Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Bill 2014: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, will resume his reply to the debate.

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I began my reply yesterday to the contributions made by Deputies on all sides of the House. I thank all those who have expressed support for the Bill, recognised its important role in the protection of human rights and that this is truly a reforming measure that will enhance the powers available to address issues both of human rights and equality in the context of the new provisions contained in the Bill which were not reflected or contained in the legislation that applied to the Irish Human Rights Commission or the Equality Authority. As I stated yesterday, I wish to reflect on the contributions made by Deputies on the Bill. I will reflect on the suggestions made concerning improvements that might be made to the Bill as it proceeds to Committee Stage, as I will on submissions received from members of the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority, as well as from others outside the House. My intention is to have in place the best possible provisions in this legislation to have an effective human rights and equality commission.

I wish to touch on some of the issues raised in the debate and hope Deputies will forgive me if, within the limited time available to me, I do not address all of the various matters raised, some of which are of importance and to which, as indicated, I will give consideration. Initially, I wish to deal with some issues raised by way of criticism of the Bill. I will take the contributions of some Deputies without, I hope, upsetting those to whose contributions I do not refer.

Deputy Niall Collins made the predictable contribution of seeking an easy soundbite with which to criticise the Bill in the context of funding for the human rights and equality authority. Other Deputies generally made the case in a more detailed way. It is, of course, important for the human rights and equality commission to undertake its work, that it be adequately resourced and staffed and not impeded in that context. It is a bit much for Deputy Niall Collins to raise that issue. Fianna Fáil in government at a very early stage, that is, in 2007 or 2008, effectively sought to defenestrate both organisations. Substantial reductions of a very dramatic nature were imposed on the Irish Human Rights Commission, in particular, in its funding. I do not believe the percentage reduction was reflected in any other agency in the State. Moreover, in the years up to and including 2011, the funding was grossly inadequate, the number of staff in both bodies was reduced substantially and in 2011 I inherited a situation, by virtue of the outgoing Government's budget, where, frankly, there was inadequate funding for either agency. This was an issue about which I had great concern.

In the context of the appointment of the new members of the commission, I asked them to present a business case on what they had identified as being their needs and requirements. Arising therefrom, as I mentioned in my opening contribution, I obtained sanction for an increase in staffing levels that was sanctioned by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin.

This is a very important increase. It is a work in progress in that once the new staff identified as necessary are recruited I have given an assurance that within 12 months we will review where matters stand and if additional staffing resources are required I will fight at Cabinet to ensure these are provided. I managed to secure agreement with my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Howlin, for an additional €2 million to be made available this year to the new organisation. This is a very substantial sum which is €2 million more than the outgoing Fianna Fáil Government allocated at the end of 2010 for the year 2011 for the relevant bodies. It is a bit rich for Deputy Niall Collins to play a political game around resources when there was no question of his party in Government having any commitment of any description to properly resourcing either body and in particular the Irish Human Rights Commission, with whom it seemed to have a very strange relationship in the sense that rather than seeing it as an assistance to Government in ensuring we protect the rights of citizens, it seemed to be a body that was generally disapproved of by the outgoing Government.

I have always been an enthusiast for the Irish Human Rights Commission and for the Equality Authority. They are both bodies that have performed very important functions. I see this new body as a significant opportunity to ensure that we have a structure of very great importance.

Much has been made of the Paris Principles and the suggestion that there is something in this Bill that could violate the Paris Principles. In the context of the Irish Human Rights Commission and the legislation that currently applies to it compared to this new legislation, the new body will be even more independent in practical terms than the outgoing body. The Government is less engaged than the previous Government would have been in appointing members. There is an independent process for the selection of individuals to be appointed to the body in the future. There was an independent process with regard to the appointment of the new current members who will be carried over into the new body. Members cannot be appointed to this body even when recommended by Government without the agreement and a resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas. Contrary to what was suggested quite wrongly during the debate, there is no question of any description of Government exercising any control over the work of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission.

The Bill provides for it to have a discretion invested in it to take up a consideration of any issue that falls within the ambit of its area of work. It does not require a government commission nor my permission nor the permission of any future Minister for Justice and it would be quite wrong if it did. This body has enhanced independence, improved provisions for the appointment of its membership, a wider remit than its predecessor. The benefit of a single body rather than two bodies is that the overlapping jurisdictions that previously existed can be avoided. A single body will be able to work in a coherent way to address issues of human rights and issues of discrimination and seek to ensure that some of the broad range of areas of concern to Deputies on both sides of the House that were raised in the contributions, can be addressed. I regard this Bill as very exciting and important legislation. I am looking forward to seeing it enacted and the new body effectively created having the appropriate legal status that is necessary to facilitate it doing its work.

The current Irish Human Rights Commission would normally have been dealing with re-accreditation to the Paris Principles during the course of 2014. I am very hopeful that the new body when in place will retain the "A" status under the Paris Principles. The consultative process in which we have engaged with regard to the putting in place of this legislation has included dealing with relevant agencies outside the State and discussions with regard to ensuring that we have a body whose independence cannot be disputed. I believe we will have a body whose legislative architecture and framework may well provide a prototype for other states looking at how they may consider reforming their legislation in this area. It is important to emphasise that the independence of this body cannot be questioned. Anyone who does a fair comparison between the legislation originally enacted to create the Irish Human Rights Commission and the legislation before us, leaving aside the usual political accusations made across the floor of the House, could not fairly reach any conclusion other than this body has enhanced independence and is further disconnected from Government than our existing body which has "A" status and which fully complies with the Paris Principles.

Deputy MacLochlainn in his contribution raised the very important issue of the Good Friday Agreement, the relationship between our human rights commission and its sister or brother organisation in Northern Ireland and our obligations in that regard. I am afraid he is mistaken in what he said in suggesting that these arrangements are in any way in violation of the Good Friday Agreement or create any particular difficulty in that regard. The commitment given was that this State would have equivalent protection of human rights. This is a matter of substantive human rights legislation. Having a human rights commission that also has a remit for equality is a positive step. It does not change our human rights approach which is also a priority nor does it change our obligations in that area. In particular, I draw the Deputy's attention to section 10(2)(p) of the Bill which describes one of the functions of the commission:

to participate in the Joint Committee with the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission in accordance with the Multi-Party Agreement annexed to the British-Irish Agreement (within the meaning of the British-Irish Agreement Act 1999);

We have been very careful to ensure that we meet our obligations in this regard, that nothing of any nature is done that could give rise to any difficulty. The Bill provides explicitly for a continuation of the work that has been underway and in which both the Irish Human Rights Commission and the human rights body in Northern Ireland is engaged. To suggest otherwise is simply party political point-scoring; it is not the reality and it would be unfortunate if the Bill were to be misrepresented in this way.

Both Deputy MacLochlainn and Deputy Niall Collins said that they are opposed to the merger. In other EU countries there is currently a move to merging both such bodies. In my view, the legislative architecture, subject to any improvements we can make, will provide a very important prototype. It seems to me that Deputy Collins's view is simply that we should preserve the existing bodies, effect no change, not provide the wider remit that exists and not prescribe the additional levels of independence that will attach to the appointment of individuals and to the work of the bodies. I have to reject that view and I cannot accept it because it is a misrepresentation of what is a very detailed and important piece of legislation.

Many contributions from other Deputies particularly addressed individual human rights issues of importance. Each of us has views in these areas. In my opening contribution on Second State I dealt with the particular principles that are to apply when the commission exercises its functions. The Bill has multiple functions detailed in section 10.

I will not delay the House by going through all of them but it is important to put on the record the particular functions in section 10(1), which recite as follows:

The functions of the Commission shall be—

(a) to protect and promote human rights and equality,

(b) to encourage the development of a culture of respect for human rights, equality, and inter-cultural understanding in the State,

(d) to encourage good practice in inter-cultural relations and to promote tolerance and acceptance of diversity in the State, and

(e) to work towards the elimination of human rights abuses, discrimination and prohibited conduct, while respecting diversity and the freedom and dignity of each person.

I would hope they are all functions that all of us across all sides of the House can agree with, and they are broad-ranging. The commission, as an independent body, has vested in it in this legislation all of the independence and discretion it needs to perform those functions and to identify areas it should address.

I want to particularly reference the speech by the Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, Deputy David Stanton. I again thank the justice committee for its constructive engagement with the legislation and for recognising the fact that after the publication of the heads of a Bill, the consultative process enabled the committee, prior to publication of the Bill in its current form, to considerate it, receive submissions and make proposals, many of which have been incorporated in the Bill.

Some criticism was voiced from across the floor of the House as to the length of time it has taken for this Bill to be published. The reason for that length of time was that there is a huge interest among civil society, non-governmental organisations, the current membership of the Human Rights Commission and a broad range of individuals, in this particular piece of legislation, and I was anxious, in accordance with the approach that is now recommended in the context of the Paris Principles, that we have a broad-ranging consultative process before the Bill was published in its current form. I was also anxious that Members of this House would have the opportunity to contribute to that process. The process took somewhat longer than I had anticipated, but it was a worthwhile, constructive process and I hope those who contributed to it feel that the views they expressed have been taken into account. It is not always possible to incorporate every view, and some of the views expressed to us on the legislation would have been conflicting, so judgments had to be made in that regard. I greatly value the input of everyone who has engaged in the consultative process, and I acknowledge and particularly value the contribution of the Oireachtas joint justice committee and its members in the work that was undertaken.

If I was to enter into further discussion on the range of issues the commission might take up or consider, I have no doubt someone would accuse me of trying to interfere with the independence of the commission on its appointment, but I am sure members of the commission will have regard to issues Deputies in this House have mentioned as being of interest, and I look forward to a constructive engagement from time to time between the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission membership and Members of this House generally on issues of interest and concern.

In the context of the inquiry process, some criticism was voiced with regard to the provisions in the Bill, which have taken account of the creation of a legislative bedrock that will facilitate the undertaking of inquiries in appropriate circumstances within the constitutional parameters prescribed in judgments delivered by the courts, particularly the Supreme Court. The inquiry power includes the compellability of witnesses, and compellability powers cannot be used lightly. There are court judgments in regard to circumstances in which such powers can be undertaken, and it is of great importance that there are effective measures in this Bill. The power of inquiry as envisaged in the original legislation on the Human Rights Commission has not been invoked as frequently as might have been anticipated or with regard to issues in which it could have been invoked. I have particular issues in mind that might have been dealt with differently and more comprehensively had the provisions in this Bill been contained in the original legislation applicable to the Human Rights Commission, but I will not enter into that particular issue. It is important that we recognise that the power of inquiry is a very important power to be used for issues of particular seriousness, but where it is invoked, the commission has vested in it all the powers necessary to facilitate it in properly undertaking an inquiry in a manner that is constitutionally appropriate.

There was a reference to the commission promoting programmes to do with integration. My Department is engaged in that at the moment. We have advertised. We want to put together a new programme in that regard and we are seeking to review the integration strategy. An interdepartmental committee has been created in this context. We advertised for submissions within the last two to three weeks, and I hope we will have a substantial contribution.

With regard to the new communities in Ireland, those who have come to reside here permanently from abroad and acquired Irish citizenship - I remarked at another event yesterday that almost 70,000 people have become new Irish citizens in the three years so far of this Government's life - it is very important we adopt an inclusive approach, that people feel part of the communities within which they are living, that their backgrounds, cultures and perceptions of the world and people in authority are understood by the State and all State agencies, and that regard is had to issues that are of concern to them and that create difficulties for them.

In the context of matters that have personally affected me in recent days, one of the issues of huge importance is to ensure that members of minority communities in this State, whether they have been minority communities for many years or new communities that are now part of a new Ireland, are not targeted by hate speech, discriminated against or affected by prejudice. I repeat my welcome for the campaign launched on Dublin transport in recent days. Far too many people coming from different backgrounds are subjected to racial abuse on our transport system. On too many occasions, when that occurs, ordinary, decent people who are listening to what is taking place are fearful to put a stop to it in case they are attacked by those who are prejudiced and targeting people in a manner that is utterly unacceptable. We have to bring an end to that. We cannot have a situation in this State in which Irish society is contaminated by the type of prejudice that has created difficulties in other European countries. We should never regard such behaviour as acceptable. My Department is examining what steps can be taken to engage with our new communities - those who originate from different backgrounds, cultures and countries who are now very much part and parcel of this country and who are entitled to go about their daily lives with the same peace of mind the rest of us would like to have without feeling under threat or at risk of racist abuse.

There is much more we need to do now in that area. I instanced deliberately, and will revert to it, the corrosive impact of some of the material available on the web, which seems to, and is designed to, instigate or provoke racist sentiment or attack and targets individuals. This is an area of particular difficulty because we all recognise and accept the great value of the web and social media.

It is part and parcel of the democratic nature of the State. Freedom of expression is of great importance. The debate we had many years ago on our equality and incitement to hatred legislation centred on where was the dividing line between freedom of speech and those who sought to incite hatred, target minorities or people whom they perceived to be different for a broad range of reasons, be it gender, sexual orientation, racial or religious background or ethnicity. I hope this is an issue - I am merely expressing the hope as this is the only one I am referencing - the new commission may consider worthy of its engagement at some stage in the future.

Deputy Jerry Buttimer raised an issue of policy - not an internal but an external one - to which we need to give greater consideration, namely, the substantial number of Christian communities across the globe which were victims of persecution. This is an issue that does not seem to receive much attention on the international stage. Just as it is important that we engage internationally in addressing racism or discriminatory legislation against and attacks on gay people, there is a growing issue in different parts of the world of Christian communities being persecuted and not allowed to live in peace. That issue has received little attention in this parliament. It is one to which perhaps some attention should be given. Some consideration should be given to what could be done on the international stage, not just by the Government but also by Deputies in the context of the international organisations of which they are part.

I again thank Deputies for their contributions. I look forward to moving to Committee Stage and seeing constructive amendments that may be proposed. I hope that, by the time we get to the summer, we will have enacted new and important legislation that will form part of our human rights and equality architecture.

Question put:

The Dáil divided: Tá, 61; Níl, 31.

Tá

Bruton, Richard.
Burton, Joan.
Buttimer, Jerry.
Byrne, Catherine.
Byrne, Eric.
Cannon, Ciarán.
Carey, Joe.
Coffey, Paudie.
Collins, Áine.
Conaghan, Michael.
Connaughton, Paul J.
Conway, Ciara.
Costello, Joe.
Coveney, Simon.
Creed, Michael.
Daly, Jim.
Deasy, John.
Deering, Pat.
Doherty, Regina.
Doyle, Andrew.
Durkan, Bernard J.
Farrell, Alan.
Fitzpatrick, Peter.
Flanagan, Terence.
Harrington, Noel.
Heydon, Martin.
Hogan, Phil.
Humphreys, Kevin.
Keaveney, Colm.
Kehoe, Paul.
Kenny, Seán.
Lynch, Ciarán.
Lyons, John.
McEntee, Helen.
Maloney, Eamonn.
Mitchell O'Connor, Mary.
Mulherin, Michelle.
Murphy, Dara.
Murphy, Eoghan.
Nash, Gerald.
Naughten, Denis.
Neville, Dan.
Nolan, Derek.
Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
O'Mahony, John.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Penrose, Willie.
Perry, John.
Phelan, Ann.
Phelan, John Paul.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reilly, James.
Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Brendan.
Shatter, Alan.
Sherlock, Sean.
Stagg, Emmet.
Timmins, Billy.
Tuffy, Joanna.
Twomey, Liam.
Wall, Jack.

Níl

Boyd Barrett, Richard.
Browne, John.
Calleary, Dara.
Collins, Niall.
Colreavy, Michael.
Cowen, Barry.
Daly, Clare.
Doherty, Pearse.
Donnelly, Stephen S.
Dooley, Timmy.
Ellis, Dessie.
Ferris, Martin.
Fleming, Tom.
Halligan, John.
Healy, Seamus.
Higgins, Joe.
Kelleher, Billy.
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
McConalogue, Charlie.
McGrath, Finian.
McLellan, Sandra.
Mathews, Peter.
Moynihan, Michael.
Murphy, Catherine.
Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Pringle, Thomas.
Smith, Brendan.
Stanley, Brian.
Tóibín, Peadar.
Wallace, Mick.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Paul Kehoe; Níl, Deputies Martin Ferris and Seán Ó Fearghaíl.

Question declared carried.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 10 Apr 2014