Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 19 Jun 2001

Vol. 167 No. 4

Carer's Leave Bill, 2000: Second Stage.

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

I am pleased to present to this House the Carer's Leave Bill, 2000. I am confident the Bill is not only a first in Ireland but in Europe where the State, through the provision of carer's leave, will allow people to take temporary leave from their employment for up to 15 months or 65 weeks to look after persons in need of full-time care and attention.

Today, people's expectations are far different from what they were ten or even five years ago. With our booming economy, people's quality of life has improved immensely and they now have more disposable income. The number in employment has risen from 1.22 million in 1994, to 1.71 million today, an increase of 490,000 or just over 40%. Allied to this is the fact that there are some 283,000 part-time employees in the workforce, with the majority of these being women. All these healthy and welcome developments have created a new scenario in society, that is, that of balancing the needs and demands of the workplace with those similar needs and demands outside it. This is sometimes described as the formulation of "family friendly" policies.

Why do we need these "family friendly" policies? In an Irish context, the answer is quite simple. The family has and will continue to be the cornerstone on which our society is built. The Government is committed to continually reviewing our policies on how to successfully marry the changing needs of the workplace with the ever growing demands of family life. We all know that there has been a very significant rise in participation by women at work outside the home. However, if we do not address caring issues or how family and work responsibilities are managed, this new situation may end up being a source of stress to many and lower their overall quality of life.

Family friendly workplace arrangements can address this issue if they are effectively applied. They must be applied in a way that brings no negative consequence to the career prospects of those who take them up. This is vital. If not, all we will do will be to address inequalities in labour market participation but also worsen inequalities in labour market position and career.

For employers, these benefits include retention of skilled staff, reduced absenteeism, improved productivity and a more highly motivated workforce. Employees, on the other hand, benefit through greater prospects to better balance their working and family lives, greater equality of opportunity between men and women and a fairer sharing of family responsibilities between men and women. Alongside the labour market and business case is the very compelling equality case for family friendly work arrangements.

The Carer's Leave Bill, taken with the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Bill, 2000, which I hope to bring to Committee Stage shortly and the extended maternity and adoptive leave entitlements bear testament to the Government's commitment to fostering family friendly arrangements which are in harmony with the needs of our dynamic and enterprising economy. As we move into the new millennium, life expectancy is increasing. As a consequence, major demographic changes in terms of the age profile of our population are happening on an ongoing basis.

In order to address these concerns the Government has already provided that pension costs for future generations will be met, in part, from some of our current budget surplus. This initiative, overseen by the National Treasury Management Agency, has been widely welcomed as being innovative and far-reaching. In the same vein, we must also look at other initiatives which are needed to cater for the needs of an ageing population.

One such area is that of caring for our sick and elderly. Down through the years so many people have made and continue to make time available to care for our sick and elderly, be they caring for children, parents, grandparents, relatives or indeed just good neighbours or friends. As a people, we have always tried to provide sick and elderly people in our community with the privacy and dignity they required in times of need, most particularly in the final months and days of terminally ill people. Many people give freely of their time in this regard without much recourse to the State coffers. However, because of rising caring costs there has been recognition by the State that a form of income support is needed to assist and facilitate those people who want or are required to care for persons on a short-term basis.

It was against this background of fostering for future generations the culture of caring for each other that the Government announced its intention in the 2000 budget to introduce a new insurance-based carer's benefit scheme. This scheme was introduced by my colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, with effect from 26 October 2000. The main criteria used by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs for entitlement to payment of carer's benefit of £96.50 per week, plus child dependant allowances, are laid out as follows.

An employee qualifies for carer's benefit if he-she satisfies the following criteria: is 16 years of age or over; satisfies the PRSI contribution conditions; has been in paid employment for the previous three month period; leaves his or her employment to provide full-time care to a person who has been certified as in need of full-time care and attention – this person is known as a "relevant person" under the Social Welfare Act, 2000; is not employed or self-employed outside the home during the period of receipt of the benefit, except as prescribed by regulations made by the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs; is living in the State; and is not living in a hospital, convalescent home or other similar institution.

With regard to "relevant person", the deciding officers or appeals officers of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs will decide, on the basis of a medical assessment carried out by that Department, having regard to information provided by the person's GP, whether the "relevant person" is in need of full-time care and attention.

The PRSI contributions required for a person claiming carer's benefit for the first time are that 156 contributions have been paid since entry into insurance and that the person must satisfy one of the following: 39 or more contributions paid in the governing contribution year; 39 or more contributions paid in the 12 months immediately before the commencement of the benefit; or 26 contributions paid in the current governing contribution year and 26 contributions paid in the previous governing contribution year. For second or subsequent claims the employee will simply be required to have been in paid employment for the previous 13-week period or have been in receipt of carer's benefit in that period.

An employee who is entitled to carer's benefit may engage in limited self-employment within the home or employment outside the home for up to ten hours per week. The employee may also pursue an educational or training course, or take up voluntary or community work for up to ten hours per week. During such absences, adequate provision must be made for the care of the relevant person. This entitlement was raised by a number of Deputies during the passage of the Bill through the Dáil and, as a consequence, this provision will be highlighted in explanatory literature to be made available to the public following the passing of the Bill.

This new insurance based carer's benefit scheme allows an employee who has been certified by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs as meeting the eligibility criteria for a carer to take temporary leave from his-her employment to look after a person in need of full-time care and attention. This new benefit will be paid for a period of up to 65 weeks – 15 months – to those who meet the qualifying contribution conditions outlined above.

The Government has decided that this carer's benefit scheme should be complemented by a statutory entitlement to carer's leave, hence the Bill before the House. I am giving the background to the involvement of the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and putting that involvement in context. We are coming to the point where my Bill enters the scenario. The provisions of this Bill will entitle employees to carer's leave, protect their employment rights over the period of the absence and allow them to return to their jobs. Carer's leave is not simply a complement to carer's benefit, it is a significant independent right.

The Carer's Leave Bill fulfils a Government commitment in budget 2000 and in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness that legislation would be introduced to provide for a carer's benefit payment scheme for certain employees with a parallel right to carer's leave for employees. In approving the drafting of this Bill, the Government directed that the provisions of the carer's benefit scheme and the carer's leave scheme should be harmonised as far as possible. To that end, in preparing this legislation, my officials and officials at the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs worked closely over a number of months with a view to aligning the two schemes and the respective application procedures.

In addition, we had detailed discussions with the social partners, the ICTU and IBEC, which both support the intent of the Bill. The ICTU and IBEC have both raised a number of issues, which are mainly of a technical nature. These issues have been considered in detail and have been the subject of a number of important amendments on Committee Stage in the Dáil.

The key features of the carer's leave scheme, as set out in the Bill, are as follows: the leave may be taken by any employee who satisfies the conditions set down in the Bill; the leave is for the purpose of personally providing full-time care to a person who is objectively assessed by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs – by deciding officers/appeals officers under the carer's benefit scheme – as being in need of full-time care and attention and as being a "relevant person"; subject to certain exceptions, the leave terminates when the employee ceases personally to provide the full-time care and attention to the relevant person, for example, where the care of that person is assumed by another person or institution other than in circumstances provided for; the employee must have been in the continuous employment of the employer from whose employment the leave is to be taken for at least 12 months before he/she can commence the leave and there is no minimum hours threshold; an employee may not be on carer's leave in respect of two or more relevant persons at any one time except where the two relevant persons reside together; only one employee may be on carer's leave in respect of the person being cared for, at any one time; an employee is entitled to a maximum of 65 weeks in respect of any one relevant person; the 65 weeks entitlement may be taken as a continuous period, or in separate unit periods, the aggregate duration of which does not exceed 65 weeks; an employer may refuse, on reasonable grounds given in writing, to permit an employee to take carer's leave for a period of less than 13 weeks; carer's leave is unpaid by the employer, but it is reckonable for the purposes of employment rights – other than superannuation and public holidays or annual leave entitlement beyond the first 13 week period of carer's leave in respect of any relevant person; an employer and the employee may agree to postpone, curtail or vary the leave in any way they so wish; disputes about certain entitlements under the Bill are, in general, referable to a rights commissioner, with a right of appeal to the Employment Appeals Tribunal; issues arising in relation to, in particular, whether the person in respect of whose care the leave is taken is a relevant person for the purposes of the Bill and whether an employee is providing the full-time care and attention as required by the Bill will be decided by a deciding officer of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, who will also carry out the assessments regarding relevant persons under the parallel carer's benefit scheme; and there is a right to appeal from a decision of a deciding officer, under the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993, to an appeals officer and the decision of a deciding officer, or a decision made on appeal from a decision of a deciding officer, given in writing, is to be taken as sufficient evidence of the fact of the decision.

In practice, what will happen under the provisions of the Bill is that employees wishing avail of carer's leave will be required to notify their employer six weeks before they intend to take the leave and produce evidence as soon as possible from the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs that the relevant person, that is the person for whose care the leave is being taken, is in need of full-time care and attention. Applicants for carer's leave can then use an acknowledgement of receipt of their application from the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs when they first approach their employer in regard to seeking carer's leave, not later than six weeks before they propose to commence the leave.

This acknowledgement from the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs will constitute evidence for employers of the bona fides of the application by the employee for carer's leave. It will also ensure that applicants do not have to have two medical assessments carried out for carer's benefit and/or carer's leave.

The Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs has indicated that all claims for carer's benefit are dealt with as soon as possible. All claims received are immediately acknowledged and referred to the Department's medical assessors. It takes approximately four weeks to process straightforward application forms and some additional processing time in cases where an application form may be incomplete. The Department is satisfied with the processing times achieved and has received very positive feedback from applicants applying for carer's benefit to date. Two weeks before commencing carer's leave, applicants will be required to confirm their intentions to their employer.

I stress to Senators who fear that persons not meeting the carer's benefit criteria may be excluded from eligibility for carer's leave that this will not be the case. We want, between our two Departments, to make the process as user friendly as possible. We do not want a situation whereby a relevant person will have to undergo two medical assessments, one for carer's benefit and one for carer's leave. To that end, the medical assessment form has been designed by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs in such a way that it not only covers applications for carer's benefit but both carer's benefit and/or carer's leave as required.

It should be noted that failure to qualify for carer's benefit by not having the necessary PRSI contributions will not necessarily mean an employee cannot avail of carer's leave. In such circumstances, the employee can be facilitated at his or her own expense with such leave provided the other requirements are met in respect of relevant persons and full-time care and attention.

Senators may also be concerned that such a procedure may delay approval of carer's leave. In fairness to all carers, it would be wrong to ask them to go through the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs's medical procedures for carer's benefit on the one hand and through their local general practitioner on the other for carer's leave. It is better that the application and certification procedures for both schemes are aligned as much as possible. Accordingly, the above arrangement will be the most effective for everyone involved, especially the most important person in all this, namely, the person being cared for, as he or she will not be required to undergo two medical assessments.

The Bill provides in section 17 that any disputes about the medical assessment and the provision of full-time care will only be dealt with by the deciding/appeals officers of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. Disputes about employees' employment rights, for example, length of continuous service, return to work and redundancy situations, will be dealt with by a rights commissioner in the first instance and the by Employment Appeals Tribunal on appeal, as appropriate. This is similar to redress mechanisms set out in other employment rights legislation, such as the Maternity Leave Act, 1994, the Adoptive Leave Act, 1995, and the Parental Leave Act, 1998. These have worked well to date. I have no doubt that, given the nature and sensitivities of cases likely to be dealt with under this legislation, these mechanisms will also work effectively and efficiently for carer's leave into the future.

The Bill, with the exception of the medical assessment procedures outlined above, is modelled on the Parental Leave Act, 1998. The Bill has been the subject of a number of important amendments, which I was happy to take on board and which have improved the thrust of the legislation. I will outline to the House the main features of the Bill.

Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, are standard provisions dealing with the Short Title, interpretation of terms and the making of regulations. Section 4 ensures that persons cannot contract to nullify or exclude the application of the provisions of the Bill, but it allows for the provision of arrangements between an employer and an employee more favourable than those provided for in the Bill. This is a standard provision in employment rights legislation generally. Section 5 is a standard provision which states that the cost of administering the Bill incurred by the Minister will be paid out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas.

Section 6 defines the qualifying conditions for entitlement to carer's leave. An employee is entitled to carer's leave without pay of 65 weeks in respect of any relevant person – a relevant person must generally require full-time care and attention – to enable him or her to provide full-time care and attention to that person. An employee must apply to the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs for a decision on whether the person to be cared for is a relevant person for the purposes of the Bill. An employee must provide his or her employer with a decision from a deciding officer at the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs that the person in respect of whose care the leave is to be taken is a relevant person for the purposes of the Bill before the commencement of the leave. There is provision for an appeal of a decision of a deciding officer under the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993.

An employee must have completed 12 months' continuous employment before commencing carer's leave. Only one employee may be on carer's leave in respect of any relevant person at any one time. In general, an employee may be on carer's leave in respect of only one relevant person at any one time. The section also declares, in the interests of certainty, that entitlement to carer's benefit is not a condition for entitlement to carer's leave.

Section 7 requires an employee to notify his or her employer of any change of circumstances which affects his or her entitlement to carer's leave. The section also provides that an employee may avail of leave for the care of a second relevant person while already on leave for the care of a relevant person where the two relevant persons concerned reside together. However, this may be done only once. This section was the subject of a number of technical amendments on Report Stage in the other House aimed at improving the effectiveness of the Bill. In such cases the period of leave for the second relevant person shall commence on the date on which the deciding officer at the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs notifies the employee that that person is a relevant person for the purposes of the Bill.

Section 8 specifies that carer's leave in respect of any one relevant person may be taken in one continuous period of 65 weeks or in a number of periods, the aggregate duration of which does not exceed 65 weeks. An employer may, on reasonable grounds notified to the employee in writing, refuse to grant carer's leave for any period of less than 13 weeks. This provision was the subject of a Government amendment on Committee Stage in the other House which involved the insertion of "reasonable grounds" in the text. The inclusion of "reasonable grounds" given in writing had been sought by ICTU. There must be a gap of at least six weeks between periods of carer's leave taken by an employee in respect of a relevant person.

The section also provides that an employee who has taken carer's leave in respect of a relevant person cannot commence a period of carer's leave in respect of another relevant person until a period of six months has elapsed from the date on which leave in respect of the first relevant person terminated. Following representations from ICTU and FLAC, I moved a Government amendment on Committee Stage in the other House which reduced the gap to six months from the original 12 months provision. The only exception to the six months' gap requirement is that of two relevant persons residing together as set out under section 7.

Section 8 also states that an employer and employee may agree to carer's leave on terms more favourable to the employee. The section confers power on the Minister to make regulations applicable to any class or classes of employee in respect of the form in which carer's leave may be taken where it is proposed to take the leave in a form other than a continuous period of 65 weeks.

Sections 9 and 10 regulate the procedures to be followed by an employee in giving notice of intention to avail of his or her entitlement to carer's leave. At least six weeks' prior notice in writing is required from the employee, except where in exceptional or emergency situations it is not reasonably practicable, in which case notice must be given as soon as is reasonably practicable. A Government amendment of section 9 on Committee Stage in the other House resulted in this revised provision.

The terms of the leave constitute a document to be known as a "confirmation document". This document must be prepared and signed by the employer and employee not less than two weeks before the date on which the leave as stated therein is due to commence. An employee may revoke the notice of his or her intention to take carer's leave by notice in writing given to the employer before the date of the confirmation document. An employee must give at least four weeks' prior notice in writing to his or her employer of the intention to return to his or her employment on the expiration of the period of carer's leave.

Section 11 sets out the circumstances and conditions upon which carer's leave terminates. Generally, the leave terminates on the date specified in the confirmation document. However, the leave may terminate on another date specified in an agreement between the employer and employee concerned. Carer's leave terminates when the employee ceases to satisfy the conditions for the provision of full-time care and attention to the relevant person in respect of whom the leave was taken, for example, where another person begins to provide full-time care and attention to the relevant person concerned in circumstances other than those prescribed. The leave also terminates when the person to be cared for ceases to satisfy the conditions for a relevant person. The leave shall also terminate where a deciding officer or an appeals officer of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs makes a decision, on reference by an employer, that either the employee or the person being cared for does not satisfy the conditions applicable to him or her.

Section 11 also provides that carer's leave shall continue for up to six weeks after the death of the relevant person, subject to the period of carer's leave in the confirmation document not having expired. This section was changed during the passage of the Bill through the other House to reflect the concerns of Deputies who pointed out that it would be made more user friendly by setting out in clearer terms the circumstances and conditions upon which carer's leave terminates.

Section 12 provides for the postponement, curtailment and variation of the form in which carer's leave may be taken by agreement between the employee and employer concerned. The section also provides that where carer's leave is postponed, curtailed or varied, it may, subject to section 6 of the Bill, be taken at another time.

Part 3 of the Bill is a standard provision in employment rights legislation generally. Section 13 relates to the employment position of the employee during carer's leave. The main provisions are as follows. An employee on carer's leave will be treated as if he or she had not been absent from his or her employment so that all his or her employment rights, except the right to remuneration, annual leave and public holidays in excess of the initial period of 13 weeks of carer's leave for each relevant person, superannuation benefits, will be unaffected during the leave. This section was amended during the passage of the Bill through the Dáil to provide for the entitlement to both annual leave and public holidays in respect of the first 13 weeks only of the 65 weeks entitlement for each relevant person. A period of probation or apprenticeship may be suspended during carer's leave if the employer considers that its continuance would not be consistent with the carer's leave. Periods of carer's leave are not to be reckonable as any other type of leave, for example, sick leave, annual leave, adoptive leave, maternity leave, parental leave or force majeure leave.

Section 14 provides entitlements to return to work on the expiration of a period of carer's leave. It also deals with arrangements for return to work where there has been a change of ownership of the enterprise concerned or the enterprise is temporarily closed on the date the employee expects to return to work from carer's leave.

Section 15 provides that where, on the resumption of work following a period of carer's leave, it is not reasonably practicable for the employer to permit the employee to return to the same work as he or she did prior to the leave, suitable alternative work on terms and conditions not less favourable to the employee than those applicable to his or her previous employment, shall be provided by the employers.

Section 16 provides for the protection of employees from penalisation by employers for exercising or proposing to exercise their entitlement to carer's leave. Under this section, penalisation includes dismissal, redundancy or an unfavourable change in the conditions of employment. An employee may seek relief against penalisation involving a dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 1993.

Part 4 deals with resolution of disputes. Sections 17 to 19 provide that, in the event of certain disputes arising relating to an employee's entitlement to carer's leave, a claim for redress may be made to a rights commissioner in the first instance with a right of appeal to the Employment Appeals Tribunal. An employee may refer a dispute to a rights commissioner that his or her employer has contravened a provision of the Bill in relation to the employee's rights to carer's leave. An employee may seek redress against penalisation, other than in relation to dismissal, by an employer for exercising his or her rights under the legislation.

Disputes concerning an employer's opinion as to whether a person is a relevant person as defined and-or whether full-time care and attention is being provided must be referred for adjudication to the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs only. The rights commissioner or the tribunal will be bound by the decisions of a deciding officer or an appeals officer of that Department on these issues.

The Defence Forces have been excluded from Part 4 of the Bill, relating to resolution of disputes, because they have their own statutory redress mechanisms under the Defence Act, 1954.

Section 29 provides that a decision of a rights commissioner may be appealed to the Employment Appeals Tribunal within four weeks of the date of the decision. By way of a Government amendment on Committee Stage, this period was revised downward from six weeks to tie in with other employment legislation, for example, the Maternity Protection Act, 1994. The section also provides that the Employment Appeals Tribunal shall issue a determination in writing affirming, varying or setting aside the decision of the rights commissioner. An extension of time to appeal of six weeks may be granted by the tribunal if it considers it reasonable to do so having regard to all the circumstances. During the passage of the Bill through the Dáil, a proposal was put forward that the appellate body should be the Labour Court rather than the tribunal. I argued strongly that it should be the tribunal, not least because of its previous experience as the appellate body under the Parental Leave and Maternity Acts.

Section 21 in regard to redress provides for matters which may be the subject of a decision or determination by the rights commissioner or the tribunal, respectively. Among the matters which may be so decided or determined are the granting of the carer's leave of such length and at such times as may be specified or an award of compensation of up to 26 weeks' remuneration. This is similar to other employment rights legislation.

Section 22 provides that if a party fails to carry out the terms of the decision of a rights commissioner or the determination of the tribunal, the Circuit Court may, on the application of the aggrieved party or of the Minister, make an order directing that it be carried out. In making an order under this section, the Circuit Court may direct the employer to pay interest on the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Courts Act, 1981.

Section 23 provides that the tribunal may refer a question of law arising in proceedings before it to the High Court and a party to proceedings before the tribunal may appeal for a determination of the tribunal to the High Court on a point of law.

Part 5 deals with miscellaneous issues. Section 24 deals with the service of documents for the purposes of, or in relation to, proceedings under Part 4 of the Bill relating to resolution of disputes.

Section 25 provides that compensation due to an employee under this Bill shall be among the debts having priority in the distribution of assets of a company being wound up, or of a bankrupt or arranging debtor.

Sections 26 to 30 ensure that other relevant enactments take specific account of the introduction by this Bill of carer's leave. Accordingly, the relevant Acts in relation to several matters are amended to ensure the protection of a person availing of carer's leave. Section 28 was amended on Report Stage having regard to the revised public holiday entitlement in section 13.

Section 31 places an obligation on employers in relation to the keeping of records and notices relating to carer's leave, and creates an offence in respect of the contravention of this obligation.

Section 32 confers power on the Minister to appoint persons to be inspectors for the purposes of the Act. The section confers certain powers on the inspectors and regulates those powers in relation to investigating whether the provisions of the Act are being complied with. The section also creates an offence for, inter alia, giving false or misleading evidence to an inspector or obstructing or impeding an inspector in the exercise of any of his or her powers under the section. Section 33 makes general provision for the prosecution of offences under the Bill.

A new section 34 provides that the Minister shall, between two and three years after the commencement of the Act, carry out a review of the operation of the Act after consulting representatives of employers and representatives of employees generally and shall prepare a written report, copies of which shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. There is a similar review provision in the Parental Leave Act, 1998, which incidentally is currently the subject of such a review.

It has taken me some time to outline in detail the provisions of the Bill and I thank you, a Chathaoirligh, for your patience in that regard. It was important to do so. I have no doubt the House will be supportive of this innovative social legislation which allows people time off from their jobs at a difficult and sensitive time. As I said, the Bill honours Government commitments made under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and budget 2000.

While the introduction of the Carer's Leave Bill is some months behind the parallel carer's benefit scheme, I understand that 602 applications for carer's benefit have been received by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. These cases are being dealt with in an expeditious manner by officials in that Department. An amendment was proposed during passage of the Bill through the Dáil that employees currently on unpaid leave from their employment and availing of carer's benefit should be allowed the benefit of the legislation retrospectively. However, I have been advised it would be in breach of natural justice to impose retrospective obligations on employers who would, in fairness, have acted in good faith by allowing their employees to take leave to which there was not a statutory entitlement at that time. I should, however, point out that many of these cases have been helped by a compassionate and pragmatic approach on the part of employers which has enabled some of these applicants to leave their jobs pending the enactment of this Carer's Leave Bill.

While I regret the delay in finalising the legislation, it was this process of harmonising as far as possible the two parallel schemes, namely, carer's benefit and carer's leave, which has delayed proceedings somewhat. I firmly believe that the excellent work done by officials of my Department and the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs will result in effective, user-friendly procedures for everyone availing of either or both schemes.

The Carer's Leave Bill, 2000, was published on 14 December 2000 and completed its passage through the Dáil on 30 May last. I believe that, in general, there is political consensus and goodwill on the thrust and intent of the Bill. Mindful that the remaining Stages of the Bill in this House have been set down for 21 June 2001, I ask the House to proceed with haste in ensuring its early passage. This will give clear signals to employees, employers and those people requiring care of the support of the Government and this House for those in need of such care.

This legislation is home grown. Many people have noted in the context of legislation, particularly in relation to social affairs and employment rights, that much of it stems from EU directives. This is very much the Government's own initiative and I would appreciate the speedy passage of the Bill so that we can deal with the situation on the ground. Many people have expressed an interest in the carer's benefits provision of the Carer's Leave Bill. I commend the Bill to the House and thank all for their patience and endurance.

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome the Bill. The Minister asked for co-operation in ensuring the speedy passage of this Bill and he will have it. It is an important Bill and it has been well debated. It may be a little behind schedule but it has probably benefited from the extra input. I compliment the Minister on his speech today. It was an unusual ministerial speech in that it was extremely clear and easily understandable language was used. It could almost be used by those using the legislation as a manual on how it will work. It was a comprehensive speech which stated the principles behind the legislation and gave us a detailed account of what the legislation will incorporate. My remarks today will not be lengthy. I approve of the Bill and any points of detail I have will be taken on Committee Stage.

As the Minister mentioned, we should be grateful to all those unsung heroes and heroines, more usually heroines, who down through the years have made time available to care for sick people. These are not just the elderly but also young people who may be handicapped or chronically ill and not in a position to avail of residential services, or these may not be appropriate. It is not always relatives who take on these tasks but also friends and neighbours. It is important that the sick and the elderly are given the privacy and dignity they require and to which they are entitled. It is only when we find those near and dear to us in these circumstances that we realise the extent to which carers can make life bearable for them and give them a better quality of life. They also ease the burden of guilt or concern on relatives who are required to go out and work for economic survival rather than care for them themselves.

Those of us in public life, probably more than most, often find ourselves visiting hospitals and homes and often say to ourselves that people would be much better off if only they had someone to care for them in their own homes. People in the past gave freely of their time and energy without reward and it is important that we recognise that. Carers themselves took on tasks that were burdensome, difficult and stressful. These tasks imposed restrictions on their lifestyle and confined them for long periods thus restricting their social lives and often restricting too their ability to secure other employment. This has drained them both emotionally and physically. It is great that this legislation is coming through and that the State, through this Bill, can give not just recognition but genuine help to carers.

The Bill makes provision for a new entitlement for employees to avail of temporary unpaid carer's leave to enable them to care personally for people who require full-time care and attention. The Minister will agree that perhaps the Bill does not go far enough in recognising the value and the contribution carers make. On Committee Stage we will ask the Minister to look at a number of areas. The leave scheme provided for in the Bill allows an employee a maximum of 65 weeks in respect of any one relevant person. The entitlement may be taken as a continuous period or as separate periods, the aggregate duration of which does not exceed 65 weeks. The employee must have been in continuous employment for at least 12 months before he or she can commence leave. The leave is unpaid but it is reckonable for the purpose of employment rights other than superannuation and certain public holidays. I am glad, as the Minister stressed in his speech, an employer and an employee may agree to postpone, curtail or vary the leave in any way they wish. An employer may refuse without reason to permit an employee to take carer's leave for a period of less than 13 weeks. This is a sensible provision. The more that can be left to agreement between employer and employee the better it is for the operation of the scheme.

In the last budget there were some means test changes which resulted in an extra 5,000 people qualifying for payment. This does not go as far as the Carers Association would wish. In light of our continuing economic success I appeal to the Government to introduce further measures along these lines. If social inclusiveness is a cornerstone of the national development plan, the Government should be committed to ensuring that all our citizens benefit from the fruits of our prosperity and success. Nowhere is this more relevant than in the case of carers. They have been the unsung people for too long. There is little recognition of or glamour attached to their work and this Bill does something to redress that.

There are many people in the community who provide care of one type or other for relatives over and above that recognised by the State in monetary terms. There may be as many as 100,000 in our community altogether. Only a small proportion of those will get some carer's allowance. The amounts involved are small but I welcome this Bill. This issue will become an increasingly important one in society. As health services improve and people live longer, the drains on health and social services will mount and carers will comprise a more important part of our social fabric. For that reason this Bill is a substantial start. The Minister would probably be the first to say that it is no more than a start along a road which, I hope, will see on an annual basis improvements, wider inclusion and higher benefits being paid. A good start has been made and I look forward to discussing the details on Committee Stage. I compliment the Minister on the Bill.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House on what is an historic day, as Ireland leads the field in looking after older people and recognising changing needs. The population is getting older, people are returning to work and more women are involved in the workforce. As the Minister of State said, we have recognised the need for more family friendly policies, which continues the programme of addressing the daily issues of looking after those at home, such as children or elderly relatives, while maintaining a standard of living and a life in the workplace.

The Minister of State, his officials and the Government should be congratulated by this House. This Bill represents a significant change, of which we should be proud. I hope we send a clear message to our EU colleagues that Ireland is setting the standards they will have to meet regarding the way in which families are looked after. There are between 30,000 and 50,000 carers in Ireland, about 5,500 of whom received some form of payment when the Government took office. About 17,500 now receive payments and while I acknowledge this is not enough, there is a limit to what can be done at any given time. I recognise the balance in the Bill between allowing time off from work and allowing opportunities to apply for carer's benefit through social insurance contributions. Carers will benefit from a payment of £96.50 per week, if their PRSI contributions have been appropriate.

There is to be a review of the Parental Leave Act, 1998, which will allow us to deal with paid parental leave based on insurance contributions. Many employees would greatly benefit from the opportunity to attract some payment while taking the maximum 14 weeks leave per child, even if it meant there would be a slight increase in PRSI contributions. If the Department was to examine the uptake of parental leave, it would see that the scheme is a cornerstone of family friendly policies. I urge the Minister of State to look seriously at the introduction of some type of parental leave payment. I apologise for taking up discussion time in relation to this Bill, but this was an opportunity too valuable to be missed.

There are 270,000 part-time workers in Ireland, the majority of whom are women. What does this mean for families? As our population is getting older and we are living longer, we must consider what to do. The triangle of support is turning around. While we once had many people at the bottom of the triangle looking after the few at the top, we now see greater numbers at the top and fewer available to look after older people and with the resources to do so. We owe a debt to those who deserve to be cared for in their own homes and communities, a debt we have recognised. This Bill is a significant step forward in ensuring we do our duty to acknowledge the contribution and sacrifice made by those who give up work for a certain length of time to look after those in need of full-time care.

As Senator Manning said, the Minister of State has laid out the entire Bill beautifully by giving us a dissertation for which he and his officials should be complimented. It is important that the House takes some time to examine and reflect on the role of carers. What is the role of the carer in our community? They provide company for those in the home who are unable to look after themselves, perhaps by bringing them to mass or the post office to collect a pension. Carers involve older people in the community by ensuring they are not locked behind closed doors, unable to get out because they have nobody to help them. Carers collect groceries, prepare meals and ensure relationships with family and friends are maintained. Those who provide care may have to work long days and nights.

We are aware of the different areas in which carers work and the different people with whom they work, such as those suffering from Alzheimer's disease, a sad issue we have to face. It can be difficult and painful to observe as someone one loves dearly succumbs to this sad and horrifying disease. Those who care for sufferers should be admired as they do a tremendous job. It is important that sufferers of Alzheimer's disease are looked after at home, if possible.

A recent public meeting in Galway dealt with the hidden area of brain injury. Many young people, involved in traffic accidents or injured while playing sport, suffer severe injury. Great disability follows as a result of damage to the brain. A young person might go out as normal one day or night and encounter an horrific accident in the car or on the playing field. I know of a person who fell off a ladder on a building site. After rehabilitation, families are filled with joy that the injured person has survived and that they do not have to embark on a daily visit to a graveyard. The person may have changed dramatically as a result of silent brain injury and while they might look very well, there may be grave difficulties. Mothers or siblings have to look after the person who physically looks fine, but who has serious problems such as an inability to concentrate, communicate or show what is wrong.

Disability is another issue relevant to the Bill. I come from a large family and my sister suffers from a disability. My mother's greatest fear concerns what will happen when she is gone and there is nobody to look after my sister. One of the Bill's greatest features is that it gives us an opportunity to look to the future. Families will be able to share responsibilities while maintaining employment rights and receive payment provided the necessary insurable contributions have been made. Many think that only elderly people need to be cared for, but such a view discounts physical and sensory disabilities, including autism. This area is well catered for by the health service, but as times change and new facilities emerge to enable us to look after loved ones at home, it is important to allow people to balance work with care. The Bill allows carers to take 65 weeks leave, a year and three months, which is a fair and worthwhile proposal.

I welcome the Minister of State's clarification regarding the mechanics of applications and the implementation of the system. It is important that such systems are user friendly and the onus is on the Government and the Department to publicise the scheme widely. People are often confused about what is available when they are faced with something they do not expect, such as a sudden change in a loved one's well being as a result of a fall or the onset of disease. A sibling or parent of such a person is then faced with the possibility of having to give up work to look after him or her full time as well as taking care of their own family commitments.

It is not always easy to obtain information. However, information must be made available so that people immediately know they can apply to avail of schemes and initiatives such as this. We must work with them to ensure they can access them. I hope the publicity campaign for the scheme will avail of the latest electronic media which provide a 24 hour a day shop window for these initiatives. A web page should be provided for the scheme and it could also provide information on other family friendly policies. The Government and Department have produced excellent documentation on such policies with the first newsletter being published recently. More people are using electronic media on a daily basis and information on these policies should be disseminated through them.

The Minister of State outlined the benefits to employers of carer's leave in terms of retention, lower absenteeism, improved productivity and goodwill, but it is important that clear and concise documents are also published for employers as well as employees. Many employers have small to medium sized businesses. They are the mainstay of the economy and they are the reason we are where we are today. It is often difficult when one is trying to run a business employing ten, 15 or 20 people to keep up to date with all the statutory requirements one must fulfil while at the same time being aware of the new legislation coming on stream.

Some employers are not members of IBEC, the SFA or ISME and, therefore, it is vitally important to ensure all employers receive a copy of the relevant documentation explaining this scheme. All employers have an employer number and the Department could issue the information in conjunction with the Revenue Commissioners.

The Minister of State referred to sections 9 and 10. One is required to have 12 months continuous service with an employer to be eligible for carer's leave. If an employee does not have 12 months service but has made insurable contributions, it may be possible for leave to be granted if there is an agreement between the employer and the employee. For example, if a relative of such an employee is diagnosed with terminal cancer the employer will know the person will die within 12 or 14 weeks and, therefore, the employee could apply for short-term carer's leave. Under the legislation they are automatically excluded because they do not have 12 months continuous service. Many employers might consider granting carer's leave for a shorter period because they might want to retain the employee in the hope that it will result in continued loyalty in future years. This issue could be examined as the Bill passes through the House.

The issue of paid parental leave should be examined as we move forward. The parental leave legislation will be reviewed shortly and parental benefit, similar to maternity benefit, could be introduced. A smaller amount could be provided, although any money will make a difference to those availing of parental leave.

I refer to the Maternity Leave Act. The current position is farcical. Women are obliged to take four weeks off work prior to having a baby and the remainder of their maternity leave can be taken after the baby is born. Very often women change the dates of their maternity leave so that a maximum of two weeks is taken off prior to the birth of the baby because many feel well enough to do so and they much prefer to take leave after the birth so that they can spend more time with their families and babies while recovering. There are difficulties in this area because of EU directives. However, a decision could to be taken whereby the women of Ireland will no longer be forced to tell lies on maternity leave application forms and have doctors certify dates, the veracity of which they may be concerned about. I ask the Minister of State to take this issue on board in conjunction with his colleagues in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and join in my battle to ensure the provisions in this area are reformed before the Government's term expires next year.

Ireland is truly moving forward and setting an example in Europe. This legislation is confirmation of our Government, business community and society striving for a better quality of life and ensuring people who have looked after us will be cared for.

I also welcome the legislation. This area has been neglected for too long. As previous speakers stated and the Minister of State will acknowledge, the issue of looking after those in need of long-term care has not been articulated properly and a proper infrastructure provided nor has an intellectual approach being taken in terms of providing a White Paper or a Green Paper and examining the issue in a proper context.

While I welcome the provision of carer's benefit by the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs and the introduction of carer's leave, the area is fraught with discrepancies, loopholes and inadequacies, is under-resourced and lacks a proper structure. The extent of the problem for carers is unknown and there is no mechanism for dealing with it in a rounded, comprehensive fashion.

The Minister of State made a good contribution and the Bill is transparent and clear in what it sets out to achieve but legislation should be put in a proper context. The context of this legislation is the problem that exists for carers, their quality of life and that of the elderly and incapacitated for whom they care, the right of such people to a decent standard of living and the onus on the State to make good on the deficit that exists. None of this is provided for in the legislation. The Minister of State did not provide statistics on the number of people in need of care, the number caring on a part-time or full-time basis or the number in receipt of an allowance from the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. We are devoid of a proper perspective on the problem and how we are dealing with it.

Our society is facing an increasing problem in this area. We all know the difficulties. A report on nursing homes was published earlier this year which showed many discrepancies in the manner in which elderly people are treated in terms of subventions and the incredible cost of providing institutional care. The Minister of State did not give us any statistics in this area. A person who gives up work for 15 months will get a miserable £96.50. A cost effective analysis should be done in terms of institutional and personal care. I know this is not primarily the Minister of State's responsibility, as the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs is responsible for social welfare allowances and benefits, but he is responsible for employment. The two Ministers and the Minister for Health and Children should get together and research a back-up document, prepare a Green Paper and seek submissions.

It is incredible that there are 20,000 carers in the Western Health Board area. If that is the case in an area where the population is extremely low, what is it like in the rest of the country? The figures outlined are inadequate, patchy and tentative. The Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs said there are approximately 50,000 to 60,000 carers, most of whom are unpaid. Approximately 16,000 to 17,000 people receive the carer's allowance. The means test is still the major hurdle for most people to overcome and this means that many people who would like to care for their loved ones are deprived of the opportunity to do so. It is a parsimonious and patchy approach to this national issue.

I do not want to suggest it is a problem. We must deal with it in the same way as we deal with our children, our adult population, our elderly and our incapacitated or disabled who have the right to a decent standard of living. It is time we enshrined that right in the Constitution. The Labour Party sought to include in the Constitution the right to shelter, health, nutrition and an adequate standard of living. However, the Government voted it down. It does not have a properly researched or comprehensive approach to a social agenda. That is missing from this legislation.

How many people does the Minister of State expect to avail of this legislation? Why did he decide to pitch it at 15 months? Why was it not 12 or 18 months or two, three or five years, which is the length of time somebody can take leave of absence from their employment, particularly in the teaching profession? What will happen to someone after the 15 months has elapsed? There is provision for that person to receive the carer's allowance, but can another person begin the process again after the 65 weeks have expired? If a person needs care on a 24-hour basis seven days a week, they will need it after the 15 months have expired. The Minister of State did not refer to that in his speech. These loose ends have not been dealt with.

How many nursing homes are there? How many hospital beds are taken up by people who could be better looked after in the home and in a more family friendly and caring environment? Nurses in Naas General Hospital went on strike during their lunch break yesterday because of the shortage of beds for acute emergencies. How many beds are taken up by people who should not be there? How many people are in institutional care, which is not of the same quality as the personal care given by a relative, whether it is a brother, sister, son, daughter, cousin, uncle or aunt? It would be a good day's work to do a sim ple cost effective analysis, to use bald and crude financial terminology.

The cost of keeping people in private nursing homes is colossal. Public nursing care is equally expensive. The State must be paying a fortune to nursing homes. I would love to see those statistics as we debate this issue to give us an idea of what we are talking about. However, we have not been given the information. The Minister of State has outlined a broad approach, but he has not given us the back-up statistics or research required to put this Bill in context.

The Minister introduced the carer's benefit legislation last year. I understand there has been a poor take-up, but we have not been given the figures. I would like to see those figures.

I gave the figures in my speech. The figure is 602.

That is 602 in the space of 12 months.

That is the up-to-date figure.

Is that the figure for the take-up or for the applications?

That is the take-up figure.

Only 11 applications had been processed by Christmas and 11 people had taken up the scheme. That is not a large number for a scheme which was trumpeted as one of the great advances of our time. If that is what is happening in a scheme the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs announced as his great invention, how will this scheme work?

I would like the Minister of State to tell us whom he is targeting. We know that approximately 70% of the people in full-time care, whether it is paid or unpaid, are women. Is the Minister of State targeting those people? Is he targeting the majority of the population? How does he intend to do that? Is he targeting people in part-time or full-time employment? How many people does he expect to take it up and how does he expect they will take do so? How does he expect them to take it up for 15 months and then leave their loved one without any care? Will they be put into institutional care? Is there a roll-over mechanism whereby they can continue to take care of them? That is not spelt out in the legislation. This is inadequate legislation because sufficient thought was not given to how it will work. The same is true of the legislation introduced by the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs; he did not think it through properly. The take-up is small because it is not an attractive offer. If the Minister of State can offer a person, who is caring for someone for 24 hours a day seven days a week, only £96.50 a week—

Everyone will not get that. I am only dealing with employment rights legislation.

That is not the minimum wage.

We should focus on the issues. This is employment rights legislation.

We are talking about the toughest work anybody could do. Those in need of permanent care are in need of that care seven days a week, 24 hours a day. This is a Second Stage debate and I am entitled to put this matter into context. That is my function. On Committee Stage we can deal with the matter by way of individual amendments but at this point I want to highlight the fact that there is a huge stumbling block in the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs in terms of the means test and who qualifies for it. Also, in terms of this legislation, I do not know how it will progress. I do not know whether the leave is open-ended or if a person can go over the 15 months period. There is also the question of a person who gives up a full-time job, which is fully incremental, who will now get £96.50 per week. The minimum that should be granted is the minimum wage. We should look at that again. If somebody is in institutional care, not much will be done for them for £96.50 per week. That is about £14 per day, which is inadequate.

I was glad to hear the Minister of State say, even though it came late in his contribution, that he was looking at carer's leave in terms of a right. He said carer's leave will be dealt with as a right, that it is not simply a complement to carer's benefit but a significant, independent employment right. That is the way to look at this. There is a right to care and a right to be a carer. That should be legislatively underpinned and given the full complement of duties accruing from it, one of which is proper remuneration.

There are many good aspects to this legislation. The Minister of State is dealing with the employment section and the appeals mechanism. That is all very worthy and I am happy with it because it is put in place quite well, but I am unhappy with the context, which is what we are discussing today. How does that fit in with the problems and the need that exist?

We are given a lecture every time the Minister for Finance comes into the House. Even when he does not come into the House he is available to give lectures to the media any chance he gets. He has been quite good on the subject of pensions in terms of putting a considerable sum of money aside to prepare for the year 2020.

There is an increasing elderly population and we cannot continue to deal with this issue on a hand to mouth basis. We must have, first, a proper research approach to it to determine the extent of the problem, at least to the year 2020, and, second, put in place the necessary legislative provisions to ensure we deal with it adequately and humanely.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, to the House, and I welcome the Bill. The Carer's Leave Bill runs in tandem with legislation on carer's benefit. Carer's leave is now in the process of being established as a right. While Senator Costello might say it is not all-encompassing or that there are not sufficient moneys to cover all aspects of the Bill, the principle has been adopted, the provisions are being made and it can be improved on as our economy develops.

The Bill recognises a commitment given by employers, employees and trade unions within the framework of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and the budget of 2000. It is an area of social development which is important. It recognises a serious and increasing responsibility for Government and the future of the country in relation to caring and carers.

I take this opportunity to compliment those who have looked after their parents and other relatives over many years, which they felt was their right. The commitment to family was a great tradition, particularly in the west, where there are many elderly people. That is a growing responsibility and this legislation respects the need of people within the family structure to be in a position to support their relatives and those in need of care.

Some of the traditional responsibilities of looking after the elderly have now been taken over by institutions. It is not uncommon now for people to visit their mother or father in an institution on a Sunday. That is part of life in the Ireland of today and this legislation is a firm commitment to workers who want the right to care for their families and look after the needs of those for whom they are responsible.

I welcome the fact that carer's benefit will operate in tandem with carer's leave. It is right that the applications and certification procedures for both schemes should be aligned as much as possible to make the assessment for qualification as simple and family friendly as possible.

The Bill was published on 14 December and passed by the Dáil on 30 May. There are 33 sections in the Bill which outline how the leave will operate, who will qualify for it and the system of appeal for those who have been refused carer's leave.

The Bill is a step forward in recognising the rights of people to care for their loved ones. In the long-term we need to examine our investment needs in relation to long-term care. Many people are hospitalised in the winter for whom there is great difficulty in finding homes as there is no one to look after them. Such people occupy beds which are needed for those who undergo acute surgical or medical treatment. We must put in place an action plan to provide for the long-term needs of people, particularly our growing elderly population.

Increased financial support for carers is a worthwhile investment for the State in that it provides family support at a reasonable cost for those who wish to become carers. At the same time, it saves the State a substantial amount of money in looking after people in homes, institutions or hospitals and supports a tradition which has existed for some time. Such supports encourage family values and engender an atmosphere of closeness among people.

We are faced with a dilemma in that we have a growing elderly population. The State has provided substantial investment for the long-term provision of pensions. However, as regards health, we have also invested substantially in capital programmes for the provision of community homes for the elderly. Some of these homes include voluntary and community involvement while others are fully funded and supported by the State through health boards. This investment has been substantial and the State will increase the provision of such services in the future. I welcome this investment.

I also welcome the provision in the Bill whereby carers will be entitled to take up small, self-employed jobs or to engage in adult education and training. Such participation is essential as it provides the diversification necessary for anyone who finds himself or herself in the difficult position of looking after someone. From personal experience, I know that looking after someone is an onerous task, particularly for young people, and those who carry out such work are to be admired. People who give of their time, support, love and affection are to be encouraged as such care is important for society.

I welcome the Bill which represents a new approach. It will not solve all our problems regarding care, but it is principled legislation which recognises the right of people to work and to provide support in this way. The Bill is supported by the carer's benefit legislation which is a step in the right direction in terms of social policy and will benefit people. This is a positive Bill which I support.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this legislation. I spent some time looking after an elderly relative as a carer, though I did not recognise myself as such at the time. As a result I am aware of the demands, challenges and difficulties faced by carers.

I welcome the Minister of State and this innovative Bill. As Senator Chambers stated, the most important aspect of the Bill is that for the first time it enshrines in legislation the right of an individual to provide care. No more than any other Bill, this legislation is not perfect in every aspect, yet we must appreciate that we are at the beginning of a process. The Government, the Minister of State and his officials can be proud they have initiated this process. There is no doubt that in years to come further significant developments will take place with regard to what we are initiating today.

We must also note that this Bill sets standards in that Ireland is the only country in Europe to embark upon this course of action. In this respect we are giving a good example to our EU partners. In saluting the Government, the Minister of State and his officials, one must recognise that carers have become well organised in recent years. The Carers Association is particularly well organised in County Kildare. There is no doubt that the emergence of such carers' groups has contributed in no small way to this legislation, and I acknowledge the role they have played.

We have been talking about care in the community for 20 years or more, yet there has been little action to support such care. We can be proud of the Government's recent initiatives, particularly the carer's benefit legislation and the practical impact of the minimum wage in supporting home helps. There is no more laudable group than those who, for many years, have provided support for elderly and disabled people in their homes. In many cases, such people worked for as little as £2 per hour. The minimum wage has benefited carers and, as a member of the ERHA, I am aware that the authority will pay rates which are considerably in excess of the basic minimum wage. Significant supports have been put in place for care in the community of the elderly, the disabled and the sick.

In the past, particularly in rural areas, care for elderly relatives was provided by the single son or daughter who had to give up work and move home to look after a parent, aunt or uncle. This process went on for many years. We have heard much recently of the number of single people in north Leitrim who are benefiting from community employment schemes. Many such people had to give up employment to look after elderly or disabled relatives, for long periods in many cases. Many of these people experience considerable difficulty returning to the workforce. That is why the principles contained in this legislation are worthwhile.

I welcome the support of Senators for this Bill. I acknowledge the support of the employers' organisations. We need to ensure, however, that employers fully understand the import of this legislation and that those who might wish to avail of it will not experience any difficulties. I am sure the Minister will be attending to that matter.

I hope some element of flexibility will be possible within the terms of the legislation. I am thinking particularly about people who will find themselves in emergencies, including the onset of serious or terminal illness. Such a situation would require a high level of short-term care. I hope arrangements can be worked out between individual employees and their employers whereby the provisions of the Bill might be applied in exceptional circumstances. I hope that matter can be examined. Leis an gcúpla focal sin, I commend the Bill to the House.

It gives me great pleasure to support the Bill and endorse what has been said. It would be difficult to find anything new to say because listening to the debate on my monitor I saw that there was warm and universal support for the aims and objectives of the Bill. I add my support to that. The Bill is a significant step in the right direction.

I remember when the carer's allowance was introduced in the Dáil and I am happy to say that it was the leader of my party who brought the proposal to Government before steering the legislation through the Dáil. The carer's allowance represented a significant advance in the provision of care at that time. With enormous respect to the men present, it was significant that the carer's allowance represented a woman's thinking. In the olden days, women traditionally stayed at home to look after their elderly parents. Very often, and sadly so, it was single women on whom aged parents relied for support. In such cases, single women gave up many opportunities for personal fulfilment and happiness to stay at home and look after their parents. They did so with very little remuneration and sometimes very little gratitude. As we move into a new and better century, I acknowledge, even at this remove, the part that was played by single women looking after their parents in rural Ireland. I acknowledge the work they did and, even though many have now gone to their eternal reward, I hope their reward in the hereafter is a bit more than the reward they got here.

The Bill represents an extension of the measure that was in place when the carer's allowance was first introduced. It was a very significant move but the scheme has now been greatly extended and increasing numbers of people benefit from its provisions. I remember the people who, in the early days, brought the principles of the scheme to the notice of politicians. Once the scheme was put in place the question arose as to who would care for the carers. Very often the carers were people who were beginning to get old themselves. A middle-aged woman could be bringing up her own children while trying to care for her parents at the same time. Such a person was caught in the middle, trying to look after two generations, at a time when her own energy was in decline. Before the introduction of the carer's allowance, parents were caught in this age wedge and did not receive much recognition of the consequences for their own health and well-being.

The Bill represents a step in the direction towards caring for the carers. If one is holding down a responsible job from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., as I did when I had a more regular job, with a widowed mother living in the house, it is not easy to keep the effort going on all fronts. This legislation allows people to take time off work to enable them to look after parents without putting too much of a burden on their own health and lifestyles. It is part of the family-friendly service that was almost an automatic aspect of Irish culture in the olden days and it is now coming back on a more formalised basis.

Few people understand one better than one's own family but it is not always easy to cope with elderly people. Moreover, as Senator Cox said, it is not only elderly people who need care at home. A whole range of people from different age groups, and for various reasons, need to be cared for at home. Old age can be a disease in its own right. Elderly people can sometimes be very demanding, and more so on their own family at home than on health professionals in hospital. It is not always easy to accomplish this kind of work. The legislation is based on common sense.

We espouse the concept of community care but we have done very little to put flesh on the bones of that concept in the past 20 years. Dozens of people in accident and emergency sections of hospitals and in hospital beds could be better cared for in their own homes if a network for such provision was put in place. This Bill represents part of the network for that provision which includes care in the home, home help, access to a public health nurse and a good GP service in the community. That is the way in which we must develop the health services. I am glad the Government is making this input.

Last week I spoke in the debate on the Health Insurance Bill. I hope the representatives of the two providers, BUPA Ireland and the VHI, were listening when I said that they need to develop, and offer to their insured members, the kind of products that make home care more attractive to people. I recall an incident where somebody had a hip replacement operation and was insured with one of the health insurance companies. One day they rang to ask about the aftercare provisions and were told they could have two weeks in a convalescent home. The insured person said: "I do not particularly want to go to a convalescent home, I would prefer to come home. Can you offer me anything simple whereby somebody would come in twice a day to make a cup of tea and help me out of the bed?" That would cost less than £20 a day but the health insurance company could not offer that, although it could offer an infinitely more expensive and unnecessary package. It is time for health insurers to focus on developing products that make it attractive for more people to be cared for at home.

There is a number of benefits in what we are trying to do today. With the changing nature of work, there will be far more flexibility in the next generation. People will be enabled to do a number of different things at the same time. They will be able to retain their jobs and perhaps work on a part-time basis or take time out, yet provide care in a structured way for members of their family. That is the way in which we must proceed. The workplace of the future will enable people to work in a manner that has never been attempted in human history. It is up to us to anticipate these opportunities, grasp the challenges and devise more ways to enable a range of activities to be carried out by workers as the need arises. Needs arise at different times during a life and the need to look after an elderly parent or a sick child passes. People can then decide to resume full-time work or do whatever it is they want to do. We should maintain and develop this openness, employers in particular, to allow that to happen.

For the elderly the greatest ailment is very often loneliness. I am going off the point a little but the Minister of State will forgive me because this is all part of the culture I hope we are creating. In cities in particular there are large numbers of elderly persons living alone and we are tardy in developing villages for older people where they would inhabit their own home while having access to services if and when they needed them. This would allow them their independence. We are very slow to develop that model of housing even though it is working very well elsewhere. It is an objective the Minister of State can bring to the policy makers as a way of looking after this generation's old people.

We are experiencing an extraordinary level of prosperity which I did not believe possible when I was a student. I have seen a transformation in my lifetime from which most of us are benefiting. Thank God for that. The transformation was built on the backs of those who are now old and fragile. We owe them better provisions. We owe it to them to seek out and develop new opportunities to look after the elderly. We are told selfishness has become a feature of our prosperity and it is an historical fact that recession, hard times and war bring out the goodness in people. It is a huge irony that such times bring out the patriotism and generosity in people while prosperity does the opposite. Is life not strange?

We are experiencing a massive decline in old style neighbourliness and voluntary input into social activities. At my own church two Sundays ago, for the first time ever there were not enough people to hold the St. Vincent de Paul boxes. These are matters we cannot ignore. They are features of the times in which we live and there is only one way to counteract their effects. The way to do it is to put in place the kind of legislation – and make the kinds of provisions – contemplated here today. Whoever else has to suffer, surely in a civilised society it cannot be the very old, the very young or the sick.

I welcome the Bill and advocate further development of this thinking. The benefits will be immense. As a civilised legislature we can feel personal satisfaction about our efforts to make this happen. There is always a danger that the economy and its demands so dominate that we are tempted to forget our social and family obligations. Sometimes I worry about that but then I see legislation like this and hear contributions such as those made on all sides of this House and realise there is much right and decent thinking. I am happy to say those few words and support the Bill.

I sincerely thank everybody who has spoken on this Bill. The debate has been constructive and helped to set out the agenda for the future. This is an important beginning and innovative legislation which is home grown. One can only strive to do so much in this booming economy. We cannot accurately predict how successful this will be and I will later share with the House some of the facts and figures which describe our experience. I have a particular job to do in relation to employment rights but the debate has been broader than that, which is to be welcomed. My colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is also very involved with this while other Ministers, such as the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, have made suggestions. We do something important today which I acknowledge has been mentioned by many Senators.

Many of the issues raised today have been subject to debate in the Dáil and Senators will appreciate that much good work has gone into drafting the Bill. I accepted quite a number of amendments from all sides of the House and the Bill is better because people have spotted areas where it needed improvement. What we are doing is enabling employees to avail of the new entitlement to carer's leave. In most cases, though not in all, they will receive carer's benefit and can take leave in the knowledge that their jobs are secure and can be returned to. That is essentially where my responsibility lies and I am very glad that has been done.

In February, when we started this Bill in the Dáil, the number of applications received by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs was 218. That increased to 512 by April when the Bill was before the Select Committee on Enterprise and Small Business and to date 602 applications for carer's benefit have been received. That reflects increasing interest in availing of the benefit and, more than likely, carer's leave. It is during the winter months in particular that the elderly are more prone to illness and it is therefore very important that we have this legislation in place at the earliest possible date. I thank Senators, especially the Leader of the Opposition, Senator Manning, for their approach. They are anxious to get this legislation up and running.

Senators Cox, Chambers and Ó Fearghail remind us of the improvements introduced for carers since the Government took office and I thank them for their comments. The Bill will improve quality of life for those who find themselves in these circumstances. Senators Cox, Ó Fearghail and Manning remind us that carer's leave is a new entitlement. They stress the important point that when the Bill is enacted leaflets publicising it should be readily available. I am determined to make that so and ensure people recognise their entitlements. I will also use my Department's excellent website to highlight the legislation.

Senator Manning referred to the carer's allowance scheme, which is the responsibility of my colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, to whose attention the Senator's comments will be brought. Senators Manning and Costello spoke about the effect of the means-testing of applicants – which has undergone substantial improvements since the Government took office – and, again, I will raise the matter with the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Senator Costello worried that I did not refer to enough figures in my speech regarding which I remind the House that we are dealing with a particular element of employment rights. That has been recognised by Senator Chambers and others though I appreciate that people will look for more data on Second Stage. If that leads to a wider debate I am happy about it but I repeat that I did refer to the figure of 602 in my speech.

Interestingly, in Dublin 51 people received carer's benefit without this legislation being passed. I am convinced the numbers will rise because there will be a comfort factor in the enactment of this Bill. There is a rising age profile in the population. There is a recognition of circumstances which require people to look after family members. Many Members, such as Senators Quill and Chambers, have said that people will move towards the family structure rather than placing sick family members in homes or hospitals. This legislation will help to move matters attitudinally and culturally and bring in a new approach.

Questions were asked about the period of 15 months. The Government's decision is to tie it into the carer's benefit scheme. The ICTU sought a period of three years while IBEC wanted a once-off entitlement for each employee. As in many such cases, the Government sought to reach a balance. We, therefore, came up with a period 15 months, of which every employee can avail.

Roll-over was mentioned. Senator Quill referred to the practicalities of how this will work. The situation is that an employee can take 15 months leave. There was originally a provision wherein there would be a break of 12 months and then the employee could take another 15 months leave. An obvious example would be where both parents of an individual worker were very ill. I, therefore, closed that 12 month gap between the two 15 month periods down to six months, again as a result of Committee Stage deliberations. I suggest that in most situations there would be other family members and friends who would look at this option in terms of filling the six month gap, for example.

I repeat that this is a start and that we will monitor it. Many Senators have rightly referred to the review process. A carer can get a maximum of 65 weeks or 15 months leave for each relevant person and reapply for a second relevant person after six months. That is the way it will work out but we should not forget that there will be other family members who could avail of that possible gap, though not in all situations, which I appreciate. Senators referred to a common sense approach. I hope when the 65 weeks are up others will take a common sense approach in looking after someone who requires full-time care and attention on a long-term basis which is longer than 65 weeks. I appreciate that this is an issue which we will monitor.

On flexibility of employment, which Senator Quill raised, it is important to note that an employee will be able to retain payment of carer's benefit and work for up to ten hours per week for the same or another employer. We will highlight this in the information leaflets. Senator Cox referred to the Parental Leave Act, which is the responsibility of the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Mary Wallace. I will write formally to the Minister and Minister of State at that Department in relation to the Senator's comments. My Department is represented on the review group. I will ensure the matter is also brought to the attention of the group at an official level. I will also bring the Senator's comments on the Maternity Protection Act to the attention of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, as it is his area of responsibility.

Senators rightly referred to situations where one might want more favourable treatment and where employers and employees might agree a different arrangement in particular circumstances. I assure the House that the employer and employees can come to more favourable arrangements than those contained in the Bill. This practical issue was raised by different Senators and it will happen on the ground. If employers and employees can agree particular arrangements for emergencies in order to care for elderly people or those with a disability or who have suffered an accident, there is provision for this.

I thank Members for their positive response. It is a new area for us but, as legislators, we are pushing the boat out on an important social issue. As Minister of State with responsibility for labour, I see this as an important matter which relates to employment rights. We have initiated this ourselves, though I am not taking away from the many excellent directives we have had from the European Union. As a Minister of State who attends many social affairs meetings in Brussels, we have benefited greatly from equality legislation in particular. Having said that, if difficulties arise, I suggest we are well able to account for ourselves and deal with particular concerns we might have. The most important issue for me is the social partnership approach to which Senator Manning referred. We have a very good system involving the voluntarist approach to industrial relations, where we agree matters between employers and employees. Senator Manning said that the ideal situation is for employers and employees to agree. In many ways our legislation and approach, domestically and at EU level, is to try to maintain that spirit of partnership, which is important. We are doing so extremely well at EU level.

This legislation has not stemmed from any particular directive and it is to our credit that we are able to respond to the needs of the workplace and those who require urgent attention. I thank Senators for their constructive comments and look forward to proceeding further with the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Thursday, 21 June 2001.
Sitting suspended at 2.45 p.m. and resumed at 3 p.m.
Top
Share