Deputy Alan Kelly stood with Mr. O'Meara every step of the way. I met Mr. O'Meara last week and was very taken by his very quiet determination and courage, and a certain unease about being in the middle of this. He was determined to see this case all the way through to the Supreme Court. I was impressed by the pride that he has in his achievement, which is something he and his children can share because, due to their actions, this important change will benefit many and be a testimony to Michelle’s memory.
The Supreme Court found that section 124 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 was incompatible with the Constitution in that it excluded a cohabitant, like Mr. O’Meara, from the payment because he was not a widower or a surviving civil partner. The Supreme Court decision gives rise to the necessity for the Bill before the House today. The Bill will have an important impact on many hundreds of people directly affected by the death of a loved one. It should also bring comfort to thousands of families and couples who may some day find themselves in an appalling situation whereby a loved-one dies and they seek access to a contributory based survivor’s pension from my Department. As we all know, death, and the associated grief, does not distinguish on any grounds and the loss of a loved one affects us all equally.
The Supreme Court judgment recognised that to provide the payment to surviving cohabitants, a legislative amendment would be required. The purpose of the Bill is to give legislative effect to extending eligibility for the widow’s, widower's or surviving civil partner contributory pension to surviving qualified cohabitants. In its decision, the Supreme Court noted that the State had already defined cohabitation within the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. Accordingly, the Bill proposes to extend eligibility to the payment to qualified cohabitants who are in an intimate and committed relationship for a period of two years where there is a child or children of the relationship or five years if otherwise. This reflects the definition in the 2010 Act for qualifying cohabitants.
Expanding eligibility for the payment to surviving cohabitants requires several other relevant changes to the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005. The Bill provides for this as follows: the name of the scheme will change to the bereaved partner’s contributory pension in order to reflect the more inclusive nature of the payment for all bereaved partners, whether spouses, civil partners or qualifying cohabitants; and there will be no time restrictions on when the bereavement of the qualified cohabitant occurred, provided the rules continue to be met.
Payments will commence from 22 January 2024, or later if the death is after this date. I am advised that, with respect to backdating payments for deaths prior to the judgment, an issue Deputy O'Reilly raised with me, that this is in line with established legal rules regarding findings of unconstitutionality. The rules on when entitlement to the payment will permanently cease will be amended to remove entitlement where couples are divorced, enter into a new relationship of qualified cohabitation or two years after the end of the relationship, whether that relationship is based on marriage or cohabitation. This is to address existing anomalies in the scheme cited by the Supreme Court and to avoid a situation whereby surviving cohabitants may have greater rights than married or divorced couples or vice versa.
The Bill includes provisions that anyone currently in receipt of a payment, including divorcees, will retain their payment. The same rules for eligibility for cohabitants will be applied to other schemes such as the non-contributory version of the pension and the widowed or surviving civil partner grant. These schemes will be renamed, again to reflect the more inclusive nature of the payment.
