Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 Oct 2024

Vol. 303 No. 11

Maternity Protection, Employment Equality and Preservation of Certain Records Bill 2024: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages

I welcome to the House once again the Minister, Deputy O’Gorman.

This is a Seanad Bill which has been amended by the Dáil. In accordance with Standing Order 148, it is deemed to have passed its First, Second and Third Stages in the Seanad and is placed on the Order Paper for Report Stage. On the question that the Bill be received for final consideration, the Minister may explain the purpose of the amendments made by the Dáil and this is looked upon as the report of the Dáil amendments to the Seanad. For Senators' convenience, I have arranged for the printing and circulation of the amendments. The Minister will deal separately with the subject matter of each related group of amendments. I have also circulated the proposed groupings in the House. A Senator may contribute once on each grouping. I remind Senators that the only matters that may be discussed are the subject matter of each grouping of amendments made by the Dáil.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be received for final consideration."

I now ask the Minister, Deputy O’Gorman, to speak on the subject matter of amendments in group 1.

I appreciate the guidance of the Acting Chairperson. If Members will indulge me for a minute before I speak to the amendments in group A, I wish to warmly welcome three women and their families to the House here today for this important matter. Having experienced the terrible news of a cancer diagnosis during their pregnancies, Erica Tierney, Mary Canavan and Emma McGuinness have all campaigned tirelessly to ensure that women who are diagnosed with cancer during their pregnancy can pause their maternity leave while they receive treatment. From now on, any woman with serious illness; whether it be physical or mental, will be able to avail of this pause in their maternity leave. It is because of their generosity in sharing their personal stories that we are here today to see this particular piece of legislation enacted.

I wish to give a special welcome to Róise, Erica’s daughter and Cillian, Mary’s son, who are here today to support their mams.

I thank the Irish Cancer Society for their work and supporting these wonderful women to tell their important stories. We will be one of the first countries internationally to legislate for the deferral of maternity leave in cases of serious illness, and we can all be very proud of that. I welcome all of the families and I thank them for their work to date. I should also reference my own mam and dad and my uncle Gerard and recognise their tireless work in helping me and allowing me to be here today.

The amendments in this group are largely technical in nature. Amendments Nos. 1 and 15 propose a change to the Short and Long Titles of the Act, respectively, to reflect the proposed addition of sections related to non-disclosure agreements and preservation of records that were not part of the published Bill. The first amendment further provides for the commencement of different sections of the Act. Amendment No. 2 is a standard provision related to expenses incurred in the administration of the Act.

Amendments Nos 3 and 4 are of a technical nature, changing wording slightly and correcting a cross-reference but with no change to the intended purpose of the amended section.

Amendment No. 8 provides for the Minister for Social Protection to make regulations to allow for maternity benefit to also be postponed in line with the provisions to postpone maternity leave. This is necessary to ensure that when a person who is eligible for maternity leave and benefit avails of the option to postpone her maternity leave, she can defer her maternity benefit at the same time.

I thank the Minister. Does any Member wish to come in on group 1? If not, I ask the Minister to speak to the subject matter of amendments in group 2.

That is amendment No. 6. This proposal, related to maternity leave for Members of the Oireachtas, was carefully drafted with the Office of the Attorney General to avoid any perceived overstep in relation to the separation of powers. However, given the subject matter of what we are doing, in allowing all women to have the ability to defer their maternity leave in the event of serious illness, it would be strange at the same time that we are providing maternity leave for Oireachtas Members, not to provide the same right to them. Amendment No. 6 clarifies that and ensures that if female Members of the Oireachtas become seriously ill during their maternity leave, they have the same rights to defer it as all other women.

If no Members wish to speak on that group I ask the Minister to speak on the subject matter of amendments in group 3. That is amendment No. 7.

This amendment inserts a new section 14B into the Employment Equality Act 1998 to introduce measures to limit the use of non-disclosure agreements, NDAs, where an employee has alleged discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment or victimisation. The proposal provides that such NDAs may be entered in to only if requested by the employee, and with legal advice provided at the employer's expense. The amendment lays out a list of conditions that must be met in order for such an NDA to be enforceable. It must be set out in writing, be in an accessible format, have a 14-day waiting period to allow the employee to withdraw from the agreement, be of unlimited duration unless the employee elects otherwise, include information about who the employee can make disclosures to, which includes a member of the Garda, a legal practitioner, a registered medical practitioner, a mental health professional, an officer of the Revenue Commissioners, an officer of the Office of the Ombudsman, an officer of a trade union or such individual or member of such class of individual as may be specified within the NDA. The NDA proposals were included in the general scheme and have been considered by the committee during pre-legislative scrutiny. The amendment further proposes to exempt NDAs that are agreed through the Workplace Relations Commission's mediation service.

These proposals build on a previous Private Members' Bill sponsored by Senator Lynn Ruane and Senators Flynn, Black and Higgins. As we know, that Private Members' Bill passed all Stages of the Seanad. My own Department did a consultation on the equality legislation and a section on the NDA is one which we had significant feedback on. I want to note my appreciation to Senator Ruane for her work and co-operation with me and my officials in advancing this important legislation.

I wish to mark the legislation coming back into the Chamber today. The Minister said at the committee that he would move heaven and earth and I was still looking at him sceptically. I wish to now take that back.

That does not happen every day; we should all celebrate.

As he can understand, when things are out of your power, when you have spent so long working on something and then hand it over and when you have to give over and suspend all power over or hand in what happens next, it is difficult. As it is such groundbreaking legislation, there was always a concern there would be enough pushback on it for it not to happen. I wish to acknowledge the Minister, his officials and Department for initially supporting the legislation that I brought through the House and then expanding on it in terms of their own research and seeing how important it was that we continue to see it through and for it to become law in Ireland.

Last night, there were already communications coming to me from the UK, America and Canada. Everyone seemed to be well-tuned to what was happening in the Dáil last night. It is globally groundbreaking legislation.

The intention of the legislation should always be that, if a victim does ask for an NDA, that the NDA protects the victim. It is never about protecting a perpetrator. Obviously an NDA hands the power to the victim whether he or she wants to enter into one or not, but also ensures that other people are not expected to collude in any shape or form with an NDA. That is something that needs to be worked out when people enter into an NDA because we not want people to give references for people who have potentially committed any sort of crime or engaged in harassment or bullying. It is important that we do not then pass those people on to unsuspecting other services or sectors.

The use of NDAs has never been about people, human life and the things that happen to us. NDAs were ever only about protecting patents and trade secrets. They were never supposed to be used as a tool, or a further extension, of silence and abuse. We have moved really far to end that practice but also to set the moral standard for other people in terms of when they do try to coerce or suggest to somebody that they should enter an NDA, that it is a silencing tool and should be seen as bad practice. We should expect solicitors and union representatives all to be so good at their jobs that they always negotiate in the best interests of their client or the person who they are there to support in the long term, not just in the immediate moment.

I thank the Minister and the Department. I also thank the staff in my office for their work on this right from the drafting of the legislation. Seb McAteer from my office is here today. He drafted the original legislation that has been passed in this House. My office has continued to have lots of global meetings. Last year, we had a great event attended by Zelda Perkins, who was the first person to break the Harvey Weinstein NDA. We have a big event here in Ireland that was well attended by people who could not contribute on the day but were there because they had signed NDAs and could never share their stories. I hope that today they see that in the sharing of their experiences with myself and the Department over the past few years, they have created a monumental change in how NDAs are viewed and how NDAs should be used. I welcome the amendments tabled here today and appreciate the way in which we have worked over the last couple of years.

I very much welcome that we finally have this Bill here. The campaign fought by the Irish Cancer Society has been a long one. We spoke about this two weeks ago when this Bill was before the House. I very much welcome the work done by the Minister and his Department in eventually bringing forward this legislation as there have been delays along the way.

To follow on from what Senator Ruane said about the inclusion of a provision on non-disclosure agreements, that is hugely welcome. I am somebody who worked in the trade union movement for many years and I had to sign up to non-disclosure agreements in the course of my work in respect of dealing with employers. I knew that the paper was not worth the paper it was written on but NDAs were very much used as an instrument to coerce and silence vulnerable workers, with long-lasting impacts. I thank Senator Ruane for all her work on this legislation.

I want to flag a concern that should be considered over the longer term. This legislation provides that an NDA is acceptable or permissible provided that an employer has access to independent legal advice. I warn that we have seen the legalisation of industrial relations and employee rights over the past number of years in this country that effectively has elbowed out the trade union movement. As trade unions are the true voice that represents workers, there has to be space to allow workers to have advice from trade unions. There is no doubt there has been all sorts of black sheep in the past and Senator Ruane referred to that previously. However, the principle remains that unions represent the best interests of workers whereas sometimes, in cases where independent legal advice is required, the cost and other associated factors are not necessarily in the worker's best interest. We need to examine this matter in the future in providing for both independent legal advice and advice from the worker's trade union to protect the best interests of the employee in question.

Lastly, and I do not know if this is in order, but I hope that the Acting Chairperson will bear with me for a minute.

If I was not paying attention before, because I was, but I will pay even more attention now that the Senator has flagged it.

I raised a matter on Second Stage and I will raise it again. It is a huge disappointment that in the context of this Bill, which seeks to recognise that women who go through a severe, serious health condition or illness while pregnant, or just after giving birth to their baby, that the Government seeks to distinguish between a physical health condition and a mental health condition, and that the criteria for recognising a mental health condition has to be inpatient hospitalisation. I said on Second Stage and I will say it again that the requirement is evidence of an antiquated view of mental health and its treatment. Somebody can go through cancer but never spend a day as an inpatient in a hospital, yet we expect that somebody with a mental health condition has to be hospitalised. In this day and age, such a scenario does not reflect how science and medicine have progressed. I said it at the time that I do not want this Bill to be delayed in any shape or form, and this is why we are supporting it here today, but the Bill needs to be revised in the future so that there is parity, at the very least, between those who suffer a serious mental health condition and a serious physical health condition because it is a disservice to women who suffer a serious mental health condition that they have to be hospitalised to qualify under this Bill.

I did let the Senator continue as the point was well made. Senator Seery Kearney will be followed by Senator Warfield.

In the course of the the most recent on the Bill in the Seanad we did not have an opportunity to speak about NDAs and I will briefly address the matter.

I congratulate Senator Ruane on her considerable work over many years in bringing this matter forward and highlighting the appalling bad practice of silencing people. I want to acknowledge the people in fear who came forward to the Senator. They discussed their situation with her while being terrified of where it might go. I congratulate the Senator on holding the confidence of those people yet moving forward with that information and empowering it through legislation. Such work sums up what we are about. It is about making changes and making people's lives better. Everything about this Bill, from beginning to end, does so. I just want to remark on that and show enormous respect.

I thank the Minister and his Department for all the work done to bring forward this legislation. I know that the legislation must pass so many barriers along the way before it can be included in legislation. It is fantastic and it is great to make sure that they have that.

This legislation sets the tone of a culture of no tolerance so that where there is sexual impropriety and complaints of that nature, under no circumstances can anybody collude in a cover up. They cannot for a start silence a complainant, victim and a survivor of abuse, and the perpetrator cannot be passed on to another employer. We should also not have a situation where references are ever given to anybody in such a situation. There is no obligation in law to give a reference other than to confirm that somebody started employment on day one and finished on a particular day. References and character references are wholly inappropriate. The practice of giving references really began in academia. It is appalling to think that people have been passed from one entity to another to continue perpetrating in another guise all knowing that they covered by silence. Today can act as a stop sign for that practice, culture and any remote tolerance of it anywhere because there is now a mechanism and a means of complaint. I am delighted with that. We need to set a cultural tone for this country and for what we will tolerate in society. This Bill is a fantastic stop sign. Congratulations and well done.

On behalf of Sinn Féin I welcome the Minister to the House and commend him on the work in bringing this Bill forward. I also want to acknowledge the work of the Irish Cancer Society and the Leave Our Leave campaign which it ran. As the Minister has said himself, I am particularly mindful of Erica Tierney, Emma McGuinness and Mary Canavan who selflessly shared their experiences of receiving a cancer diagnosis during their pregnancies and being compelled to begin their maternity leave while also going through cancer treatment. They are all very welcome here to this House today. This legislation is indeed a recognition of their work and of the campaign's endeavours to ensure that no women will again endure what those women had to go through. I welcome the proposal of the Minister around the expansion of the proposal beyond cancer to all serious illnesses also. The impact this Bill will have for mothers, children and their families is immense and cannot be overstated.

I reiterate the concerns expressed by Senator Sherlock. We have concerns that the Bill falls short in recognising the many complex mental health disorders and matters which can arise during pregnancy and birth. In particular, I have concerns about the stipulations surrounding inpatient care. It is my understanding that the Bill only relates to very serious mental health illnesses which require hospitalisation, which was touched upon by Senator Sherlock. That seems to me to be contrary to best practice. Now we are encouraging people to get support within their communities and to use community healthcare where possible. The Bill seems to fail to give consideration to the full range of mental health illness that does not result in a person being hospitalised but nonetheless causes significant challenges and difficulties to a mother trying to bond with her child. Perhaps, the Minister might clarify that issue; I wanted to take the opportunity to mention it.

I thank the Senators for their contributions. Senator Seery Kearney's idea that this is a sign of no tolerance is important. As the House might know, on our State-wide response to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, we have a national strategy and zero tolerance is its title and runs all of the way through it. Situations where perpetrators are able to harass or sexually harass colleagues and staff and get that hushed up and swept under the carpet is exactly what we are trying to stop with this. The pervasive sense of impunity and the breaking of that is part of zero tolerance. I see our work today as very much feeding into our national strategy against domestic, sexual and gender-based violence.

I take on board Senator Sherlock's point on advice and from whom advice can be taken. I would note that when I listed out the people that someone can discuss an non-disclosure agreement, NDA, with, we added in trade unions after some engagement with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, which had flagged that with us. I have taken a step there to ensure that the role of trade unions is recognised within the process. It is a slightly different point to the one that Senator Sherlock is making but I nevertheless see the value of good trade union representation in what we are trying to do here.

On her further point and that of Senator Warfield, when the Irish Cancer Society and I originally met, the scope of this Bill was that women who suffered cancer during their maternity leave would be able to avail of this pause of their maternity leave. Some 50 to 60 women every year are in that position. My view was that it would be inequitable to restrict it just to cancer when there were other women suffering serious illnesses which we should also be including so I asked the drafters to draft a broader definition.

The initial definition which came back to me was broader and we are using the term "serious illness" and this right to pause is only for serious illness, something we must be clear on. The initial definitions were based upon a physical illness. I certainly was not comfortable about that. We all recognise the degree of seriousness which mental illness can have on anybody and on a new mother. I wanted to ensure that we had protection for mental illness. On our engagement, the definition and the way of including that as a definition was to use "inpatient treatment". I see the limitations and I am not disputing Senator Sherlock's point but in being able to provide something to ensure that mental illness was involved and was covered here, the intention was also to move with speed. In that regard, I know that the Senator has spoken about supporting this and wanting to get it through. As with all legislation, there is always an opportunity to tighten and improve definitions but it is important, while not disputing the Senator's point, to talk about the evolution from cancer, to serious physical illness, to also now including serious mental health illnesses.

I thank Senator Ruane for her very kind comments. When I make a commitment, I try to fulfil it. I made a commitment to her in trying to get the NDAs through. I made a commitment to the Irish Cancer Society on the Leave Our Leave campaign and I made a commitment to some of those who had engaged with me on the protection of private records. I am also pleased today about the fourth point on maternity leave for female Oireachtas Members . Late is the hour, I know that, but we have got that through. For the people who will be able to benefit from the various provisions of this legislation, the fact that it is close to an election time will not be of concern to them when they will be able to avail of the new rights contained within this legislation. I thank the Senators for their comments.

I ask the Minister now to speak on the subject matter of amendments in group 4, which are amendments Nos. 9 to 14, inclusive.

The amendments in this group introduce a new Part to provide for the preservation of the defined categories of records held by private actors so that they are preserved in the public interest. I recognise that this section came late in the day. I thank all of the Senators who have engaged with me on this particular point and I know that we have held a number of briefings for Senators and Deputies. I hope we have explained our wanting to move fast with this particular protection. The private actors would include anyone who holds records on mother and baby and county home institutions, Magdalen laundries, industrial schools and reformatories, orphanages, as well as the bodies which ran or oversaw these institutions. This would also include those who hold records related to adoption agencies and those who were involved in placing people for adoption into a care arrangement, into an institution, and with a person who assumed the role of parent to them, therefore including illegal birth registrations also.

Amendment No. 9 defines the key terms used in the new Part 3, including "relevant record", "institution", "relevant body", "information source" and "public interest".

Amendment No. 10 provides that the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth may designate by order an institution, a relevant body or a relevant record. It means that the Minister can actually add additional records, institutions or organisations to a list which will be covered by this particular piece of legislation. This is an important flexibility which is built into the legislation. While the legislation aims to be as encompassing as possible, this section is included to ensure that any relevant institution, bodies or records which come to life and are not covered by the Bill now can subsequently be covered.

Amendment No. 11 places an obligation on any private holder of a record to preserve it and makes it an offence to destroy, mutilate, falsify or fail to maintain the relevant record or to export them from the State. It also provides that the Director of the National Archives may direct a person or body to provide a statement outlining the relevant records in their possession.

Amendment No. 12 provides for offences under the legislation. The offences mirror those set out in the Birth Information and Tracing Act 2022, namely, that on summary conviction, a class A fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both, or, on conviction on indictment, a fine not exceeding €50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or both.

Amendment No. 13 sets out the standard provisions for the service of notice.

Amendment No. 14 amended the National Archives Act 1986 to include the new functions assigned to the director under the legislation. As I said at the outset, legislation on this has been called for by survivors and former residents, affected persons, their families and advocates. They want to ensure that the records that support the understanding of their identity, but also the institutional systems which shaped their life experience in such a significant way, are preserved or maintained. While the Birth Information and Tracing Act 2022 was able to protect, preserve and allow access to private records and to people's own individual birth and early life information, we are seeking to protect here the wider institutional records, the financial books, the ledgers, the house rules and all of those things which are not directly linked to one person's information but are nevertheless very important in understanding how these institutions operated and their wider impact on the women and children who were placed within them and, indeed, on wider society.

I am bringing these amendments forward as Committee Stage amendments to allow this urgent and important legislation to travel quickly through the necessary Stages in the Oireachtas

Well done, Minister. This is great legislation and I thank the Minister for his thorough engagement with us. It was a meaningful conversation about what this system would look like. One of the points I took away from our engagement was that the onus to preserve to a standard that would be required in an archive may mean that organisations and institutions will hand over the information they have because they will not be able to keep it to such a standard. The information will be accessible and properly preserved. I came away from our engagement reassured. I had wondered whether the information would be destroyed or moved to another country, as has happened previously. We now have a means of stopping that from happening.

This information is not personal data. Given the narrative the Minister has given us, it tells us about the organisations and the experience of living there without it being any one individual’s experience. That in itself will be meaningful.

I acknowledge that people have received information from the database on birth information and tracing and under the redress scheme. I have assisted a significant number of women through that process. I remember standing in the Chamber cautioning that there may not be the information people believed was there for them, but I have actually experienced quite the opposite. People have got extraordinary information about a level of care experienced of which they have no memory. I saw letters from the then local authorities that were cold and transactional, but I have now been privy to the letters of parents who had children boarded out with them. Some of those letters showed a level of care, concern and heart. I have had the honour of being part of that process in people’s lives and seeing how healing and restorative it has been. I did not anticipate that. I anticipated that people knowing about themselves would be good, but not that extra piece. I remember speaking about how there may have been teddy bears, letters and so on. There actually were, much to my surprise.

I congratulate the Minister. It was a difficult process for all of us. There is a residual issue affecting people who were in an institution for less than six months, so if we can review that in future, I hope we will. A review is built into the legislation. The Minister guided and led this process at a time of great political turmoil, so I congratulate him on that. To his parents, I say, “Well done, you did a good job.”

I invite the Minister to respond to group 4.

I thank the Senator for her comments. What we are doing is significant. The preservation steps we are taking in this legislation are similar to those taken in Northern Ireland approximately two years ago as regards wider institutional records. In Northern Ireland, that has already led to private record holders surrendering records to the state because they cannot maintain them to the standard expected. I anticipate that something similar will happen once we implement this. Under the National Archives Act, there is a facility whereby it can take receipt of private records. The same thing has happened since we passed the Birth Information and Tracing Act 2022, with the ISPCC handing over to the Adoption Authority of Ireland a significant body of records. Some religious organisations have also handed records over. The steps we put in place under the 2022 legislation kick-started that process, and this Bill will continue to deliver that.

Regarding the 2022 Act, it is wonderful to hear the stories of people who have got genuine glimpses into or details about their early lives. We must recognise that there are still people who have not got that, but 11,000 people have now used the system and received information under the legislation. Some of them have received their birth certificates for the first time, others have found out their original names. The Act, which we discussed in great detail in the House, has had a very real meaning. More than 150 provided items have been handed over to people. These are items that were left. The Act has had real significance. It is important to recognise that we were able to make a significant change. I remember saying during the debate that, when I studied family law in university, this was the big barrier. Adopted people could not get their information and bridge that gap. We have been able to bridge it with significant success.

Question put and agreed to.

When is it proposed to take Fifth Stage?

Question, "That the Bill do now pass", put and agreed to.
Top
Share