When I spoke last Wednesday evening I joined with Senators Ryan and McGuinness in welcoming the charter as a useful yardstick to measure progress towards travellers' full participation in society. I made the point, however, that many of the principles enunciated in the charter have become part of Government policy, particularly the recognition of the distinct identity of travellers and their right to pursue a nomadic lifestyle if they so wish. Important steps have also been taken to ensure that travellers are consulted about policies which affect them and to encourage them to speak out about their situation.
The Department of Health are particularly concerned about the health of travellers. Travellers are entitled to, and do receive, medical services; but evidence suggests that they do not make full use of the preventive health services. It is not so much a question of providing special services for travellers as of positive action to ensure that they receive the services to which everyone is entitled. To this end my Department made funds available to the Eastern Health Board for a mobile clinic, which visits traveller encampments to encourage mothers to attend antenatal examinations in the maternity hospitals and to offer vaccinations and developmental screening of young children.
The clinic is staffed by two public health nurses and public health doctors attend as required. The Clinic began work in July of this year and I am glad to say that already the clinic has proved its worth. In one three day period alone, 164 children were vaccinated.
There is, however, one note of caution which I must sound. There is, unfortunately, an inherent conflict between the traditional travelling way of life and the attainment of the highest standard of health. Travellers who wish to maintain a nomadic way of life have no option but to live in caravans. The Review Body on Travelling People pointed out in 1983 that even the best appointed caravan is not suitable as permanent accommodation for a large family, particularly in the Irish climate. Even when parked on a site with proper amenities, a caravan has many drawbacks.
The overcrowding, lack of proper sleeping accommodation and poor ventilation associated with a large number of people living permanently in a caravan constituted, in the review body's opinion, a continuing hazard to the health of the occupants. The price of continuing the traditional traveller way of life may be a lower level of health among the families concerned.
Although I am not a lawyer, it seems to me that the principles listed under article 6 of the charter concerning the family are too broad and do not sufficiently take into account the rights of others in the society. Article 6.3, for example, would declare illegal any measures aimed at forcing travellers to move on against their will.
I would suggest that this should be qualified to the extent that traveller families should not be moved unless they are provided with suitable, alternative accommodation. A blanket prohibition on any movement of travellers from any place they choose to park could interfere with the rights of other citizens and be against the best interest of the community.
No discussion of rights, we are told is complete without reference to the accompanying duties. If society is to recognise travellers' rights, travellers will be expected to accept certain duties in return. The duties of citizenship are not always easy, particularly for those who up to now have only acknowledged the discipline of the road. The best way of tackling fear and prejudice against travellers is to show that there is no grounds for such attitudes. Integration, as the review body commented is a two-way process, involving give and take on both sides.
The charter draws attention to a number of issues where travellers rights may need to be protected by law. In particular there is a need for legislation to outlaw discrimination by private individuals against travellers for no other reason than that they are travellers. Such discrimination takes place in the work place, in public houses, hotels, dance halls, and cinemas. At present travellers have no legal redress against such practices nor have travellers any remedy against public attacks on them as a group or propaganda designed to stir up hatred against them.
My Department and the monitoring committee are concerned about the absence of statutory protection for travellers as a group and have made representations to the Departments of Justice and Foreign Affairs about measures necessary to remedy the situation. Those Departments are involved in examining the implications for Ireland of ratifying the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As far as travellers are concerned, what is required is that any anti-discrimination legislation necessary to ratify the above covenants and the Covenant on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination should be broad enough to cover attacks on, or discrimination against, travellers. Senators can be assured that my Department will continue to pursue the interest of travellers in this matter. Senator Ryan, when he was speaking last week, claimed that discrimination against travellers takes place at unemployment exchanges. If discrimination exists against travellers solely on the grounds that they are travellers, then it should be eliminated. This is a matter which the monitoring committee should examine with the assistance of the Department of Social Welfare. I will ensure that it is brought to their attention.
It is time to say a bit more about the monitoring committee, which was established under the aegis of the Minister for Health to review progress towards the implementation of the Government policy statement on travellers of July 1984. Travellers and persons who speak on their behalf make up the majority on the committee. The committee have just completed their first year's work, a period during which much has happened of benefit to travellers. In education and training, for example, progress has been particularly marked, although much remains to be done. The impetus to increase educational opportunities for travellers children, based on principles such as those listed under article 7 of the charter, has resulted in more pre-schools, better attendance at primary schools and a growth in the number attending secondary schools.
Most encouraging has been the success of the training centres for travellers which now provide 571 places, an increase of 43 per cent on the number provided in 1984. The centres help to compensate young travellers with inadequate primary education and to give them the skills to earn a living and participate fully in society. Senators may have heard about the recent celebration in Galway when over 500 travellers from the training centres throughout the country came together to share their experiences. It was by all accounts a most successful day. Thanks to the monitoring committee, pressure is being maintained on those bodies with responsibility for different aspects of travellers welfare, and the progress made in accommodation, education, training and health is in no small measure due to their persistence. I hope they will continue the good work and be able to report further progress this time next year.
There are many worthwhile aspects of this charter that I have not mentioned, not because I do not consider them important but because they have in general my wholehearted agreement. I am thinking particularly of the articles dealing with economic needs and political rights. I would ask Senators to recognise the many positive developments which have taken place in policies and services for travellers in recent years, without minimising the scale of what remains to be done. I see this charter as both the indicator of the best thinking about travellers' rights and a signpost for the way forward. I ask Senators to accept the Government's good faith as far as policies and services for travellers are concerned.