Vol. 431 No. 6
4 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the steps, if any, he intends to take to implement the recommendations made in the report on the Kilkenny incest investigation to make barring orders and protection orders available to provide protection against all forms of domestic violence and abuse.
I have already indicated to the House, in reply to questions on 16 February 1993, that proposals to amend the barring orders legislation are being considered in my Department. This is in line with a commitment in the Programme for a Partnership Government. In the context of preparation of the legislation my Department will take into account the recommendations contained in the report of the Second Commission on the Status of Women and the report on the Kilkenny incest investigation. The legislation is being prepared as quickly as possible.
Will the Minister explain why his ministerial colleague in the Labour Party, the Minister for Health, Deputy Howlin, when addressing the House last week on the Kilkenny incest investigation, appeared to be unaware, first, that legislation was being prepared, second, of the fact that this was an area of responsibility of the Minister for Equality and Law Reform and, third, told the House he would discuss the issue with the Minister for Justice?
Questions to the Minister should relate only to his area of responsibility.
They do, the question relates to barring orders.
I thought the Deputy mentioned the Minister for Health.
I am querying the competence of the Minister for Health who stated that he would raise the issue with a Minister who had no responsibility in the matter.
Please, Deputy; let us confine questions to the Minister with responsibility in this area.
As I was not present when the Minister for Health dealt with questions on this subject I cannot answer the question. It would be open to the Deputy to put down a further question to the Minister for Health, if he wishes. As I said, the question of extending the barring orders legislation is being considered in my Department. I made this clear to the House on 16 February when the matter was discussed. The matter will be considered in the context of the Programme for Government and the report of the Kilkenny incest investigation. However, there are complications. The question of the extent to which the legislation should be extended has to be carefully considered with a number of other issues, including the question of protection orders, whether they should be made permanent and who should be entitled to apply for them. It is my intention in due course to extend the legislation dealing with barring and protection orders. Cases have been brought to my attention where, for example, mothers have been terrorised by grown up sons but I cannot at this stage state the exact parameters of the legislation.
Is the Minister aware that his colleague, not in reply to a Dáil question but in a considered speech prepared by his Department, said that he would talk to the Minister for Justice about this matter? Will the Minister have discussions in this regard with the Minister for Health whose area of responsibility this is? Is the Minister aware of the fact that long before the Commission on the Status of Women reported and long before the Kilkenny incest investigation the Law Reform Commission recommended that legislation be introduced in this area? When will a final decision be made by the Minister on the nature of this legislation? Will it be published before the Dáil goes into recess for the summer?
The legislation will not be published before the Dáil goes into recess for the summer. I will clarify with the Ministers for Justice and Health that the question of extending barring and protection orders legislation comes within the ambit of my Department. I am sorry if there has been some misunderstanding but I do not have personal knowledge of this.
He held a press conference.
The Deputy is correct when he states that the question of possible extensions in this area has been on the stocks for a long time. As far back as 1986, for example, the question of whether there should be permanent protection orders was considered. Indeed, a draft Bill was prepared at that time but, in the course of consultations, a considerable volume of objections was received, particularly from a number of women's organisations which apparently felt it might not be desirable because many district justices might be inclined to avail of the protection order procedure alone on a permanent basis rather than the more effective barring order procedure. Consequently, that legislation was then dropped. For all these reasons the matter is complex and requires some care in setting the parameters. The examination of the procedures is underway in the Department.
