Skip to main content
Normal View

Select Committee on Legislation and Security debate -
Tuesday, 28 May 1996

Estimates 1996.

Vote 33: Equality and Law Reform.

The purpose of our meeting is consider the Estimate for the Department of Equality and Law Reform, Vote 33. I welcome the Minister, Deputy Taylor, the Secretary of the Department, Mr. Bernard McDonagh and his colleagues from the Department. I look forward to an interesting and productive debate. A suggested timetable has been circulated. Its purpose is to ensure that all the subheads receive proper consideration. However, I will be flexible in applying the timetable.

The 1996 Estimate for Vote 33 is £11,768,000, representing a 2 per cent increase on the figure for the previous year. I hope the proposed format will give members an adequate opportunity to question the Minister.

At the beginning of last year I outlined in great detail the Government's manifesto for equality which is entrusted to my Department. This manifesto has the full and unqualified support of all of the parties in Government and of most people outside Government. In the three and a half years since my Department was established it has, for a small branch of the public service, made a considerable impact in terms of legislation passed and in terms of putting in place the conditions for a truly equal society.

Last year it was acknowledged by members of the committee that one of the most important tasks facing the Department was the divorce referendum. There was particular interest that parents and children would have new measures to protect and support them in the context of marriage breakdown, including divorce. If the way is cleared by the Supreme Court in the case before it on the divorce referendum I will be in a position to quickly bring forward the text of the Family Law (Divorce) Bill for formal approval of the Government to publish it and circulate it to Deputies. Subject to the result of that case, I look forward, as I am sure all members of this Committee will, to a constructive debate on the Bill, much of which is modelled on provisions in the Family Law Act, 1995.

In response to those in the Committee last year who urged a programme of measures to protect and support the family and the institution of marriage, I will indicate the very significant progress on those matters to date. The Maintenance Act, 1994 was, on the basis of an order made by me, brought into operation with effect from 25 November, 1995. On that date the United Nations Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance payments — which the 1994 Act enabled Ireland to ratify — entered into force between the State and 52 other contracting states. That Convention provides for a central authority system under which a person in a contracting state seeking maintenance from a person in another contracting state can be assisted in taking an action in that state. Our central authority for the purpose of the Convention has been established in my Department.

The 1994 Act also enables the State to enter into special agreements with other states on reciprocal arrangements for the recovery of maintenance payments. Following detailed discussions between officials of my Department and US authorities, arrangements are in place between the State and all federal states in the USA since 1 May, 1996 following an order made by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs. In effect, Ireland now has special arrangements with other states for the recovery of maintenance due to members of a family. The aim is that maintenance debtors in another country will not be allowed to evade the responsibility of maintaining the other spouse or any children.

The Family Law Act, 1995 will come into operation with effect from 1 August 1996 on the basis of an order made by me on 16 February 1996. The Act strengthens the law in relation to orders of the court on financial support of spouses and children following breakdown of a marriage; it allows for financial protection following foreign divorce or separation; it improves the law on applying for declarations as to marital status; it increases the age of marriage and provides a new notice provision; it gives the Circuit Court jurisdiction in custody cases and provides for other matters. In view of publicity generated by the recent Private Members' Marriages Bill to the effect that the marriage provisions in the 1995 Act require to be amended, I take this opportunity to inform the Committee that I am advised by the Attorney General that there is no necessity for that Bill and that the marriage provisions of the Act are in order.

The Domestic Violence Act, 1996 is now law and came into force on 27 March 1996. This time last year the legislation was yet to be published — it came under the category of legislation that was promised. The Act strengthens the power of the courts to make orders to protect persons in the home whose safety or welfare requires it because of the conduct of another person in the home; extends that protection to cohabitants subject to certain conditions; and strengthens the powers of arrest and the powers of gardaí to intervene in domestic violence cases. The provision under the Act under which a health board may, in special circumstances, seek protection on a person's behalf becomes effective from 1 January 1997. An explanatory leaflet on the various remedies under this legislation has been made widely available to interested groups and individuals. Experience of operation of the Act already seems to indicate the legislation has significantly improved the protection for victims of domestic violence.

On 25 January, 1996, on my initiative, Ireland was among the first group of signatories of the Council of Europe Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights. That Convention complements the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which has been ratified by Ireland. The expressed object of the Council of Europe Convention is to promote the rights of children in family proceedings affecting them, to grant them procedural rights and to facilitate the exercise of these rights by ensuring that children are informed of them and allowed to participate in the proceedings. The Convention is being examined with a view to its early ratification.

The Civil Legal Aid Act, 1995, which provides a statutory framework for the scheme of civil legal aid and advice, was passed on 16 December 1995. The regulations necessary to give effect to that Act are in the course of being formally drafted, taking into account consultations between my Department and the Legal Aid Board.

These are the main family law measures which have engaged the attention of my Department. That process of family law reform continues in my Department. As well as being responsible for the legislation which will be necessary to implement divorce, the Department is preparing proposals for submission to Government to improve, among other matters, aspects of the law on guardianship of children, the evidence of children and nullity. In the preparation of those proposals various recommendations of the Law Reform Commission are being taken into account. I shall bring forward those proposals as quickly as possible.

Other very important legislative measures promoted by my Department during the past year are in relation to occupier's liability and powers of attorney. The Occupiers' Liability Act, 1995, came into operation on 17 July 1995. It updated the law governing the relationship between occupiers of and entrants to property and makes important distinctions between the duty owed to visitors and that owed to trespassers and recreational users. The legislation took into account work of the Law Reform Commission and detailed consultations with interest groups, including farming organisations.

The Powers of Attorney Bill initiated in the Seanad in late June 1995 is now before the Seanad with some amendments from the Dáil. That Bill is of necessity complex and technical, but I have no doubt that in time the simple message it delivers will be taken on board by a considerable number of people. Its main importance is that it will enable people to provide in advance for the possibility that they may become incapable of managing their powers by authorising a person or persons of their choice to act for them in that eventuality. I have, during progress on this Bill, taken into account the valuable deliberations of this committee as well as consultations between my Department and members of the Law Society. Progress is being made on the regulations to give full effect to the legislation and I am taking into account consultations with the Law Society and the Dublin Solicitors' Bar Association on the practical and other aspects of those regulations.

I propose to introduce shortly a Bill to amend the law on civil liability. It will update the amount payable by way of compensation for mental distress in fatal injuries cases and it will extend the category of persons who can seek certain damages in fatal injuries cases. The Bill is in the course of being formally drafted.

An Employment Equality Bill which will prohibit discrimination in employment on grounds of gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin or membership of the travelling community is being prepared in my Department at present. I expect to be in a position to publish the Bill shortly.

Work is proceeding on the preparation of the Equal Status Bill dealing with discrimination in the provision of goods and services, for the categories of people I have already mentioned. This will be complex and wide-ranging legislation and extensive consultations with interested parties have taken place with officials in my Department. I met many delegations to hear views in relation to this proposed legislation. The Bill is being drafted at present and I hope to be in a position to publish it before the end of the year. I am working to achieve a balanced and reasonable Bill that can meet the legitimate needs of all concerned, and I am hopeful that, working together, we can achieve this.

Under subhead C1, £6.5 million is being provided in 1996 as grant-in-aid to the Legal Aid Board. This represents an increase of 5 per cent over the £6.2 million expended by my Department in 1995 for this purpose.

The scheme of civil legal aid and advice was established in 1979 so that persons of limited means could avail themselves of legal services. However, because of pressure on public finances generally, the pace at which services under the scheme were developed and expanded was slower than that originally envisaged. Over the years it became apparent that waiting lists at the board's law centres were lengthening. Another unfortunate feature of the scheme, that also causes me much concern, is the need for many clients, particularly outside Dublin, to travel undue distance to get to law centres. I was determined, therefore, on taking office as Minister for Equality and Law Reform over three years ago, to try to ensure that the maximum moneys possible would be provided within budgetary constraints, to secure significant and lasting improvements in access to the services provided by the board.

Early in 1993, at my request, the Legal Aid Board, in consultation with officials of my Department, devised a development programme for the board for the purpose of securing meaningful and lasting reductions in the waiting times at the law centres. This first phase concentrated on upgrading the capacity of existing law centres by the introduction of an additional 41 staff, including 12 solicitor staff. As a result of these initiatives, by the end of 1993, waiting lists at the law centres had significantly reduced.

The £4.972 million which I secured in 1994, and the £6.2 million which I secured in 1995 as grant-in-aid to the Legal Aid Board were sufficient to enable the board to proceed with the second phase of its programme of development. The additional money allowed for the expansion of the board's network of law centres by the opening of ten full-time and four part-time law centres, as provided for in the development programme. It ensured that by the end of the second phase all counties had either a full-time or part-time law centre. At the beginning of 1994 there were 16 full-time and 19 part-time law centres located strategically throughout the country. There are now 26 full-time law centres. In addition, there are 17 part-time law centres — a total in all of 43 centres. By the end of 1996 the number of full-time centres will have increased to 30.

The 1994 and 1995 allocations enabled an additional 24 solicitors and 34 support staff to be employed to service the new law centres and an additional six staff to be employed to supplement the staff of the board's head office. In 1996, it will be possible for the board to recruit a further six solicitors, 12 support staff, and three additional staff for the head office. One of the head office staff — an assistant principal on loan from the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications — has already taken up this position in a temporary capacity.

The numbers of people provided with legal services by the Legal Aid Board continue to increase. In 1995, approximately 11,400 persons received assistance from the board — an increase of 13 per cent on 1994. The number of persons provided with legal aid -representation in court — increased by 25 per cent from 3,282 to 4,060 — while the numbers provided with legal advice was 7 per cent higher. Notwithstanding the increased demand on the board's services there has been a continuing reduction in the waiting times at its 26 law centres.

In early 1993 the waiting period in half of the board's centres was between one and seven months — in 50 per cent of the board's centres the waiting period is now two months or less. In the remaining half of the centres in 1993 the waiting period ranged between eight months and 14 months — now in all of the remaining 50 per cent of the centres the waiting period ranges between two and six months, and no centre has a waiting period in excess of six months. Having regard to what has been achieved to date, it is reasonable, to assume that when the expansion and development programme for the board is fully implemented, it will serve further to enhance the level of service available to legal aid applicants under the scheme of civil legal aid and advice.

In 1994 1 increased the grant aid to the free legal advice centres, more commonly known as FLAC, to £45,000. This increased grant was also paid in 1995 and will again be paid in 1996.

I turn now to Subhead D, Family Mediation, for which £300,000 is provided in 1996. This is the same as was provided in Estimates for 1994 and in 1995, when £149,000 and £260,000, respectively, were actually expended. This year's allocation is more than double the amount allocated to the Service in 1993.

The Family Mediation Service was established in Dublin in July, 1986, on a pilot basis for three years and has continued on that basis ever since. The purpose of the service is to enable couples, whose marriages have broken down, amicably to resolve outstanding matters without having to resort to the courts. The Family Mediation Service offers couples a way of negotiating separation agreements which deal with such matters as maintenance, the division of property, and custody of, and access to, their children, with the help of a neutral third party. The service has handled approximately 250 cases annually. On average, couples require about six sessions, each of two hours' duration. The service is provided free of charge.

While it is my firm belief that it is necessary that our family law provisions are modernised, and that the courts are given full powers to enable justice to be done to the parties to broken marriages, nonetheless where there exists a willingness among parties to attempt to settle the terms of their separation without having recourse to litigation they should be facilitated to do so by way of mediation.

The importance of mediation where a couple have decided to separate is recognised in the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act, 1989, section 5 of which requires a solicitor acting for an applicant for a decree of separation to ensure the applicant's awareness of alternative separation proceedings and to assist attempts at reconciliation. This is because in some of these cases the immediate resort to the law could ruin the prospect of a voluntary settlement which would be in the better interests of the parties and their dependants. It is also my belief that a high proportion of family law cases which come before the courts can and should be resolved by the use of the mediation approach, without recourse to litigation. I trust that the fund available to the service this year will go a considerable distance towards popularising mediation as a means of avoiding the sort of conflict that is, regrettably, so often a feature of litigation on family law matters. It is proposed that all family mediation services provided by the State should be centrally controlled through the Dublin centre.

While the State-funded family mediation service operates from a premises in Dublin, its services are not confined to those resident in Dublin. The increased allocation available to the service in 1996 will facilitate the continued expansion and development of the service which has now been established on a permanent basis. In order better to provide for people seeking mediation, I opened a second family mediation centre in Limerick in recent weeks. The new second centre was opened in Limerick on the basis that the major demand for judicial separation outside Dublin is in Cork, Galway and Limerick and, of these, Limerick is best placed geographically to provide a service to this catchment area.

Prior to 1994 grants to the voluntary organisations providing marriage guidance and counselling services were administered by the Department of Health through the health boards and, from time to time, supplementary grants were paid by the Department of Social Welfare. There has been little increase over the years in the amounts provided to the various organisations. Neither was there co-ordination of decision making in the process with several Departments involved at any one time.

Work of immense value is done by the many voluntary organisations engaged in the area of marriage counselling for couples encountering difficulty in their marriage. I secured funding of £750,000 for those organisations in 1994 and again in 1995 — an increase of 150 per cent over previous years. I am glad to be able to say that this allocation is being increased further in 1996 to £900,000. This money will be used to assist those organisations in their work, to encourage them to develop and expand marriage counselling and related services and to ensure a nationwide coverage. It will also provide assistance for the first time to organisations providing counselling services to children whose parents have separated.

In 1995 58 organisations benefited from assistance. Already in 1996 the first instalment of grant aid to marriage counselling and child counselling organisations, totalling £225,000, has been paid to 68 groups. The organisations in question can look forward to two more cheques this year, and I expect that major additional benefits will as a result accrue to those members of the public who find themselves in need of marriage counselling, and similarly to children.

The Government's aim in increasing funding was to enable organisations involved in marriage counselling to expand and develop their services. As a result of the payment of the grants in question the total number of counselling hours provided by grant aided organisations increased by more than 40 per cent in 1994: from 44,166 hours in 1993 to 61,946 hours in 1994. There was an even greater increase in pre-marriage courses in the same period — from 2,279 hours in 1993 to 7,030 hours in 1994, 308 per cent. Further improvements can be expected this year, as many groups are only now bringing on stream new counsellors trained in 1994. It would appear that the scheme has been particularly successful in rural areas. While urban centres have benefited from significant increases, rural centres, some of which were on the verge of closing, have had an injection of enthusiasm as well as additional volunteers as a result of the additional funding.

The pilot child care initiative, which I had included in the 1994 Estimates for the first time, has been continued into this year. The scheme is intended to assist the initiation of projects for the establishment, on a pilot basis, of child care measures, utilising the skills of trained local people, to enable local residents to undertake education, training, retraining and employment opportunities which they would otherwise be unable to do, in the absence of a child care facility.

The scheme is being administered, on behalf of my Department, by Area Development Management (ADM) Limited, an independent company designated by the Government and the European Commission to support integrated local economic and social development in co-operation with relevant area partnership companies established by the Government in designated disadvantaged areas. A provision of £800,000 has been included in my Department's Estimate for 1996. At the end of May a total of £200,000 — in 1996 — had been issued to ADM towards the cost of grants for approved projects. Additional instalments will be paid in line with progress achieved in the projects. An evaluation of the child care scheme to determine the extent to which its objectives have been achieved is underway and a report is to be ready later this year.

During the Irish Presidency of the Council of the European Union I intend to pursue two draft directives in the area of equality. These directives will deal with an amendment to the Equal Treatment Directive following a recent judgment of the European Court of Justice in relation to positive action and a Directive on the Burden of Proof in equality cases. The recent judgment of the European Court of Justice in relation to positive action — in the Kalanke case — determined that a German law which provided for an automatic quota-related system for appointment to posts in the Bremen public service exceeded the exception for positive action laid down in the Equal Treatment Directive. This judgment has created uncertainty in relation to the types of positive action permissible under the Equal Treatment Directive. It would be intended, therefore, to amend the directive to clarify the type of positive action measures which are permissible following the Kalanke judgment.

The second phase of the consultation process under the Social Protocol of the Maastricht Treaty on the burden of proof proposal is nearing completion. It is unlikely that agreement will be concluded between the social partners in that forum. In that event, I am preparing to press forward with any initiative tabled by the Commission for the Irish Presidency. Such an initiative will deal with the apportionment of the evidential burden of proof in equality cases. The intention of the proposal would be to seek to ensure that no unreasonable level of preliminary evidence is required of a person wishing to pursue a legal remedy in an equality case, before the burden of proof shifts to the other party. I will also be giving support to the proposed Council recommendation on equality in decision making, which is likely to be adopted during the Italian Presidency.

On the law reform side, I will be seeking to progress proposals to extend the 1968 Brussels Convention to family law matters, and to enable accession of the new EU states to the Brussels and Rome Conventions. I will also be anxious to see progress on a draft convention to simplify the transmission of judicial documents across boundaries within the EU.

In the context of the EU Intergovernmental Conference, the Committee will be aware the issue of equality has received some attention. The conference will be an opportunity to explore with our partners how appropriate extensions of the existing equality provisions in the treaties could be achieved.

On the 22 December 1995, the Council of Social Affairs Ministers adopted a decision on the Fourth Medium Term Community Action Programme on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, 1996-2000. The programme seeks to promote equal opportunities for women and men in all aspects of life and to facilitate its achievement through several specific aims which include promoting integration of the dimension of equal opportunities for men and women in all policies and activities, mobilising all the actors in economic and social life to achieve equal opportunities for men and women, reconciling family and working life and promoting a gender balance in decision making.

The fourth action programme will be formally launched by the European Commission during Ireland's Presidency of the European Union at a conference on mainstreaming organised by my Department, which will be held in Dublin Castle during October. My Department has recently conducted a widely targeted information campaign through the national media with a view to encouraging Irish organisations to participate in the programme.

The Social Affairs Council reached political agreement on a directive on the framework agreement on parental leave on 29 March 1996. This directive will be formally adopted by the Social Affairs Council at its meeting on 3 and 4 June next. I was happy to support the proposal which will provide for workers, both men and women, a period of up to three months' leave at home to care for young children. The availability of the leave, not just to mothers but to fathers too, will have beneficial effects not only for the reconciliation of work and family life but for a more balanced distribution of child care responsibilities within the family.

Member states have a minimum of two years to implement the directive. With a view to implementing the directive within that timescale I intend to initiate consultations, initially with other Departments and later with other interests, in particular the social partners, on the most appropriate legislative approaches for the implementation of the proposal.

I recently decided it was time to update my Department's 1993 report on equal opportunities in the public sector. Initial contacts have been made with major Departments on follow up surveys in their sectors and the question of extending the proposed survey to public service employments not previously covered is also being considered.

Turning to the National Women's Council, the council receives the bulk of its funding from my Department. The allocation for 1996 is £170,000, an increase of over 20 per cent on last year's allocation. The council is completely independent of Government.

The extension of the Employment Equality Agency's brief under the proposed new equality legislation will involve a major expansion of the agency's responsibilities and workload. I am providing an allocation of £750,000 for the agency this year to offset the additional salary and operational costs which will arise as a result of this expanded role.

The Child Abduction Authority operated in my Department continues to give a valuable service to increasing numbers of cases involving abductions into and out of the State. In 1995 there was a total of 101 new cases involving 184 children. That represents an increase of 12 per cent on the 1994 figures and of 38 per cent on the 1993 figures. The two international conventions under which the authority operates in conjunction with other authorities worldwide are working well in so far as our experience is concerned.

With regard to other international instruments, I am in the process of finalising Ireland's second and third report under the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. I hope to submit these to the UN and publish them in the near future. Also, following the equality legislation, I will bring forward a proposal to ratify the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Race Discrimination.

Concern has been expressed that Ireland has not ratified the Hague Convention on abolition of legalisation of documents — the "apostille" convention — and related conventions between the Council of Europe and EU states. I am anxious to ratify these measures and will submit proposals to Government shortly on the matter.

Notwithstanding the turmoils and successes of 1995, in some ways the major challenges still lie ahead. We are committed to a programme of action to provide the necessary legislation services and policy initiatives to meet the real and substantial needs. Our goal is nothing less than a new horizon of equality and legal rights for all citizens. There are many obstacles in the way to that objective but I hope that Members of the committee will be prepared to join me in working towards that goal.

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive review of the Department's work. There are a number of omissions, one by virtue of the Supreme Court challenge to the divorce referendum result. We await the decision of the court. The Minister mentioned that legislation may be forthcoming to which we look forward.

When the Minster spoke on the Estimate last year he promised that the new Employment Equality Bill would be published before the end of 1995. To date there is no sign of it and we are almost halfway through 1996. This is essential legislation to ensure that all our people, especially those who have had obstacles placed in their way in the past, can fully participate in the workforce. It will be especially valuable for women, people with disabilities and disadvantaged groups of various kinds in our society.

The proposed legislation is a necessary platform on which to build the great social advance that real equality in the workplace would represent for everybody. Consequently, there is a great demand for it outside this House, and a great sense of urgency regarding its introduction. The Minister has advised that he hopes to introduce the legislation shortly. We look forward to this but there has been a great deal of delay in this area and many are concerned about its implications because apart from the legislation going through the Dáil and the Seanad — we will facilitate this in any way we can — the implementation of the legislation is especially important and there is normally a time lag until this can take place.

The lack of progress in this area is compounded by the failure, notwithstanding the numerous promises and assurance, to publish the Equal Status Bill. Again, the Minster has advised that he hopes to introduce it by the end of the year. When the Minister spoke on this last year my notes indicated to expect the Bill in 1996. There is great concern about the lack of progress in this area. We acknowledge the sensitive issues and difficulties which exist and will again give the Minister every assistance in overcoming these difficulties, but no progress can be made until the Government publishes the Bill. It needs to be introduced, debated and discussed to obtain agreement and finality in this area.

There is a growing impression that, while it started with great verve, energy and enthusiasm and has done a great deal of work, the Minister's Department is now running out of steam. I ask the Minister to stoke the fires and get these two major Bills under way.

At a time when we are faced with the challenge of reconciling the family and the workplace so that both can co-exist and prosper, we need strong and vibrant political leadership. In March 1994, the report of the working group on childcare facilities for working parents was published. Recently, the Employment Equality Agency published its report on introducing family friendly initiatives in the workplace. These two reports contain a body of well researched proposals which, if implemented, would make a huge contribution to the achievement of equality in the workplace and at the same time enhance the status and stability of the family in the modern age. I am sure the Minister will agree that legislation in this area is especially urgent, given the changing patterns of work and changing circumstances in the workplace for families. Unless we introduce these measures families will suffer and we will be dealing with more and more marriage breakdown.

I welcome the childcare initiative pilot scheme, which the Minister has adopted and which will apply especially in areas of disadvantage, in conjunction with the other work being done in the areas through the national partnerships. We need to go much further on a national basis, to set out a programme for the implementation of the report of the working group on childcare facilities for working parents and the report produced by the Employment Equality Agency on family friendly initiatives in the workplace. This was an excellent, timely and very valuable report. It indicates policy direction for the future and we should act on it without delay.

The Minister will be aware that, over the years, I have been keen to make progress in areas such as parental leave and the supports and breaks of various kinds which are needed by families. Many younger families still have great family traditions but find it very difficult to maintain them because of pressures in the workplace and difficulties arising from both parents working and trying to maintain a solid, co-ordinated family home. This is where we come in, we must give them the support they need to maintain strong family traditions and to build the families they wish in the changed working environment. I know the Minister is very supportive of this approach and I urge him to treat it as a matter or urgency.

This work is of utmost importance and will beneficially affect the daily lives of an enormous number of people, particularly young people who are currently faced with these challenges. The Minister should take urgent action in this area. He will have our support.

The Minister mentioned the Private Members' Marriages Bill and said he has been advised by the Attorney General it is not necessary and there will not be any difficulty with the Family Law Act. The Attorney General is relying on the interpretation Acts and there is a problem with those. There is some doubt about the situation and that is a worry. The Minister should examine this matter as intensely as possible.

It is possible that the only solution will be to exempt the first three months from the notification requirements under the Family Law Act. That would put the matter beyond doubt. We do not want any uncertainty about the position of couples who get married in August, September and October and there need not be uncertainty. If there is uncertainty it should be dealt with expeditiously by the simple measure of putting back the date of implementation. Will the Minister look at that issue again? We do not want the matter to be challenged and to have to depend on a court to make a decision on our behalf. I am concerned about this, notwithstanding the assurances given. There is an element of doubt and there may be legal differences about it. There is no room for legal difference about this issue and we should not allow it to arise. It is estimated that about 6,000 marriages will be effected in that time and even if two or three of them were affected that is too many. The Minister should examine the issue again from the point of view of putting it beyond doubt or legal interpretation.

The Minister has promised to introduce new legislation on civil liability to deal with the issue of mental stress in fatal injuries. One of the issues that arises frequently for public representatives is the trauma, upset and hurt that can accompany a tragic death. This is not recognised in law and only a limited sum, about £7,000, is provided for the loss of a husband. That figure is way out of date. I commend the Minister for taking up this matter and welcome his plans to introduce legislation. We will be keen to support it.

The Legal Aid Board has a huge task. In the past three or four years it has accelerated its work at a great pace and extended its range throughout the country. It has done a commendable job in the sensitive and delicate area in which it operates. The Minister said by the end of this year there will be 30 full-time centres and 17 part-time centres. This is a dramatic change to the previous position and is the kind of support that is needed in current circumstances.

While the vast majority of people who come to public representatives with problems are women, the Minister should bear in mind that men seek equal treatment in this area. They have a case in some instances and that should be borne in mind. More work and attention should be given to that aspect of the matter in future because many men believe they are not getting balanced and equal treatment, especially in areas such as child custody. That said, the vast majority of the clients are women and they also comprise the majority of the people who are adversely affected. I commend the Legal Aid Board on its work in the past few years. That work had built up over a period and the Legal Aid Board has done much to meet demand and to reduce waiting lists.

The family mediation service was mentioned by the Minister. The service is still quite small and deals with about 250 cases per year. Obviously there is scope for development and we would like to see a wider network of the service availed of and available. The experience in Dublin and Limerick will be valuable in reassessing the provision. The Minister should examine provision for the future of the service again because a good and effective mediation service could save a great deal of trauma and time.

The Minister's provision for counselling has been increased from £750,000 to £900,000. Assuming the Supreme Court upholds the decision in the divorce referendum, legislation to provide for the right to remarry will be introduced. Counselling will be important at that stage and will have to be looked at in greater depth. It will be particularly important before the breakup of a marriage and the decision to part, so it is a service we would like to see developed.

The Minister also referred to the fourth medium term community action programme on equal opportunities for women and men, 1996 to 2000. Men seeking parental equality will be pleased to see they are formally included in the programme which will be launched by the European Commission during Ireland's Presidency.

Commissioner Flynn will launch it.

I hope the Minister will invite the committee to the launch. We look forward to that. Will the Minister briefly outline his programme for the period of the Presidency and the events planned?

The Social Affairs Council reached political agreement on 29 March last on a directive on the framework agreement on parental leave. I look forward to this matter being advanced. At its meeting on 3 and 4 June next, the Social Affairs Council is expected to adopt the directive formally. I am disappointed the Minister did not bring in equal treatment when adoptive leave arrangements were introduced. Such a measure would have put us ahead of others but I know it was held back by the Government and the Minister for Finance because of worries about precedents. It could have been done at virtually no cost.

However, I am glad the EU is going to drag us into parental leave arrangements. It is so important in the new social circumstances. The mandarins who operate behind the scenes need to look forward. We will not be able to tackle marriage breakdown unless we look forward and the mandarins will have to pick up the cost afterwards. If they let us save the cost by taking positive measures it will be more beneficial.

I congratulate the Minister on the good deal of legislation he has put through. We have worked on the legislation with him and we will encourage and support him in the future.

The Department of Equality and Law Reform is very important yet it is underfunded. As Opposition spokespersons a lot of the pressure we bring to bear is to ensure the Minister is given the budget he needs for legislative reforms. I was privileged to attend the UN conference in Beijing and I was impressed by the amount of outstanding work put in by the officials of the Minister's and other Departments. Although I was at a remove, I was proud to observe and be part of it. The Irish delegation was acknowledged as a leader in a European context.

I regret that there was so little media coverage of what went on at the conference. There was plenty of coverage of the disorganisation, the rain, Mrs. Hilary Clinton and the NGO part of the conference. Regrettably, there was hardly any coverage of the huge amount of work done, the action plan and the accommodations which were arrived at finally.

We were all happy about the positive outcome of the divorce referendum. I am sorry we are still waiting for the outcome of the Supreme Court's deliberation. Hopefully, we will be able to proceed with the divorce legislation. The Department has brought forward a good deal of legislation. If the Department had had more resources more could have been done. A lot of the legislation we dealt with last year was determined by the divorce referendum.

There is legislation outstanding — the employment equality and equal status Bills. It is regrettable we are still waiting for them. We thought the employment equality legislation would be before us last year; many people eagerly await it. The Estimates make provision for the Employment Equality Agency's expanded role as anticipated in the legislation and that gives me hope the legislation will see the light of day.

With regard to the equal status legislation, there are fears of a polarisation of attitudes between the vintners and the travellers and such difficulties are slowing the process. There is concern that an effort is being made to weave a path through the difficulties that have arisen. Meanwhile, an equality campaign is up and running. All the groups involved are concerned about the perceived lack of action. What are the obstacles? The Minister hopes to have the Bill ready before the end of the year, yet it is hard not to be impatient about it when one is regularly contacted by groups seeking reasons for the delay.

The Minister will have to alleviate the fears of those anxiously awaiting the legislation. It is ironic that women's groups are still among the minority rights groups as if they only comprised a small percentage of the population. The delay in the equal status legislation is a cause for concern and, hopefully, we will see it before the end of the year. We have to give credit where credit is due in regard to the area of free legal aid. When the Minister came into office there was a huge backlog in this area. There have been great strides there and that is to be welcomed. Perhaps I can tease this out under the subhead but I notice the Estimate for the free legal advice centres is the same this year as last year. What effect will that have? Are the lists up to speed at this stage?

That is a separate issue. FLAC is completely separate from the legal aid board.

I wonder, in relation to FLAC, will that have an impact as well? The legal aid board grant is up by 5 per cent, but many people want to get independent advice initially and FLAC is concerned that it is not getting enough funding. The Minister can tease that out with me later.

Deputy Woods mentioned the family mediation service. We are all concerned that there would be enough counselling services. The Minister is right when he says mediation is extremely important. People should have access to mediation so they would not always have to go through legal channels. I am delighted 250 cases have been dealt with, but I was a little surprised that more have not been dealt with. Has this to do with demand or the fact that we still do not have enough trained personnel to deal with these cases? There is an expectation that the service will be available. This is obviously the way to go and if the service is available we would like to see people use it. I was quite surprised at that figure. I realise that the service is more widely available now, particularly as there is now a centre in Limerick, but could we have figures and details of how the service is operating in the various centres?

I referred before to the pilot child care initiative and said it is very welcome. I am surprised and concerned it is administered by the Department of Equality and Law Reform, although I do not mean to be negative about the initiative. I referred under Education as well to this grey area of responsibility for children. Child care comes under the Department of Health, yet there are elements such as pre-schooling that come under the Department of Education. What links are in place between Departments in relation to this initiative? While I welcome the initiative, I would like the Minister to explain that element of it.

The next six months will be very interesting because Ireland will hold the presidency of the European Union. I would like to hear a little more about the Minister's intentions in this regard. There is a rumour — I would like the Minister to comment on this because it may or may not be correct — that there is a recommendation that the budget for the fourth action programme be halved. Has the Minister heard anything about this? Does he have any information which he can give me now or later on whether there is any threat to the funding for the programme on equal opportunities? I welcome the fact that the fourth action programme will be launched during the Irish presidency and I look forward to it being implemented, so it would be of enormous concern if its budget was to be cut. I welcome the agreement on parental leave and so on and I will not go into that.

The Minister said he recently decided it was time to update the 1993 report on equal opportunities in the public sector. A report on this was commissioned by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Womens' Rights and it will be launched on Thursday. It makes depressing reading; it will make people aware of just what an uphill struggle women have in relation to equal opportunity. There are very few women in the upper echelons of the public service, as the Minister knows. There is one female Secretary and four female Assistant Secretaries. We have a dearth of women at the top level within the Civil Service, but the sit- uation in the public service and at local government is really depressing where one really has to look hard to find a few women. There are quite a number of suggestions in that report which the Minister and the Department would find very interesting and I recommend it to him.

I welcome the increased allocation to the National Womens' Council and I hope this will help them to continue their excellent work. Any voluntary organisation needs as much money as it can get so I am sure it is grateful for an extra provision. I do not know how much it sought but the provision is much better than it used to be.

I wish to make a point in relation to the Kalanke judgment. The Minister referred to decision making under the Italian Presidency; I cannot find the reference but it has been pointed out to me that the European Court of Justice is all male. There are no women to my knowledge in the Court of Justice and we should be concerned about this. The experience of women at that level might benefit the judgments and that might have had some influence on the type of judgment there. What it should do is tell us how important it is to have women and therefore women's experience — available at all levels.

This final point relates to a different Department. Some 17 new judges are being appointed to deal with delays in the courts. In reply to a question, the Minister said the difficulty with appointing women as judges was because a pool of women with the relevant experience is not there. Interestingly, at a recent Europe-wide conference on women and decision making, a workshop on justice attended by a number of women judges suggested we should change the criteria. I think we should be open to that. What are the criteria by which we appoint judges? Do they stand up if we wish to introduce a dynamic new way of looking at things? I raise this as something the Minister can think about — it is not his responsibility but it widens the scope of debate on such issues. It would be valuable if the Minister for Equality and Law Reform examined those matters and discussed them with his Cabinet colleagues, so that there would be more openness to those appointments and a realisation that a narrower definition of experience may no longer be appropriate.

A number of questions have been asked of the Minister and rather than having them answered now, I suggest we deal with them in the course of our deliberations on the subheads. If Members agree, I will begin with subhead A, on administration. Are there questions arising here?

Under this subhead last year, the staff included one secretary, two assistant secretaries, four principal officers and 13 assistant principal officers. The secretary of the Department was male and there were no female assistant secretaries or principal officers. Has there been any change since or is that still the position?

It is still the same.

We will move on to subheads B, C1, C2 and D, which we are taking together. Subhead C2 concerns the free legal advice centres and I welcome the increase of £6.5 million to the Legal Aid Board under subhead C1, which represents over 50 per cent of the Department's budget. In the Minister's initial contribution there was one statistical omission which he may be able to fill in. It has been my view for some time that the free legal advice centres and Legal Aid Board centres are almost exclusively family law centres. Little advice is being given and few cases are being conducted in areas other than family law, specifically marital breakdown. It appears that 95 per cent of cases are in the latter category. Does the Minister have any statistics which prove otherwise? What percentage of cases feature advice in areas other than family law?

I am not sure we have an exact figure. You are correct, Chairman, to say the overwhelming bulk of the cases they deal with are family law or family law related. However, they are not restricted to such cases. They are open to various other types of case in accordance with the guidelines and rules and with the regulations under the Act when it comes into force. The centres are open for business in other areas but for accidents, etc., the practice seems to be that people tend to go to private solicitors, who deal with such cases in a certain way and are not prepared to deal with family law cases on the same basis. Perhaps the money is not there or they have another reason. The types of cases which law centres may deal with are specified in the Civil Legal Aid Act, which is more or less a reflection of the existing non-statutory scheme. They deal with other types of cases when they come their way. Cases are not refused because they are not family law cases. Some 97 per cent of court cases and 90 per cent of advice given is in the family law area.

I thank Deputy Woods and Deputy Keogh for their questions.

There is an argument for changing the name to "family law centres" rather than "Civil Legal Aid Board centres".

I do not think the name matters much. They fulfil a need, as can be seen by the numbers going to the various centres. The work is necessary and what it is called will not change matters. If that is where the need is, they will fill it and they do so skilfully and professionally at present. They are fully resourced and computerised—all the precedent banks are now on computer in all or virtually all the centres. They operate professionally and effectively.

The structure and composition of staff in the centres has changed also in the period of my administration. When I took over the only staff to be found were either solicitors or clerical staff. There are now two new categories, law clerks and solicitors' apprentices, which makes for an effective composite team. All these people have a role to play in a well run solicitor's office. For example, they handle "running down" cases on occasions when a private solicitor is not prepared to take them. They do not refuse cases — if a person qualifies and comes within the terms, they are eligible for consideration for any case coming within the terms of reference of the board.

I think the point I made still stands. They have so much business in the family law area that they are almost exclusively family law centres.

Yes, factually that is the case but that is where the demand is and someone has to do that work.

Deputy Woods spoke about men being entitled to equality in the context of the Legal Aid Board. The board and its law centres are open to everyone, they are not confined to women. Perhaps the bulk of the people who resort to them are women but not all are. Men go there and there is a campaign for parental equality. I met its representatives recently and no doubt there will be further meetings. I was interested in what they had to say and I think we had a useful meeting.

We are also dealing with family mediation services, which Deputy Woods and Deputy Keogh mentioned. There are only two centres available for family mediation in comparison to the Legal Aid Board and the law centres. Their operation and structure are different from those of the law centres. As regards time application per case, Members will note from my initial statement that the average case requires six two hour sessions, a substantial amount of time. The average consultation in a law office would be half an hour. It is painstaking, skilled and professional work.

Mediation as a science is only beginning to come into its own in Ireland. It is a relatively new profession and we do not have sufficient numbers. The service in Ireland consists of mediators who worked in the family mediation service and a relatively small number of others who practise at a number of locations throughout the country. The numbers in that category are quite small and there is no big pool from which to draw. Even if we opened additional centres, there could be difficulties finding skilled and trained professional staff to service them. Mediators may come from England to take up some of the new posts which come on stream in Limerick. I am not sure where the applications will come from but that is a possibility. The Limerick centre will be important because it will increase our facilities to train new mediators and to give them experience. Professional qualifications must also be considered in this area. It is different from counselling; it is quicker and easier to train a marriage counsellor than to train a mediator. However, there are many openings for mediators. Mediation is not confined to family law; it is acquiring increasing importance in all types of disputes, including those in the commercial field.

The £45,000 grant for FLAC remains the same. They are separate and distinct in that they are not State run and they have other funding sources.

Has any thought been given to employing private mediators in different areas?

I referred to that briefly in my opening statement. It is our intention that the Dublin centre will cover the Dublin catchment area and the Limerick centre will cover the south-western area. As regards other parts of the country, we hope to come to some arrangement with mediators in private practice for the family mediation service.

Each case costs approximately £1,000. If the service is expanded in Limerick and private mediators are employed, will each case still cost £1,000?

It is difficult to say because we would have to see what type of fee arrangements are worked out and the numbers of people involved. I believe the service will expand as the years go by and that the cost per case will reduce the figure the service gets.

Under subhead G, the Minister mentions child care, seed capital and grant assistance for innovative projects. I ask the Minister to be innovative and to look at new ideas as regards community based child care measures. I know of one case where parents are providing back-up for children in the community. They looked for assistance but they did not seem to come within the terms of reference. That was probably because they did not put their case properly. I ask the Minister to look carefully at such cases because we want to find people who will do such work in the community. It is important to be flexible and innovative and to be prepared to take chances because these people are dealing with the issues.

The provision under subhead K is to cover carry-over costs arising from the information campaign for the divorce referendum in November 1995. I am sure the Minister has accepted a suggestion we made before the referendum that a commission should be set up to deal objectively with such issues in the future. He set up a commission to deal with part of the problem and it produced a useful document which covered both sides. That is important for the future.

As regards background gurus being involved in contracts, the Minister of State said he was not aware of a letter from an adviser to the company in question. I mention the matter here because this is the place to discuss such things. I know the Minister is committed to procedures, therefore I trust it will not happen again.

As far as child care is concerned, I am happy and prepared to be innovative within the bounds of a scheme as it is structured. I am pleased we are able to find people to participate in these child care schemes, which are successful. Approximately 70 such projects have been funded since funding became available a year ago and I have visited many projects in rural and urban areas. I visited one centre in a rural area of County Donegal and it is heartening to see that women in particular, though not exclusively, because of having a place to leave their children, can take up employment and training and educational opportunities which would not exist if the facilities were not available. The pilot childcare initiative falls under the ambit of my Department for the reasons I have stated and because it involves an element of equality.

ADM has commissioned a report to assess the overall effects of and benefits that have accrued from the childcare initiative. I look forward to receiving that report and I will also investigate how the initiative can be improved, advanced and progressed in the future. In the interim, there are approximately 70 projects under way as a result of this initiative. I suggest that Deputies visit any of the centres throughout the country, where they will be made very welcome.

I do not wish to enter into a detailed discussion on the divorce referendum because it has been dealt with elsewhere. However, I take the point made by Deputy Woods.

We will now deal with subheads E to N.

I did not have an opportunity to speak on the previous two subheads.

I apologise.

I was not questioning the Act. As I stated earlier I welcome the childcare initiatives. I am sure they are welcomed by the people involved, regardless of under which Department's remit they fall. What liaison exists with other Departments in relation to the initiative? I am aware that the equality element comes under the remit of the Department of Equality and Law Reform but it seems unusual that responsibility for childcare falls under another Department.

I do not wish to become involved in another debate on the divorce referendum. However, I wonder if the Minister could provide a breakdown of the quite substantial costs relating to the information campaign on that referendum?

Full details relating to the information campaign are in the Official Report. They were provided in reply to a parliamentary question.

Will the Minister circulate them?

I will give Deputies the reference to the parliamentary question.

With regard subhead L, Grant for the Commission on the Status of People With Disabilities, and subhead M, Grant for the Council on the Status of People with Disabilities, a report has not yet issued from the Commission. Is the Minister aware of when it will be published? Will the council be established by the end of the year?

The Commission's report is being drafted at present and will be available in the very near future. July was suggested as the most likely date for publication, but this will depend on drafting arrangements, etc. Subhead M refers to a grant to facilitate the establishment of a permanent council for the status of people with disabilities. The names of people to comprise an establishment group were recommended by the Commission, which I asked to prepare a constitution and arrange for setting up a council. I have no involvement with the arrangements for this, other than providing a grant. I understand that the work is ongoing but I am not sure when it will be finalised.

I believe we have exhausted our discussions with the Minister unless Deputy Keogh has any further questions.

The only issue outstanding is the breakdown of costs relating to the divorce referendum.

The Minister indicated he would circulate the relevant information. I am glad that the committee has noted, in considerable detail, Vote 33.

I also asked the Minister about rumours of cuts in the budget relating to the fourth action programme.

It is not a rumour, there was a cut in the budget. The fourth action programme was halved from 60 million ECU to 30 million ECU. The proposal from the Commission to the Council was for 60 million ECU, the amount adopted by the Council was 30 million ECU. This does not come under the remit of my Department but the relevant Minister supported the Commission's proposal for 60 million ECU. I agree that this is a disappointing development.

I thank the Minister for providing a comprehensive overview of the work carried out within his Department. He has undertaken to circulate to the committee information requested by Deputy Keogh in relation to a breakdown of costs for the Government's information campaign on the divorce referendum. I believe all other matters were dealt with to the satisfaction of Members. I thank the Minister for appearing before us and his officials for assisting in the provision of information to the committee. It is fair to state there are no mandarins in the Department of Equality and Law Reform. We look forward to meeting the Minister to debate the Committee Stage of legislation in the near future.

The Select Committee adjourned at 4.30 p.m.

Top
Share