Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 2023

General Scheme of the Civil Registration (Electronic Registration) Bill 2023: Department of Social Protection

We have received apologies from Senator Garvey. Members participating in the meeting remotely are required to do so from within the precincts of Leinster House only. I ask members and witnesses to please turn off their mobile phones or ensure they are on silent mode. I advise members of the committee who are participating in the meeting remotely to use the raised-hand icon on Microsoft Teams if they wish to contribute.

This meeting is to undertake pre-legislative scrutiny of the civil registration (electronic registration) Bill 2023. The stated objectives of the Bill are to enable online registration of births and deaths; a reduction in the time in which a death must be registered from the current three-month timeframe to 28 days; revision of the criteria for registering stillbirths and improved access to the stillbirths register; as well as the registration of a death where a coroner's inquest has not yet been concluded.

The committee welcomes this Bill and looks forward to engaging with the Department and interested groups with its scrutiny process and hopes that the suggested recommendations are taken into consideration by the Minister.

I welcome to the meeting today representatives from the Department of Social Protection, namely, Mr. Liam Daly, assistant secretary responsible for operational control; Mr. David Dillon, principal officer, General Register Office, operations and policy; and Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin, assistant principal officer, General Register Office with responsibility for legislation and marriages. They are all very welcome this morning.

Before we start, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they may be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect they should not comment on, criticise nor make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now call on Mr. Daly to make his opening statement.

Mr. Liam Daly

I thank the Chair and members for inviting us here today to discuss the general scheme of the civil registration (electronic registration) Bill 2023. These heads of Bill which are proposed will amend the Civil Registration Act 2004 and will provide for a wide range of issues relating to the registration of life events in the State and, in particular, births, stillbirths and deaths.

The civil registration service operates under the aegis of the Department of Social Protection. The General Register Office holds records of life events, namely, births, deaths, marriages, civil partnerships, stillbirths and adoptions in Ireland. It also holds several sets of records relating to life events which are historical in nature. Over 30 million records are held.

In 2022, just over 118,000 key life events were registered - 58,000 births, 37,000 deaths, 23,000 marriages, 102 adoptions and 145 stillbirths. In the five years from 2018 to 2022, almost 555,000 life events were registered. Under the Act, local registration services are provided by the Health Service Executive through the civil registration service with offices located nationally delivering registration services directly to the public.

The current arrangements whereby a person must attend in person before a registrar are largely unchanged since the 19th century. While they have served the State and its citizens well, there is the opportunity to update these arrangements to reflect advances in technology and opportunities for improved customer service while still retaining the necessary safeguards and formalities that are attached to any system of civil registration. The requirement for an online option became evident during the Covid-19 pandemic when physical attendance by parents and others at a HSE civil registration office was restricted.

The general scheme provides for amendments to the Civil Registration Act 2004, to provide for online registration of births and deaths; more timely notification of births and deaths by medical practitioners and institutions; revision to the criteria determining stillbirths along with increased access to the stillbirth register; and revision to the registration of deaths to enable earlier notification and registration of deaths. In addition, there are three technical amendments to the Civil Registration Act.

The main provisions of the general scheme of the Bill are as follows. The proposed amendments aim to introduce provisions that will permit online registration of births, deaths and stillbirths where parents or next-of-kin have an authenticated standard authentication framework environment, SAFE, identity and verified MyGovID account. A secure online identity authentication service is essential for the provision of online services, whether in the private or public sector. MyGovID is the secure online identity authentication service provided by the Department of Social Protection.

MyGovID, which is underpinned by the SAFE process, is used extensively by the public, reflecting the demand for access to services in a convenient and secure manner. This process enables a person’s identity to be authenticated on a once-and-done basis and provides the foundation for the provision of secure online access to high-value public services. A public service card is issued as a token that a person’s identity has been authenticated and this is then relied upon as proof of identity meaning that people do not need to provide comprehensive identity proofs in documentary form each time they apply for a public service.

Over 10 million online transactions have been processed by this Department alone, with many more processed by the National Driving Licence Service, the Passport Office and the Revenue Commissioners, among others. This new customer service online channel will run parallel to existing services delivered at civil registration offices and will give parents and next-of-kin the option of registering births and deaths online. There will be no change for people who choose to attend a registration office to register a life event in person or for people who do not have a verified MyGovID account.

The general scheme provides that notification of births and stillbirths by maternity hospitals should be made as soon as practicable after the birth of a child or within five days. Currently, no time limit is specified. While the majority of births are notified promptly, delays can occur and this can give rise to problems for parents seeking to claim social welfare benefits or access other services. Additionally, provision is being made for a notification obligation on parents where a child is born outside a maternity hospital or without medical supervision.

The general scheme also provides for a change in the criteria determining stillbirths by reducing the gestational age limit for a stillborn child from 24 to 23 weeks and making improved provision for stillbirths where multiple births are concerned. In cases of multiple births, where one of the children meets the definition of a stillborn child, any other child should also be recorded as a stillborn child provided the child weighs 200 g or more. These amendments address recommendations received from the Minister for Health and the HSE in order to align stillbirth registration criteria with current foetal viability outcomes.

The general scheme also provides for a broadening of access to the stillbirth register. Currently, only the parents of a child recorded in the register, or staff of the General Register Office, have access to the register. As a matter of practice, staff of the GRO facilitate access by family members. Parents and advocacy groups have requested a broadening of access to stillbirth records while there is also an acknowledgement of the need to respect the privacy of parents. The proposed head seeks to balance these concerns. The purpose of the stillbirth register is to provide a tangible record of the stillborn child’s existence and serve as a comfort and support to parents. The Department is very conscious of the acute loss which parents have suffered and the interests of parents are seen as paramount.

In order to address concerns that the proposed amendment does not go far enough in enabling access, the General Register Office is examining the creation of a new record of stillbirths, to run in parallel to the register of stillbirths, where parents may apply to have an entry made public. It is hoped that this would address the concerns raised by advocacy groups while preserving parents' right to privacy where that is their wish.

There is provision in the general scheme to enable deaths to be registered pending the conclusion of an investigation by a coroner. The current arrangement whereby deaths can only be registered once a coroner’s report is completed delays the death registration process. This change will facilitate more timely registrations of death and the use of online processes for registration. The current arrangements where a death cannot be registered can cause distress to families. The changes will also enable families to proceed to make arrangements relating to management of the deceased’s estate. When the coroner subsequently determines the cause of death, these will be included in an amended death certificate.

The general scheme introduces a requirement that all deaths occurring within the State are to be notified to an tArd-Chláraitheoir within two days of a death occurring. This provision is similar to the provision for the notification of births and will serve to ensure that the State has a more complete records of deaths that occur. Under current arrangements, a death notification form issues directly to the next-of-kin. Until such time as this is presented as part of an application for registration, the State has no record of a person’s death. Notifications of all deaths address the World Health Organization’s recommendations to revise the death registration process and the recommendation from National Public Health Emergency Team, NPHET, to ensure steps are taken to ensure earlier registration of deaths.

The general scheme provides for an amendment to the time afforded to the relatives of a deceased person to register a death, from three months to 28 days from the date of death. Most other countries allow a much shorter period for the registration of deaths - typically five days. However, a timeline of five days is not seen as appropriate.

There are three technical amendments in the general scheme. Head 13 proposes a technical amendment to rectify conflicting insertions of section 2(2)(g) relating to marriages and marriages of convenience into the Civil Registration Act 2004. Head 14 proposes amendments to the list of required particulars for the register of presumed deaths, for example, someone lost at sea where no body was found. The register would include particulars like presumed place of death, PPSN etc. The general scheme also seeks to correct an error which is delaying the introduction of amendments to the registration of a father’s details where a couple are separated.

We are pleased to take any questions members may have.

I welcome the departmental officials to the committee. What Mr. Daly has outlined is very interesting. With online registration of someone getting married, dying or whatever, where does the responsibility lie? Is it the responsibility of the person getting married? If people do not register, is there a breach of the law?

Mr. Liam Daly

Mr. O'Loughlin may speak more to the detail of the legislation. The online channel mirrors the existing in-person arrangements. There are legal obligations on people to register a birth and to register a death. The exact same obligations will apply irrespective of whether somebody fails to do it in person or online. We specify who the qualified informants are, for example, in respect of registration of deaths, there is an order of priority within next-of-kin or family.

Equally, there is an obligation on parents to register a birth too.

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

The superintendent registrar can inquire if someone has not registered a birth after one year and can make investigations to compel a person to register that birth. To be clear, this does not include marriages.

What is the position with marriages?

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

With marriages, the couple themselves go and register the marriage after the ceremony has taken place.

They might decide to go online.

Mr. Liam Daly

Marriages are not within the scope of this Bill. The provisions in the general scheme relate to births and deaths.

I think Senator Burke is asking the procedure with regard to marriages and the obligation of registering. Traditionally in Ireland, many marriages were in churches. After the end of the marriage ceremony, the civil registration aspect took place. I know it is different legislation. I recall when we were bringing in the legislation expanding it to include solemnisers of marriages. Is the responsibility on the solemniser or the couple to register the marriage? I think that is Senator Burke's question. The witnesses may not have that to hand.

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

The obligation is on the couple.

The obligation is on the couple. Does that clarify it for Senator Burke?

Is there a charge for all those services? When people are online, is there a charge?

Mr. Liam Daly

There is no charge for the online registration of births or deaths. I believe there is a charge associated with the submission of a notification of an intention to marry. That gives rise to a charge but the actual act of registration does not incur a charge in itself.

Can people give that indication online, but not complete it online? Is that correct?

Correct me if I am wrong. My recollection about the legislation for the registration of a marriage is that both parties have to present in person. That is a safety provision regarding some references to technical elements here. Maybe Mr. Daly might want to clarify that.

Mr. Liam Daly

Mr. O'Loughlin might have more detail on the procedures we follow regarding marriages and notifications.

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

For marriages, both people getting married should present to the registrar. They do an interview of sorts. There are occasions where only one can apply or people can apply in writing if there is an issue with attending in person. That is when they pay their fee in order to get married. For the registration itself, there is no fee involved in registering any life event.

This Bill does not cover marriages at all?

Mr. Liam Daly

No.

It is only births.

Mr. Liam Daly

And deaths.

There is no charge for registering a birth.

Mr. Liam Daly

No.

This is sensible legislation. From the experience of Covid, many things that were done in person can now be done online. We have speeded many things up. There was a point about the 19th century. I recall speaking to somebody who was waiting anxiously for the letter and cheque from the President for their mother's 100th birthday, because that woman's father had not come down from the mountain to register the birth in Macroom until about three months later. It was an anxious wait for the three months, because that was the date registered for the birth rather than the actual date of birth. Things have moved on.

I have two questions. One is a bit broader than the legislation. I will make a brief general point which is outside the scope of this legislation and Department. The issue of coroners requires further revision and updating. It affects a number of things. Families face delays in finding out what happened. I also believe some of the inconsistent approaches that can be adopted are affecting the quality of the information we have about suicides and things like that. That is beyond this Department but I wanted to say it when I had the opportunity.

The current system, as I understand it, is that registrars are employees of the HSE and the offices are run by the HSE, but the register is run by the Department. Is that correct? Is that a bit complicated and cumbersome? Is it desirable, going forward, to have this division of labour? How does it work in practice?

The other question I have is about head 13. What is a technical amendment can be a matter of debate. Could we get a bit more information on it? It refers to, "conflicting insertions of section 2(2)(g) relating to marriages and marriages of convenience into the Civil Registration Act". I do not know precisely what that means but it seems to me that could potentially have significant implications for an individual. Will the witnesses tell me a bit more about it?

Mr. Liam Daly

Obviously matters relating to coroners are outside the responsibility of the Department of Social Protection. On the arrangements whereby the civil registration service at a local level is delivered by the HSE, the General Register Office, GRO, sits within the Department of Social Protection. The system works well. We have a good system of engagement with registrars across the country. We support the necessary IT infrastructure to record births, deaths and other life events. It works well in practice. Given there is a relatively small number of registrars across the country, approximately 140, we can operate the system well and have good, open communication with them. The system we have works well.

On head 13, there were two separate pieces of legislation that referred to the Civil Registration Act. They were inserted not by the Department's legislation but by other legislation. We are proposing to try to remedy that. The first was inserted under the Marriage Act. I do not have an immediate reference to hand for the second one. Essentially, there were two conflicting definitions of a section within the Civil Registration Act. We are trying to correct that. My colleague, Mr. O'Loughlin, may be more familiar with the background to it.

As a supplementary to that, subsequent to this being enacted, what would be the definition of a marriage of convenience?

My understanding of it, which I am open to correction on, is that it is a nomenclature problem in the referencing and not in the text, but if Mr. O'Loughlin could clarify it, that is an important point.

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

That is exactly right. It was put in twice. Where we define the impediments to a marriage, it went in under the same letter. It is just a technical issue. It will not affect the interpretation of the legislation or anything to do with marriages of convenience.

Is it literally the traditional case of whether they are blood relations, if people are married to somebody else, and those kinds of impediments?

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

Yes. It will not affect anything to do with how we implement matters regarding marriages of convenience.

As the witnesses know, we sought public submissions on this. I do not know if they have had the opportunity to have sight of those submissions. They may not. A couple of issues were raised in those submissions. I would like if they could address them for the committee here today. We had a submission from Féileacáin, which deals with stillbirths and neonatal deaths. It has raised the issue regarding the registration of births being private. I know in his evidence this morning, Mr. Daly has spoken about having a mechanism where a public document would be available. Féileacáin suggested that it would be done the other way round and that the register would be available publicly for all registrations that take place from this point forward but parents would have the option to seek for that to remain private. The default would then be public rather than setting up a separate register again. In its submission, based on its own engagement with families, Féileacáin has a strong view that that approach would be more effective and would meet the needs of the vast majority of families rather than the proposed suggestion by the Department on the drafting of the legislation.

Féileacáin made a second suggestion with regard to the stillbirths register. The criteria are set down under section 7 of the Stillbirths Registration Act. This proposed legislation is updating that but Féileacáin made the point that where a birth meets the current definition, families should be able to voluntarily register a stillbirth that took place since 1994 onto the register that is being proposed, if it meets the criteria set out for weight and gestation.

We also received a submission from the Irish Hospice Foundation. Much of its submission is around training of staff. That is an ongoing issue between the Department and the HSE. The submission also referenced the facilities where registrations take place, and that there would be a private space for that. I know from registering births myself that in many centres where such registrations take place it is not a very private location. The Department of Social Protection is the officials' parent Department. At that Department's premises in County Roscommon, for example, where people get MyGovID, a room is available that can be screened off. Surely, with the centralisation of services approach, and with the HSE registrar's office, the General Register Office and the Department of Social Protection being under the one roof in Roscommon town - it is probably similar in other parts of the country - it should be possible to have a private space for these registrations to take place, rather than at a counter, which has been the situation historically. I ask for that to be looked at as well.

The Irish Hospice Foundation has also referenced the need to invest in a tell-us-once approach to registration of the details of a person's death. It made specific reference to the model in place in the UK. Again, this is maybe something that could be looked at on an administrative level. I do not think it requires a change in the legislation. I also ask for clarification on a final point. My understanding is that the heads make provision for this, but the final point made in the submission is that the registration of deaths where a coroner's inquest has not yet been concluded should be progressed, and it should be ensured that bereavement supports are incorporated into the registration system. My understanding is that is now the case, as proposed in this legislation, but the officials might clarify that.

As part of the Department's presentation, the point was made that maternity hospitals will have to register a death within five days, which will now be set out in statute for the first time. Most of them do this within two days at the moment. How is that done at present? Is it done electronically or physically? Will that now change as a result of this legislation? The current process is that families are written to. How is the register's office informed that it should issue that notification form to the next of kin at present? Do undertakers have a role in that regard or could they potentially have such a role? We are seeing more and more that families, where the death is not a sudden death, may not go through the traditional funeral arrangements. What role, if any, had undertakers historically or could they potentially have in future?

Mr. Liam Daly

We have not seen the submissions so, to an extent, that limits the response I can make. On the comments from Féileacáin and the issue of the register and the record, the default position is that the register would be public. A public register is very much that. It is publicly searchable by everybody. We are conscious that registration of stillbirths is voluntary on the part of parents. Not all parents choose to register stillbirths. There are privacy concerns in that regard. Both the Department and Féileacáin, through the concerns it has expressed, are coming at it with a view to trying to make sure that we put in a solution that recognises the wishes and interests of parents, but we are trying to strike a balance. It is felt that rather than having a default position, we want consent to be explicitly stated. That is why we approached it in terms of the record. That was the proposal we had. When we see the submission, if the committee forwards it to us, we will obviously be happy to examine the matter again.

On the criteria and the issue of retrospection, when the Act was originally introduced in 1994, stillbirths were not registered in Ireland prior to that date. At that stage, when the Act was enacted, provision was made for retrospective registration of stillbirths. We have entries on the stillbirth register that go back to the 1930s. Those entries were obviously made in line with the criteria adopted in 1994. We are now changing the limits and criteria. In doing that, we have not specified an operational date. That may well allow us to do what is being sought. We have not completed the full drafting process with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. There is a legal issue to be considered in that regard. Again, I understand the point that is being made. The approach we have always taken on this, going back to the original principles when the provision was made in 1994, was to be as supportive as is possible.

On the feedback from the Irish Hospice Foundation on the training of staff and facilities, we will raise what we have heard with superintendent registrars. The superintendent registrars and registrars do a very good job. I speak from the experience of having to register a variety of life events. They operate in a very empathetic fashion but we will relay that to them and see what can be done.

On the issue of the tell-us-once approach to the registration of deaths, as part of the development of online services, when we roll them out, it is very clear that underpinning that will be a need for very clear communication to people about what the process involves. That gives us an absolute opportunity to make sure that we also try to address those concerns and we make clear how a person goes about things, what the requirements area, how a person may fulfil those requirements and what it involves. That is very much part of our communication campaign.

On coroner cases, at the moment the issue that is preventing the completion of registration is the determination, say, of the cause of death of a person. We know that a person is deceased and we are certain as to his or her identity. We are proposing that will then allow us to register the death and, when the cause of death has been determined, we subsequently add that to the register.

Then, when the cause of death is determined, we subsequently add it to the register.

With regard to maternity hospitals, my understanding is that we get a variety of electronic notifications. Mr O'Loughlin might comment on the detail. The majority of communications are now electronic but registrars do get some communications in the manual form. In such cases, the information has to be inputted into our IT system. We recognise that when somebody comes to register a birth, we have actually been notified of it, so it is a matter of a combination of both.

A death notification form is issued by a hospital or GP, or from the medical profession, not by undertakers and so on. The next of kin or a qualified informant will receive the death notification form directly from the hospital or treating GP. At present, there is no central notification. The State is not aware that a person has actually deceased at this point. The death notification form is with the next of kin and it is only when the registration is completed that the State knows. The notification is issued by the medical profession, be it the hospital or a GP.

What happens if a person does not pass away in hospital? Unfortunately, there are people in this country who do not have a GP because they cannot get one. What happens in those circumstances?

Mr. Liam Daly

Those are the types of cases that end up being referred to a coroner, even though the identity of the person may be known. Unfortunately, it is clear that the person is deceased, but until the coroner has completed an inquiry, we are not in a position to register the death.

When what is proposed is enacted, we be able to register the death, but just not the cause of death. Is that correct?

Mr. Liam Daly

That is the intent of the proposals.

I thank Mr. Daly.

Are the deceased categorised as national, foreign national, European or, let us say, tourists? If a tourist dies in the country, what is the position? If a tourist is involved in an accident, I suppose the authorities are involved. Does everybody comply with the registration requirements? How do they apply?

Mr. Liam Daly

The Act sets out the required particulars that are to be provided when somebody registers a death. These basically include the type of information we capture, including the name of the deceased and other information regarding, say, the deceased's parents, occupation and civil status. Mr. O'Loughlin may correct me if I am wrong in any respect. All deaths that occur within the State have to be recorded. From their constituency dealings, Deputies will have had encountered cases of people who died abroad. The death registration process has to be completed abroad. We have in the General Register Office a record of deaths abroad we maintain, as opposed to a register.

As part of the improved reporting of deaths, through the notification process whereby we will be informed by hospitals or GPs, we will be getting more precise medical codes as to reasons, including underlying issues. That will help with the reporting of public health issues, helping the likes of the Central Statistics Office, CSO, to determine emerging trends.

Are the deceased categorised as nationals, foreign nationals, Europeans or tourists, for example?

Mr. Brendan O'Loughlin

That is not one of the required particulars, so it would not be included.

That concludes our first session today. Go raibh maith agaibh go léir. I thank Mr. Daly, Mr. Dillon and Mr. O'Loughlin for their time and positive engagement with the committee. We will be engaging with them further. We will furnish them with copies of the submissions we have received.

Sitting suspended at 10.15 a.m. and resumed at 10.29 a.m.
Top
Share