The debate will follow the normal pathway. We will begin with the Minister, who is most welcome to Seanad Éireann.
Maternity Protection Bill 2024: Second Stage
Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".
I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the Second Stage of this important legislation. It is an incredibly worthwhile Bill and one which will have a very real impact on women at a hugely important juncture in their lives. The Bill provides for two main areas of reform. These are, first, a pause in maternity leave for treatment for serious illness and, second, maternity leave for Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas.
I begin by acknowledging two women who had hoped to be with us in the Chamber this afternoon but who I know are watching at home and whose tireless campaigning work has made such a huge contribution to bringing us to this moment. Erica Tierney and Mary Canavan both received cancer diagnoses during their pregnancies and had to begin their maternity leave on the births of their babies while also going through treatment for cancer. It is because Erica and Mary, with the support of the Irish Cancer Society through the Leave our Leave campaign, have so generously shared their personal stories and campaigned so passionately that we are now so close to making this legislation a reality, meaning no more women will find themselves in the heartbreaking situation they both endured. I thank them both sincerely for their tireless work and advocacy on this issue. Due to their campaigning, there is cross-party support for these proposals to allow women with cancer and other serious illness to pause their maternity leave. My understanding is that, if enacted, Ireland will be one of the first countries in the world to provide a facility to pause maternity leave. That is something of which we can all be very proud.
The Bill provides for an entitlement for an employee who requires treatment for a serious medical reason to postpone maternity leave for a period of up to 52 weeks. The need for the pause must be certified by a doctor or consultant. The serious medical reason includes mental health issues as well as physical illness. To ensure this pertains to very serious illnesses, while ensuring that includes mothers with a wide range of serious diagnoses, the Bill provides for a definition of a serious condition that limits it to a condition that both entails a risk to the life or health of the employee and also requires necessary and ongoing medical intervention. For mental health conditions, it is limited to treatments that include hospitalisation and the postponement must be for at least five weeks. There can only be one period of postponement but this can be extended once. The Bill sets out the procedures for notifying an employer of the intention to postpone the leave and to end the period of postponement. After the period of postponement, the employee can resume their maternity leave and take their unpaid maternity leave, unpaid parental leave and other leaves as usual.
It is clear that female Members of the Oireachtas should have a right to maternity leave and that availing of this is crucial to the process of improving gender balance among Oireachtas Members. It is important that these provisions can be in place before the upcoming election to give a strong signal to female candidates that having children will never be a barrier to political life. The general scheme echoes a number of provisions that currently apply to maternity leave to extend these to the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas. However, following discussions during the drafting process with the Office of the Attorney General, these proposals have been amended to avoid any perceived overstep in relation to the separation of powers. The Bill now proposes simply to provide a statutory entitlement to 26 weeks of maternity leave to Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas.
Through the work of the Ceann Comhairle and the forum on a Family Friendly and Inclusive Parliament, many processes and procedures are in place which can facilitate and support Members in taking maternity leave. This legislation provides the entitlement to that leave in statute.
I thank the members of the Irish Women’s Parliamentary Caucus who contributed greatly to the work of my Department in bringing forward these proposals. It was immensely helpful to understand the challenges facing female Oireachtas Members who have a baby during their term in the Houses.
I already indicated to the joint Oireachtas committee my intention to bring forward on Committee Stage provisions related to the regulation of non-disclosure agreements, NDAs. These proposals build on a previous Private Members' Bill, sponsored by Senators Lynn Ruane, Eileen Flynn, Frances Black and Alice-Mary Higgins, which passed all Stages in the Seanad. My Department’s public written consultation as part of the review of the Equality Acts, on which I published a report last year, invited submissions on NDAs. It is of note that there was significant support for progressing the proposals in that Bill. These were included in the general scheme and it is my intention to bring forward amendments very much along the lines of that general scheme. My officials are working with officials in the Office of the Attorney General to finalise these provisions.
As Senators are aware, we are working under certain time constraints if we want to be fully confident of getting this legislation enacted. Initial priority for drafting was given to the amendments to the Maternity Protection Acts as we are aware of the great urgency with which these amendments are needed. I am conscious, in particular, of those women who may miss out on the opportunity to avail of the pause in maternity leave if this Bill is not passed. It is my hope that the Bill can be advanced quickly, the relevant amendments on NDAs can be inserted in the Dáil and that this process recognises the crucial and urgent nature of all the provisions contained within it.
Turning to the provisions of the Bill, section 1 amends the Maternity Protection Act 1994 by the insertion of a new section 14C after section 14B. This new section creates a new entitlement in the Act for an employee who requires ongoing treatment for a serious health condition, including physical and mental health conditions, to postpone maternity leave for a period of between five and 52 weeks.
Section 2 provides that absence by a Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas, duly notified, relating to the birth of a child, shall be called maternity leave for a Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas. This shall be for a period of up to 26 weeks. Section 3 provides for the Short Title and commencement of the Act.
I again take this opportunity to commend the good work undertaken by the Irish Cancer Society in raising awareness of the difficulties faced by new mothers who are diagnosed with cancer while on maternity leave. I know a number of representatives of the society are with us today. This is important and progressive legislation, which includes some long overdue measures for women in this country. I am pleased to bring it to the Seanad today and commend it to the House.
I would like to take this opportunity to commend the good work undertaken by the Irish Cancer Society in raising awareness of the difficulties faced by new mothers who are diagnosed with cancer while on maternity leave. I know that a number of representatives of the organisation are here with us here today. I believe that this is a very important and progressive piece of legislation, which includes some long-overdue measures for women in this country. I am pleased to be bringing it forward to the Seanad today. I commend the Bill to the House.uoy knahT .
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Leas-Chathaoirleach agus fáilte isteach roimh an Aire. I am very pleased to be speaking about this important Bill in the Seanad. I thank my party colleague, the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, for bringing forward this important legislation, which will allow for mothers who have had a difficult diagnosis of a serious illness to pause their maternity leave and introduce long overdue maternity leave for Members of the Oireachtas.
Maternity leave is such an important and precious time for new mothers and their babies. It is completely unacceptable that currently a woman who has just given birth and has recently been diagnosed with a serious physical or mental health condition should have to use this time for treatment and recovery. This legislation will change that and allow a new mother to pause her maternity leave while she receives treatment and recovers from her illness. She can then begin her maternity leave when she is, hopefully, fully recovered and enjoy that important time with her baby to the full.
The Bill also introduces for the first time a long overdue entitlement to maternity leave for Members of the Oireachtas. I firmly believe that the only way we will improve the number of women in the Oireachtas is by making both Houses places where equality for all Members is realised. We have to ensure that having a family is in no way a barrier to pursuing a career in public life. This vital equality measure will signal to women considering a life in politics that they are valued and welcome. If both these Bills had been brought forward much sooner, we would have had more women in politics.
Luckily, we have a good man in politics who recognises the value of women and motherhood. The Minister introduced the baby boost, which will come in for new parents in January, and reductions in the cost of childcare. It is great to have a man who is willing to recognise the value of women. If there were more men like him in politics, it would not be so urgent to increase the representation of women, who are not represented properly. Women account for 23% of Members of the Dáil. This is 2024, not the 1900s. This Bill is important in recognising that we need maternity leave if we are to get more women involved in politics.
As a single parent, I waited until my son went to college. I wanted to get into politics from the moment I had to deal with maternity services and realised how bad they were for women. I knew that until we had more women representatives, the position would not improve. I could not possibly get into politics, however, with no maternity leave or supports available in Leinster House for women in politics. By bringing forward this measure, women in this job and other jobs will see that they can get maternity leave. Hopefully, we will see more women putting their hands up and joining us in these Houses because we definitely need more women involved in politics.
I highlight the work of the Irish Cancer Society and Erica Tierney and Mary Canavan who I know are not here today. It is people's lived experiences and the passion that drives them that remind politicians of what we need to do and what is important, so that we do our best in serving people and addressing the challenges they face.
I will quote these two women briefly. Erica Tierney stated:
My maternity leave ended the week after I finished treatment. I was really sick from treatment, totally bald and hardly able to shuffle to the shop let alone go back to work. Yet that was my maternity leave gone.
Mary Canavan said:
The whole point of maternity leave is that the mother has the time to be with their child and to bond with their child during the important early months in their life. However, you do not get that time at all if you have cancer. There is no reason you should be disadvantaged because you’ve had cancer and had a baby at the same time. You should be given an extra bit of leeway there because it’s such a horrendous situation.
I commend the Minister on this Bill. It is definitely a step forward. We want to be a progressive country. We want equality in representation and this Bill is very important for that. I thank the Minister for pushing it through.
I welcome this fantastic legislation and pay tribute to the Irish Cancer Society for all its advocacy in this regard. I also acknowledge that Senator Catherine Ardagh brought a Private Members' Bill on this issue earlier this year highlighting her continued work with the Irish Cancer Society and acknowledging the need for maternity leave to be preserved for very serious illnesses like cancer.
From that perspective, it is fundamental that we have this leave. It is essential that mothers who have undergone such a serious illness have the opportunity to spend time bonding with their children when their illness goes into respite and can be the mothers attending to their children that they so richly deserve to be.
I note that IBEC has contacted all Members expressing concerns about the necessity to include outpatient treatment. I know as an employment lawyer that once somebody has a serious illness, they are categorised as having a disability. IBEC is articulating a concern that disability can be treated both as an inpatient and as an outpatient and that the Bill seems to categorise it only as inpatient treatment. Perhaps IBEC is wrong in that regard. I ask the Minister to provide some clarification on that. IBEC is worried that claims will be taken against employers for discrimination on the grounds of separating out disabilities and deciding on a disability. It also suggests that the decision for the postponement should be with the Department of Social Protection which will also be granting sick leave payments. That may or may not be appropriate but it would be useful for the Minister to address that point.
I need to address the non-disclosure agreement, NDA, element, the children's committee and the sequence of events over the summer. I was asked so support the waiver of pre-legislative scrutiny, which, given the time constraints, was perfectly understandable. The heads of Bill were provided to the committee in July. We operated on that basis.
We were coming up with a compromise as a committee that we were not going to waive pre-legislative scrutiny. On the same day, however, we were going to issue a report that responded based on submissions that had been made to us by entities that appeared before the committee to make sure the Minister's legislation was not in any way delayed, particularly given the urgency to legislate for the Leave Our Leave campaign. It also had the crucial non-disclosure agreement, NDA, element. June 2021, when the Seanad was sitting in the Dáil Chamber, was the first time Senator Ruane brought forward the NDA element. I remember talking about how I had been responsible for NDAs, but never when there was sexual misconduct going on. I could see their merit in employment settlement situations. I completely and utterly supported the proposal by Senator Ruane, however. We were moving forward, and as a committee we were really ad idem on the fact that we were very pleased with the Leave Our Leave and NDA elements and yes, of course, that Oireachtas women in politics should be supported. On the day we were making that decision, we got two letters. The meeting was starting at 3 o'clock. We got a letter at 12.51 p.m. and one at 2.39 p.m. stating that the NDA element was out of it until Committee Stage in the Dáil. The difficulty we have is that the Seanad did much of the work and to be fair, it was Senator Ruane and her colleagues who did a lot of work on the NDA. The Seanad passed the Private Members' Bill, and the Seanad actually will not have an opportunity to have a voice on this. That is not very fair. It is not very fair to Senator Ruane and all the work she has done over the years. As a result, we were upset. The Minister did come into the House, to be fair. Unfortunately, I was unable to be there on the day due to a funeral, but I saw his responses and read back over the debate. It did not bode well for the treatment and respect of the committee that we were told such things at such a very late stage, however. I need to put that out there. Government colleagues especially are very supportive. Government colleagues will understand the pressures of a Minister and the commitments of Government and the desire to ensure that we honour those commitments. However, it put Government colleagues in a very difficult position and really, it is the second time this year that we have been asked to waive pre-legislative scrutiny on matters that are important and on which we need to have a say.
I will address surrogacy leave under the amendments section of this debate. They were some of the things that needed to be said and discussed in the context of our report, but I will leave that until then. I completely support the Bill; of course we do. I cannot see anyone in this House who would not do that. However, that the NDA piece is not here and is not getting an opportunity in the Seanad is really not desirable and not particularly fair to the hard work that has been done. I have no doubt but that Senator Ruane will have something to say on that herself. It is not reasonable. It will come back to us to approve whatever goes on in the Dáil, but we will not actually have the time for a robust debate. The speed and manner in which something we have known since 2021 was on the cards was dealt with was not respectful of either the Seanad or the committee.
I will share time with Senator O'Loughlin if everyone is in agreement. We will take five minutes each.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
The Minister is very welcome to the House. It is really positive that we are bringing this Bill forward. I congratulate the representatives from the Irish Cancer Society who are in the Gallery. They have pushed and advocated for this along with the women whose lives this has affected. Now, we are here today. I congratulate them and all the women who told their stories. I also want to congratulate my Fianna Fáil colleagues, Senator Ardagh, as chair of the cross-party cancer group and Deputy Jim O'Callaghan who brought a similar Bill to the Houses.
To provide for maternity leave for the treatment of serious illness for Members of the Oireachtas is something we have spoken about. Senator O'Loughlin beside me is head of the Irish Women's Parliamentary Caucus in Leinster House. It is absolutely a day to celebrate and say that female voices have been heard and listened to and actioned. There is absolutely no negative there.
There is no point going through the Bill because it is very simple and concise and very effective. I thank the Minister for his work in making sure we had this in what are potentially the last weeks of the Government and his term of office. I thank him for his support. I wish the very best of luck to all the women who are going to be beneficiaries of this measure because sadly, women with cancer need this. There are a very small number who will benefit so much from this. I know people who have gone through serious cancer treatment and found out that they needed it during pregnancy. It is devastating for them and so worrying for their families. The time after birth and first few months after having a baby are incredibly precious. This Government and this State should at all times support and encourage that and absolutely, the female Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas should have the entitlement to maternity leave. It is antiquated and old-fashioned that we do not. Thankfully, an old Parliament like ours can modernise.
The Minister is very welcome to the Chamber. We have had many conversations both formal and informal with regard to the two main provisions in this Bill. Maternity leave is very important. It is a very precious time for babies and for their parents, mainly mums. In the past, we know that on average, approximately 60 women per year have cancer and have to undergo difficult and severe treatment during their maternity leave. Ensuring that maternity leave is extended to allow them to be able to have that precious time with their babies during a healthy time in their lives is hugely important. I thank the Irish Cancer Society for all the work it has done. I thank our colleague, Senator Ardagh, who works closely with the Irish Cancer Society and who produced legislation in this regard. This is very timely and really important.
The second provision is hugely important. As chair of the women's caucus, I am really delighted that we are at this point. We were during this past term able to introduce legislation to support women at local government level and ensure they had maternity leave with options in terms of either secretarial or administrative support. I spoke to Councillor Racheal Batten on Saturday evening, who had availed of that particular type of support. She said it was and is a tremendous help to her with her second baby compared with when she had her first baby and she had no supports and no leave and it was very difficult to keep on top of all the work. It is great that this Government is delivering maternity leave for public representatives who are female. We were very clear. It was probably last January or February when I spoke in this Chamber and said that we absolutely need to have this delivered for the next mandate. We already know the exciting news about Deputy Cairns. I think her baby is due in the middle of November. We do not know whether we will have had an election or whether we will be facing into an election. However, it must be of great comfort to women like Deputy Cairns and those who will be joining the Houses of the Oireachtas to know that there are measures in place to support them and rightfully so. We have further to go in terms of paternity leave, etc., and I know the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, is committed to that. We have spoken about it before. All in all, the changes that are being made are welcome because as we know, the pause that was permitted prior to this legislation on maternity leave was only if a baby was ill and had to be hospitalised.
We must ensure we are looking after the parent as well as the child. We know that the children will have numerous benefits from having a period of time with their parents.
I thank the Minister for the Bill and I was delighted when I saw it on the schedule. It is great to be able to deliver for the women of Ireland and those who, sadly, will get a difficult diagnosis. This will certainly help them. It will also help the women who are at present, and will become, Members of the Oireachtas.
I am very relieved we finally have this legislation and I thank the Minister for bringing it forward. In particular I pay tribute to the Irish Cancer Society and we have Suzanne Dowd and Krista Costello here today. I was struck when I listened to the experiences of Erica Tierney, Mary Canavan and Emma McGuinness, who spoke so movingly about having to forfeit their maternity leave because of their cancer diagnosis and treatment. I am very relieved we finally have the Bill. It is overdue. This month last year the Minister gave a commitment that he would bring forward legislation by the end of 2023. That time came and went. I remember tabling a Commencement matter last April asking when we would see the legislation. The Irish Cancer Society and many others are very anxious to see it enacted. Week in and week out women are not able to access maternity leave. We were told it would be rolled into the review of the equality Acts. In response to the question last April, the officials and the Department decided to tell us all about the work the Department is doing on many other Bills, none of which are relevant to the women awaiting this legislation. I am glad we are here today.
When we look at the legislation and its impact, there is a small number of women involved but it is enormously important. Those of us who have been fortunate enough to have babies know the immense value of maternity leave. It is a way for society to tell women to take time with their newborn babies. We know approximately 60 women per year are diagnosed with cancer either during their pregnancy or when maternity leave is being taken. I am glad the legislation applies to all women with serious health issues, which probably runs to hundreds of women in the country in any given year. There is a double trauma because not only do they have their diagnosis and treatment but they must also forfeit their very precious maternity leave. There is an irony I have raised previously, which is that a man looking to avail of paternity leave can defer it. Workers looking to take annual leave can defer it if they are sick. However, a woman who wants to defer maternity leave when sick cannot do so. I am very glad the legislation seeks to change this.
The very clear ask of the Labour Party is that while the Bill will go through all Stages in the Seanad today, we hope it will be scheduled in the Dáil as soon as possible and that it is then commenced as soon as possible. We are speaking about weeks here. There should be a matter of days between when it is passed through the Dáil and when it is given effect. Those women who are pregnant or have just given birth who have a diagnosis of a serious illness should be able to benefit from it. We cannot have a situation where an election, or any other reason for that matter, should interrupt the commencement of this legislation.
There are issues with the Bill. I have very clearly said the Bill needs to be commenced as soon as possible but perhaps there is a need for additional regulation or amendment to the Bill further down the line. The reason is because section 1(11) effectively seeks to differentiate between mental health and physical health in how they are recognised in the Bill. A mental health condition is only recognised as serious when inpatient hospital treatment is provided but we can only assume that somebody in receipt of outpatient care is recognised as having a serious physical health condition under the Bill. This is wrong and unfair. IBEC is 100% right on this and it is not often that I say that. There are all sorts of issues with regard to discrimination claims further down the line.
Whatever about discrimination in the workplace, for the women themselves and for the world of medicine it is an extremely outdated perspective that inpatient care would be required for mental health conditions to be recognised as serious. It does a grave injustice to the significant developments that have happened with medication and various treatment paths whereby people with serious mental health conditions can now be treated in the community as outpatients. They are not in any shape or form recognised in the legislation. A conversation has to be had with the Mental Health Commission, Mental Health Reform and all of the other relevant stakeholders on to how to get the Bill right for those with serious mental health conditions. I do not believe it is fair or right that a distinction would be made between the two.
It is very welcome that we now have recognition for Oireachtas Members who are elected representatives in the Dáil and Seanad with regard to taking maternity leave. My colleague Senator Moynihan gave birth last Friday to baby Maud. This is her second birth as a Senator. Of course, it is not officially recognised that she is now on maternity leave, as it was not on the previous occasion. The Bill is certainly very welcome and sends a very positive signal that those of us who are women and give birth as Oireachtas Members are afforded the opportunity to formally notify that we are taking maternity leave. I want to be crystal clear that my comments and concerns on the Bill should in no way delay it. There are women who very much want the Bill to be enacted and commenced as soon as possible. However, these issues need to be fixed.
Senator Seery Kearney raised the issue of who gets to adjudicate on what is a serious health condition. To my mind, a medical certificate should suffice but we need to watch this. I do not necessarily agree with IBEC that it should be adjudicated by the Department. A medical certificate should suffice. There are legitimate concerns about how an employer may view the view of a medical practitioner and the employee in question. We have to ensure women are protected as much as possible when they seek to defer their maternity leave because of a serious health condition.
I join with everyone's comments on the positive nature of the Bill before us. It is extremely welcome. While I want to focus on the positivity of one part of the Bill, and I am very glad it has been given the priority it needs, it is very difficult to weigh it up and give it the credit it deserves because I must also acknowledge the absence of reference to the NDAs which also affect maternity leave.
NDAs have been used in the past to cover up getting rid of women while they have been on maternity leave, which is obviously against the law. NDAs intersect with maternity leave in many ways. Due to the fact that the NDAs will not be before the House today, I would like the Minister to update us on where that drafting is, because we obviously expect to see it on the schedule for next week in the Dáil. That is only a few days away. I imagine the Minister has looked at a draft by now or will at least do so over the next day or two, because I cannot imagine that the draft will be produced on the day the Bill is going into the Dáil. I expect there have been updates and some sight of what that draft looks like. Rather than rehash the proceedings of the children's committee, I remind people of why NDAs are so important because this may be the only opportunity that I have to speak on them. I hope that next week I will be celebrating what comes out of the Dáil. That is the expectation I will go into it with.
Regardless of the intentions of the Minister and his officials, which have always been positive with regard to the NDA legislation, while I am not sure if it is paranoia, I have some suspicion about other actors in the background that potentially do not want to see NDA legislation pass, whether that is drafters or anybody else who would be lobbied in that regard. I say that because many powerful people have used NDAs as a tool and an abuse of their power, including at institutional level in different sectors, which include universities. A collection of academics from a university contacted me many years ago about their concern and fear about an NDA being used repeatedly for a colleague of theirs, which saw an individual move around different schools and on to a different university in the end. An NDA was used in several instances for this individual for several different workplace situations.
It was with that in mind that I began to look closer at NDAs and became aware of some people quite close to me who had signed NDAs in the community sector. That brought another layer because it means the State is investing money in service delivery in a community project and that State money has been used. They would say it is severance. It is not severance. It is a pay-off. Severance and pay-offs are very different. They have very cleverly tried to make it look like somebody is receiving a severance when, in fact, the severance is contingent and conditional on them not sharing information about the incidents for which they are signing an NDA, for many reasons. I had to meet one woman in a different county as she was on the other side of Ireland. There are women who were afraid to email me copies of their NDAs because they were so afraid that they would somehow end up in the public arena and that their house would be threatened or they would have to pay back the severance. In some cases, people have been paid as little as €5,000 under the guise of severance. They were afraid because of their position. Some had retired and had a pension. They were afraid of being challenged and having to raise what happened to them.
It is hard to champion a cause where you cannot fill a room with the people who are affected because then people do not have to face the reality of other people's lives and the silence that exists. In every briefing and event I have had on NDAs, I cannot have people in the room or if they are in the room, they are there in a silent capacity. They are not able to share their stories. They are not able to come and fill the Public Gallery today. I can tell the Minister now that there are hundreds of NDAs in circulation. Some are absolutely appalling given what is explicitly written into them. It was written into one NDA that as soon as the person signed it, that NDA meant that they were not protected by the Protected Disclosures Act. To think that somebody who has trained and studied law is going to write a contract that basically says that a piece of law no longer applies to someone if that person signs an NDA. Laypeople have no idea that this is not accurate and that they will still be protected by protected disclosures. There are people who are going to the ends of the earth to make sure people are so frightened that they can never speak up about what has happened to them in a workplace with regard to sexual harassment, racism, discrimination, bullying, or whatever the case may be.
I know the Department did its own research and was able to establish that there was a prevalence of NDAs. Funnily enough, in the interactions that I have had, in the capacity in which I could examine NDAs, men who signed NDAs most regularly had already used the Protected Disclosures Act to maybe highlight that there was a misuse of funds in a particular organisation or that they were concerned about a particular practice. In those cases, most of those men who came to me went on to sign NDAs because obviously the Protected Disclosures Act does not always protect a person's identity. As such, people become aware that someone might be the person in the organisation who has raised matters to a particular level. The orchestrated bullying campaign towards those men has come to the point where they feel they cannot be in a particular office or whatever their place of work is, and they have been bullied out of their employment. In being bullied out of their employment, they have signed NDAs to receive a severance because they are frightened of having no job and some are not ready.
In the case of one young woman in her 30s who I supported, it took two years. She was bullied badly in the organisation in which she had to sign an NDA. A union representative encouraged her to sign the NDA just to be done with it. People are never just done with it. If someone has been bullied and harassed to the point where they feel they cannot even go into their place of employment and do their job, they will not just be done with it if they sign an NDA to be silenced and to receive a severance so that they are given some breathing space before going back into the workplace. One woman could not work for two years. It took her many years to go back into the sector in which she was trained. She was so traumatised that she could not even go back into the same type of work. She was so frightened that being in the same type of work meant that even if she did not work in the same area that it happened in, the sector in Dublin is so small that if she was to arrive at a conference or some sort of event, the person who bullied her could be there. The person who bullied her want on to have other cases in which NDAs had to be signed too.
The fact that union representatives or solicitors would encourage people to sign NDAs asserting that they will somehow then be done with it is a complete abuse of power and fearmongering. Solicitors and union representatives should be more confident about doing a better job to protect people, not pushing them further into harm and silence. That silence is often about things that could be illegal if they were brought in front of a court of law. People are therefore being encouraged to sign a contract to cover up something that potentially meets the legal standard for prosecuting a person.
In and of itself, the idea of a non-disclosure agreement for such cases should not stand up in a court of law. People are afraid to challenge them because there is no precedent for somebody breaking an NDA and taking the issue to court to see if the NDA would stand. Often, these people are of less means than the institutions and employers for which they have signed the NDA.
In my last few seconds, I will draw attention to why the issue of NDAs is so important. Some employers have started to put NDA clauses in their contracts when people are taking jobs. Nothing has happened yet but there are clauses that resemble NDA clauses. There is also the idea of a non-disparaging clause, which means people cannot speak about anything that happens while employed or even criticise the employer. It even comes down to criticism. To think that people cannot criticise a past employer if it had bad practices is beyond me.
We cannot put a face to all of these people but they are there. This is very real. These people are watching, and they are contacting me all the time. I am sure they are also contacting the Minister's office to make sure this legislation passes. Even though we know it may not retrospectively apply, it will set a standard that non-disclosure agreements do not stand up, that they are illegal, wrong and immoral, and that they are of a time past when the State and other people used certain tools to make sure people were silenced. I hope next week we will show we do not support the use of power to keep people silent in this way and we legislate to end the use of NDAs.
I welcome the Minister. This is a good day. Sinn Féin very much welcomes the passing of this Bill. We want to see it passed as soon as possible. I pay tribute to the Irish Cancer Society in particular for the work it has done and the campaign it fought valiantly to get this change over the line. As it pointed out in its own press release, there is no little irony in the fact that men can postpone paternity leave but women, up until now, are not able to do so. That fact alone speaks volumes.
I wish to pay tribute to Senator Ardagh for her work on the Bill and indeed Senator Sherlock, who has been very strong on this issue on many occasions. I really agree with what Senators Sherlock and Seery Kearney have said. If we are going to get this Bill over the line and get it done quickly that is fine. However, in regard to the proposed new section 14C(11) in section (1)(e), that issue of "necessary medical intervention’, in relation to mental health, means inpatient hospital treatment", seems unreasonable. If there is agreement between the social partners, if IBEC is saying it is unreasonable, and no doubt the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, would view it in the same way, I would have thought it would be a relatively simple amendment to make either here today or next week if it is going to the Dáil next week, just to correct that. It is quite important actually. If we are going to get this right, let us get it as right as we can. I appeal to the Minister to look at that, not just say that we have to move this very quickly, which we do, but there is still scope next week to make that simple amendment. I hope he will do so.
I want to pay tribute to my colleague, Senator Ruane, for her work on NDAs. It is excellent that there is going to be an inclusion of this in the Bill next week. However, it is also frustrating for us. I cannot imagine how frustrating it must be for Senator Ruane because we do not know exactly what those amendments are going to look like. Of course, the fear we have is that they may not be sufficiently watertight. From my time as a trade union official I know that multinational companies in particular were particularly prevalent in terms of using these NDA agreements. I have a concern that maybe that sector might be lobbying to some degree to be careful around this issue. I have seen people's lives ruined by NDAs because whatever compensation they got never actually compensated them for the damage that was done in that workplace. The damage went on for years afterwards and yet people felt silenced. It is a particularly nasty practice. It is very prevalent. Indeed, I had to sign a contract many years ago to start an employment with a multinational company that effectively had an NDA as part of the terms and conditions. Having worked there for a year I could see why, frankly, because there were so many practices that were not just wrong, but illegal at times as well. I really hope the Minister ensures that the NDA amendments are watertight and strong enough, that they are not just tokenistic. Senator Ruane and her colleagues received tremendous support from across the Chamber in relation to her initiative. I hope it will be strong enough.
I will leave it at that. This is a good day. Sinn Féin welcomes this move. As colleagues have pointed out, around 60 women a year, unfortunately, have to undergo cancer treatment. This is an important change, it is long overdue and we very much welcome it.
I thank all Senators for their contributions to the debate this afternoon and for their strong welcome for the key principles behind this Bill. I believe this is very important legislation. I am conscious of the real impact it will have on the lives of individuals at some very significant moments in their lives. There is widespread support for the proposals to allow seriously ill women to pause their maternity leave. I am determined to bring this proposal through enactment. I am very pleased that under this legislation, female Members of the Oireachtas will now have a statutory right to maternity leave. As a number of Senators have said, this is long overdue. It is an important equality provision and sends a very clear message that having a family is not a barrier to pursuing a career in public life.
I will now respond to some of the points made during the discussion. I note to Senator Seery Kearney that I will respond to the issue of surrogacy on Committee Stage. In regard to pre-legislative scrutiny, I spoke at length at the Oireachtas joint committee on the reasons for the NDA element coming as a Committee Stage amendment in the Dáil, and that was solely because of the shortened time period we have to get this legislation passed and make sure that important legislation has included all three elements, namely, the NDA element, the leave our leave element and the maternity leave for Oireachtas Members element. I hope to see the draft text of that amendment by the end of this week. As I said at the Oireachtas joint committee, I will engage with Senator Ruane in terms of ensuring it meets the requirements of the legislation she has passed through the Seanad already.
It is important to put on record, because everyone else places things on record, the reason I did not oppose the Senator's legislation at any Stage when it went through this House, the reason I commissioned research in my own Department on the issue of NDAs and the reason I agreed to bring this through, even if it is a little bit truncated, is because I and the Government also share her concern about the use of NDAs. We share an acknowledgement of their impact on victims of sexual harassment and victims of bullying and we believe that her proposal is a correct one. I want to put that on the floor and I genuinely believe that next week, there will be satisfaction when those amendments are seen.
As for the comments from IBEC, I take on board the concerns Senator Sherlock raised in terms of the definition of mental illness vis-á-vis the definition of serious illness, but my priority was to ensure that mental illness was considered within the ground of serious illness. We all know for too long mental illness has just been put to the side and was not ever properly considered within the course of serious illness. I did not want that to be the case with this particular legislation. I have not gone in depth through the concerns that have been raised but I am certainly happy to talk to officials about it and see their view and possibly take the views of the Mental Health Commission and others. Importantly, in terms of date and timeline for commencement, the legislation will commence immediately on enactment. We actually have brought a motion for early signature as well to progress this. It is our intention to see this legislation enacted as soon as it is passed, again recognising we are operating in a truncated period.
Again, I thank all Senators for their contributions. I should have recognised earlier on, the women's caucus and the work it did on it. It was centrally important in terms of shaping the proposals around maternity leave for Oireachtas Members. My Department has met the Senator on a number of occasions. We have done a number of surveys and got some really good, practical experience of Oireachtas Members, some of whom who have given birth while they have been serving and some who have not as yet, and who spoke about the pressures and how elements of this job are complicated by that. Central in all of that was that a clear entitlement to leave is necessary. It relates to this sector and indeed there are many such areas, particularly areas in self-employment. I have colleagues in the Bar who I know do not take the 26 weeks because there is that pressure whereby they have to be there and have to be seen. Consequently, it is important for our colleagues to be able to state that these 26 weeks are legally reserved for them as TDs or as Senators, just as much as everyone else. It is a really important signal in a job that we all know is so consuming of all our lives that this time is legally reserved. That is a really important statement and one that I am pleased to be able to advance. I thank colleagues for their comments and contributions.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?
Is that agreed? Agreed.