Written Answers. - EU Directives.
Eamon Gilmore
Ceist:
94
Mr. Gilmore
asked the
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
the nature of the exemption secured by him for Irish schools and hospitals from the terms of the new EU directive on equality; if his attention has been drawn to reports that his conduct of these negotiations left Ireland isolated and our EU colleagues puzzled at his stance; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[25751/00]
Political agreement was reached at the Employment and Social Affairs Council on 17 October 2000 on the draft Council directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation. The draft directive prohibits discrimination in relation to employment on grounds of religion or belief, age, disability and sexual orientation. Negotiations on this directive took place over a relatively short period of time and the religion or belief ground was only one of several major outstanding issues which were referred to the council of 17 October, for resolution, in order to allow agreement to be reached on the directive.
With regard to the religion or belief ground, an amendment was incorporated into the directive which will ensure that we can maintain the existing provisions in the Employment Equality Act, 1998, which protect the religious ethos of religious, educational and medical institutions, namely, sections 16(4) to (6) and section 37(1) of the Act. The Deputy will be aware that these provisions in the Employment Equality Act gave rise to extensive debate when the Employment Equality Bill, 1996 and the Employment Equality Bill, 1997, were being considered by the Oireachtas. The Deputy will also be aware that the Supreme Court examined these provisions when the Employment Equality Bill, 1996, was referred to it under article 26 of the Constitution and that the Supreme Court found that the provisions in the 1996 Bill, which are now included in the 1998 Act, represented a balance between free expression of religion on the one hand and the right to earn one's living and equality before the law on the other.
I was not satisfied that the proposed wording in the draft directive submitted to the council on 17 October reflected the balance achieved in Irish legislation. I was concerned that the proposed wording could have meant that institutions based on religion or belief would lose the flexibility in employment practices required in order to maintain their ethos. For example, there could be a situation that in a Protestant school the only teacher who could be required to be of the Protestant religion would be the religion teacher. I am happy that the appropriate balance has now been achieved and that we will be able to maintain our existing provisions in this area.
In the course of negotiations on the draft directive, Ireland indicated at all times that the provision in relation to religion was a particularly sensitive issue for Ireland, having regard, for example, to the denominational nature of our education system. Similarly other member states highlighted provisions in the directive which created difficulties for them. It is precisely because of the complexity and sensitivity of the directive and the relatively short negotiation period allowed that a number of issues, including the religion issue, fell to the council to resolve. These issues were resolved by the Council of Ministers at the meeting of 17 October 2000.
