Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Jun 1952

Vol. 40 No. 18

Vital Statistics and Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Bill, 1952—Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

Minister for Social Welfare (Dr. Ryan)

The main purpose of this Bill is to make possible the collection and publication of more detailed statistics of births, deaths and marriages and other vital statistics. It is true that, at the present time, certain limited particulars are obtained when births, deaths and marriages are registered. Under the Bill, the collection and publication of more detailed vital statistics will be possible and the specialised services of the Central Statistics Office can be used to collect, compile and publish those statistics. Powers are being sought to enable additional information to be obtained at the time of registration or afterwards, in respect of births, deaths, marriages and, for the first time, still births. It will also be possible to undertake a survey of sickness or to assess the results of particular health services such as immunisation schemes.

I think it will be generally agreed that modern conditions not alone justify, but demand, full statistical inquiry by every concern spending large sums of money annually. At the present time the expenditure on health services by the State, by local authorities, by private institutions and by the ordinary citizen is of such an extent that it is in the interests of everyone in the State that the value of those health services may be gauged by full statistics, that their shortcomings may be ascertained and desirable improvements provided for. It will be noted that provision is made for the privacy of the individual to be respected and, in fact, information received under the powers sought in this Bill will be kept strictly confidential and its disclosure will be subject to heavy penalties.

Provision is also made in the Bill for certain miscellaneous amendments of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Code. The most important of these provisions is probably that dealing with the issue of the short birth certificate, which is mentioned in Section 6. The desirability of having such a provision hardly needs to be emphasised now. The form of this certificate is not specified in the Bill but will be specified in regulations later and will probably contain details of the name, date of birth and sex only, with, possibly, the place of birth of the person concerned.

I may mention that the short form of certificate will be accepted for a wide variety of official purposes by many Departments of State. It is also proposed to take power to provide for a short form of death certificate or marriage certificate. Particulars of parentage are given on the full marriage certificate, and a short form of this might be prescribed later. The full death certificate contains detailed information which would not always be required, even though in this case parentage is not disclosed, but provision is made for a short form of the death certificate also. I would like to emphasise that the power to apply for and obtain the present long form of certificates is not being interfered with, as it will be needed in a variety of cases by the legal profession, for example, and by the courts.

Provision is made for replacing the existing titles of Registrar-General and the General Register Office by their Irish equivalents, An tÁrd-Chláraitheoir and Oifig an Árd-Chláraitheóra, and to fix the hours at which Oifig an Árd-Chláraitheóra will be open to the public by regulations instead of by statute. It is also proposed to remove the time limit of one year under the existing law within which the first name of a child may be registered or the entry in the birth register corrected. The existing limitation has caused hardship in some cases. The present law permits alterations in the form of the birth or death register but not in the marriage register and some of the headings used in that register could, with advantage, be amended — e.g., "Rank or Profession" could be changed to "Occupation."

There are two provisions in the Bill dealing with the removal or alteration of amounts of certain fees. The fees of the ministers of the Church of Ireland and the Presbyterian Church in connection with marriages were fixed as far back as 1844 and 1870. A maximum of 5/- is payable for the issue of a licence and 1/- for entering certificates in marriage notice books. It has been represented to me that those fees are nowadays inadequate and it is proposed in the Bill to remove the limitations altogether and leave discretion with the churches to fix the amount of those fees which are paid by the contracting parties to the clergymen. The second provision permits the Minister to change the fees, etc., paid for the issue of birth, death and marriage certificates by registrars, superintendent registrars and the Registrar-General. This applies also to the reduced fees mentioned in a miscellaneous collection of enactments.

Finally, there is the provision by which public assistance authorities will be appointed superintendent registrars as vacancies occur. The position here was that the clerk of the Poor Law Union was, in the old days, appointed superintendent registrar. His duties included the checking of the register of the local registrar, furnishing of particulars to the General Register Office, etc. Due to changes in the local government code and the elimination of the Poor Law Acts, the power to appoint permanent superintendent registrars lapsed and only interim registrars could be appointed in recent years. In future, the duty of acting as superintendent registrar will be assigned to the public assistance authority as vacancies occur. Existing temporary or interim superintendent registrars, as they are called, who are not either officers, employees or pensioners of local authorities will be retained in their office as if they were permanent superintendent registrars.

No great change is made by this section except to tidy up a difficult situation and it means, in effect, that, instead of specifying that a particular one of its officers must act as superintendent registrar, the public assistance authority itself would be given the task. This is the usual procedure adopted in regard to the assignment of duties to local authorities who act through any of their officers. One result it will have is that the local authorities will retain the fees paid to them for the benefit of the rates and that the sums paid to superintendent registrars from the Vote for the General Register Office will gradually lessen as vacancies for superintendent registrars occur and will, in time, disappear.

Mr. Douglas

In the main, this Bill gives power to the Government — by Order, to be laid on the Table of the House, and which can be annulled by either House — to make considerable changes in forms and in certain statistics required. There was a time when Parliament would object to powers of this kind, but nowadays it is the normal practice that these matters be dealt with by regulation, and when it comes to statistics I do not see that there is anything to which we could raise any objection. The intentions, as stated by the Minister, seem to me such as we can all support but, of course, what may afterwards be done under the Act will possibly have to be watched by the Oireachtas—though I am afraid that in practice neither House gives a lot of attention, within the prescribed time, to their powers to annul Orders.

The main point of public interest in this Bill is the introduction of the new short certificates. For my part, I thoroughly welcome that and believe it is a wise and proper step. How far it will do all that we hope for it depends to some extent on the regulations and to a greater extent still on the public practice. I had rather hoped that, as there has been a considerable time between the time this Bill passed the Dáil and the time it came before us, the Minister would tell us a little more about what exactly it is proposed to do. I think he indicated that he would probably — I do not think he pledged himself — make a lower charge for the short certificate and a considerably higher charge for the long certificate. If that is done and if the differentiation is sufficient, it would probably lead to the general use of the short certificate.

Obviously, it would be of very little use in connection with the purpose for which it is intended unless it is generally used. I do not know whether the Minister is in a position now to say definitely how he intends to bring it into general use other than by means of a lower charge. My only doubt is whether this Bill, when it becomes an Act, without being energetically brought into effect by the Government, will have the desired result. I support the Bill.

Mr. P.F. O'Reilly

I support the ideas in the Bill, but I am disappointed that the Minister is endeavouring to do so much by regulation. I do not know what difficulty the Minister could have experienced in inserting the form of the short certificate in the Bill. It is really impossible to imagine why the Minister could not make up his mind as to the form of the short certificate and insert it in the Bill. It seems strange that so many Bills — in order, possibly, to postpone doing something — must provide that a matter shall be dealt with by regulation. I should have thought it a very simple thing for the Minister to be able to say to the Oireachtas: "Here is the form of certificate we require,", and put it in the Bill. Why does the Minister think it necessary to postpone the decision as to the form of certificate? I must say that I find it very difficult to understand why we have not had it in the Bill.

Another matter which the Minister seeks to provide for by way of regulation is the fee for certificates. Again, why can we not have the amounts which people must pay for these certificates specified in the Bill? That is not a matter which should give any great difficulty. I suggest that the Minister's Department does not look to the charge for a certificate as a substantial source of revenue. Therefore, it cannot be said that, as the years might alter circumstances, the fee might have to be altered. I understand that the amount received from fees for certificates is not very great. Therefore, the Minister should have been able to specify in the Bill the amount of the fees to be charged.

As Senator Douglas has pointed out — and, I think, as the Minister himself has indicated — it is most important that the short form of certificate should be easily available and that it should become the more popular, shall we say, of the two certificates. The position in this country to-day is, we regret to say, that in a very large number of cases, and for a reason which is well known to all of us, we must have a certificate in which all the information that appears in the statutory certificate to-day is not given. That is sad, perhaps. Nevertheless, we must face that fact. I think it is the principal reason for this Bill.

There is no point, however, in our having this Bill unless the Minister and the Government do something to ensure that the short birth certificate will be more commonly used than the longer form. As the Minister has indicated, the only purposes for which the long certificate will be required will be to assist people in the presentation of cases in court and in the proving of pedigrees. With these two exceptions, I suggest there is no necessity for the long certificate. Therefore, the Minister should go out of his way to ensure that, say, the Department of Education and, say, the Civil Service Commissioners will insist that those people who have reason to submit birth certificates will supply only the shorter form. Unless we get a lead from the Government in this connection we shall have wasted our time in the matter of this legislation.

The Minister has an opportunity of seeing that the short certificate will be the certificate which will be more commonly used. I suggest that, either in this Bill or by consultation and understanding with his colleagues in the Government, the Minister will ensure that the short form of certificate is popularised and that he will do that to a very great extent by endeavouring to see that the Department of Education, say, and the Civil Service Commissioners will accept only the short certificate.

The charge for the short certificate must, I suggest, be considerably less than the charge for the long certificate. The charge for a search and for the long certificate to-day is 3/7. I suggest that the charge for a search and for the issue of the short form of certificate should be only 6d. That is another way in which the short form would become the more commonly used form. However, if the Minister will not take steps to see that the short form of certificate becomes the more popular form, then we shall have wasted a great deal of time in having anything to do with this Bill.

I am exceedingly disappointed that the Minister seeks under this Bill to do so much by regulation. After all, what he seeks to do by regulation— except for one small matter — is very simple and could have been provided for in this Bill. We are told that these regulations must be laid before the Oireachtas. However, the time to deal with these matters is when the Bill is under discussion, so as not to have to deal with them all over again when regulations are made by the Minister under the Act.

The Acts relating to the registration of births, marriages and deaths are not very voluminous. I think there are only two or three in all. I would urge, in a Bill of this kind, that the laws should all be brought into one Statute, and that measures dealing with registrations of this kind should be consolidated. In that way we should have only one Act dealing with a matter of this kind instead of having, as is the case at present, an additional Act.

Mr. Colgan

I agree with Senator O'Reilly's suggestion that we should endeavour to make the abridged certificate the regulation certificate. I suppose there are sound reasons why the Minister could not go the whole hog and make the abridged certificate the common certificate. I think that in the majority of cases there is no necessity for the long certificate, and that it is necessary only in certain specified cases. I think that the abridged certificate should be available at a comparatively cheap rate while the long certificate should be fairly expensive. In that way the abridged certificate would become more common.

I am opposed to the making of Orders by regulation. However, this is a new departure. I suggest that the reasons may be that he will be up against difficulties and that he does not feel he should put definitely in the Bill what he will have to put in by regulation in the light of circumstances that he will meet in the operation of the Act.

I have always felt that the system of registration, particularly in regard to the registration of births, is a very haphazard one. I went to obtain a birth certificate in respect of my own daughter and found she was registered under another name altogether. What is everybody's business seems to be nobody's business. I once had an amusing experience. I was married in a country village not far from Dublin. Having signed the register and paid the fee, I was handed the registration form by the parish priest, who asked me to slip across the road and deliver it at the dispensary. As I had a number of things on hand, I could not very well go across the road. I had, therefore, to walk about five miles and put it into the letter-box myself. There is a case where the parish priest did not do his business and, if I had not done the job myself, my marriage would not have been registered.

Registration of a birth is done by some friend who makes the declaration and that is the end of the matter. I feel there should be an obligation on either the nurses or the doctors who attend a patient during birth to register the birth. The name is not so very important since a baptismal certificate will deal with that, but in certain cases a baptismal certificate is not accepted. My main reason in rising was to ask that somebody ought to be made responsible for the registration of the birth. The responsibility should be put on the doctor or the nurse who would testify that a birth had taken place and whether the infant was a male or a female. If the long certificate is made expensive enough you will find that the abridged certificate will become the common form.

Mr. Hawkins

I think it is generally accepted that the community, as a whole, welcome the introduction of this Bill. To my mind it will be somewhat difficult in certain cases to make the abridged certificate popular and have it in general use. I just thought that it is a pity that we could not define the certificate in some more definite way. It just entered my head that a certificate could be termed a general purpose certificate which would be acceptable to people seeking employment, and particularly in regard to certificates essential under the Department of Education. Unless that is done I am afraid that there will be prejudice of one kind or another and that the Bill will not achieve what it is hoped to achieve. I do not altogether agree with the suggestion that it should be made somewhat cheaper. That, of itself, would not be sufficient to have it generally accepted, but if it was generally recognised that this was a certificate that was required for certain purposes, then, I think, we would overcome the greater part of the difficulty which this Bill is introduced to remove.

Dr. Ryan

Certain Senators, just as certain Deputies, object to this method of legislation by regulation. If we were to reach perfection in that respect I assume that no regulations ought to be permitted at all in order to have anything done by amending legislation. There are 41 regulations on the Seanad Order Paper to-day. I assume, therefore, that if Senator Douglas had his way we would have 41 Acts before the Seanad instead of 41 Orders. That would be very cumbersome.

Mr. Douglas

I said I was in favour of these things by regulation. I did not object.

Dr. Ryan

I am sorry. I thought the Senator was speaking against regulations, but Senator O'Reilly took that line at any rate. However, it is necessary to do some of these things by regulation. The Senator suggested that the form of the short certificate should be put in the Bill and that the Bill should also state what the cost of the short certificate should be. I do intend to have a fairly substantial differential between the large certificate and the short one, the object being to encourage the use of the short certificate as much as possible.

We have communicated with a very large number of people concerned to know if they can use the short certificate, at the same time giving them an idea of the information that would be in the short certificate. It would not be wise at any rate to fix the price of the short certificate until we get the replies, because we would need to have an idea of the classes of people who would use the short certificate and who would require it.

A great number of Government Departments say they can use the short certificate. Bodies such as the Civil Service Commission and the Local Appointments Commission can use it. I think that local authorities generally can use it. The Department of External Affairs say they can use it for passports. Trade union bodies, in respect of Acts under the Department of Industry and Commerce dealing with labour conditions, can use it. In all these instances the short certificate will be used.

There are a few cases where it is not so easy, as in the case of my own Department, the Department of Social Welfare. I am not so sure about the old age pensioners because it is sometimes difficult to be sure they have got the birth certificate of the right person, and if we make the certificate a short one it will be easy to evade the issue, as it were. We are considering that matter further.

I am just mentioning that fairly long list of people who are willing to use the short certificate to justify, if you like, holding back a bit to decide, first of all, what we require in the short certificate. There is, of course, no doubt that we will get the name, the sex and the date. One thing we are rather in doubt about is whether the place should be put in because the place may be rather tell-tale. We would want to consider well whether that would be put in. It will depend to some extent on the users of the short certificate, whether they will tell us that they require it to be put in. The price will be fixed as soon as we get a fairly good idea of all those who are going to use the certificate.

As far as my information goes now, I think the short certificate will be used practically altogether. The long certificate, although it will be available, will only be required in some cases such as proving title or in rather complicated legal cases and cases of that kind. It will not matter very much, as far as revenue is concerned, what the price will be because the revenue will not be very much. The only consideration that should enter into the thing is to make it a fair margin above the short one so that it might be used more.

I think it was Senator Douglas raised the question of people being obliged to register births. Of course, the obligation is on the parents to do so. If the parents are negligent, then anybody who is present at the birth, the nurse, the doctor or anybody else, is obliged to see that the birth is registered. I think that it is not necessary to include that in any legislation at the moment because it is there already.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Hearne

It is a fact that there has been an expression of resentment against giving all stages of a Bill on the same day, but in view of the fact that there is general agreement on this Bill — there has been no opposition and the points that were made were very few and have been dealt with by the Minister — I suggest it would be a proper and businesslike action to take the remaining stages now.

Mr. Baxter

Is it so urgent?

Mr. Hearne

There is no great urgency about it, I understand, but it will enable the regulations to be got under way.

Mr. Douglas

I am inclined to agree, but not on the same grounds as Senator Hearne. If this Bill had only been down on our Order Paper I would not consider that unanimity was sufficient ground for taking all the remaining stages, but, as every member of the Seanad is aware, we have had it some weeks, and if there was any desire to amend it it would be known. Therefore I think we can take it that there is no objection to taking the remaining stages now. Speaking for myself, I have no objection.

Agreed to take the remaining stages to-day.