible information on this complex question in ways that the Government would regard as appropriate and in fulfilment of its responsibilities. If the Government did not do that, it could be and no doubt would be rightly criticised for putting across to the people the question of voting on an important referendum without giving them the fullest possible information as to the basis of what they would be voting on. That is the reason the money is provided. The Government will carry out its responsibilities in that regard. In regard to the timing question raised by Deputy Woods, I repeat that the details will be published in sufficient time to enable an adequate debate to take place on those important issues both in the House and in the country.
I hope the Minister agrees that the terms of the draft Bill should be published as soon as possible so that we can discuss it. In regard to the Minister's reply about counselling services, will he agree that it is not good enough for voluntary agencies, which are working with people who are under stress and in traumatic circumstances, to have to rely on the largesse of Government from year to year through budgetary measures? Should this not be done on some statutory basis? Should there not be a mechanism evolved whereby such agencies can receive funding on a regular basis which would allow them to budget over a number of years as any business must do?
In the first instance, I do not regard the grants made to the counselling agencies as largesse. I regard it as a recognition of the remarkable and important work they do around the country. Their work is essential and I am pleased to have been able to provide sufficient funds for them last year and this year to enable them to considerably expand the services they provide.
What about next year?
It is not possible to guarantee grants to any agency, be they counselling or otherwise, in any circumstances other than on a year to year basis because they are budgetary matters, as the Deputy knows or should know. It is a matter of the particular financial position at Estimates and budget time, taking taxation and other expenditure matters into account. These are matters that are debated in this House and must be approved by this House and it is not possible to guarantee particular amounts by way of grant to any agency. Obviously, that is a matter for the Government of the day and it depends on the budgetary and Estimates position in each year.
The time for dealing with priority questions is now clearly exhausted. I can, however, deal with Priority Questions Nos. 19 and 20 in ordinary time in accordance with procedures recently adopted by this House.
What about Question No. 17?
No. Question No. 17 is out. I said Questions Nos. 19 and 20.
A Cheann Comhairle, can I ask a question of yourself?
I can call the Deputy now but I must first hear the Deputies who have tabled the questions. Let us have the reply to Question No. 19 in the name of Deputy Woods.
