JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on Human Rights) díospóireacht -
Thursday, 4 Dec 2003

Vol. 1 No. 39

Ethnic Groups: Presentation.

Chairman

Item No. 3 is the presentation by Pavee Point Travellers Centre and the Irish Centre for Human Rights. It is my pleasure to welcome to today's meeting Ms Bríd O'Brien from Pavee Point Travellers Centre, accompanied by Mr. David Joyce of the Irish Traveller Movement and Dr. Joshua Castellino and Mr. David Keane from the Irish Centre for Human Rights. You are all welcome to the meeting which I hope will be of use. Pavee Point and the Irish Centre for Human Rights have been invited to discuss their concerns about the apparent de-recognition of Travellers as an ethnic group, as stated in the Government's first national report to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, CERD. In the executive summary of the report it is stated: "It should be noted that Irish Travellers do not constitute a distinct group from the population as a whole in terms of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin".

Members of the committee have been circulated with a briefing from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on this issue. Today's presentation will probably take about 15 to 20 minutes. Following the presentation there will be an opportunity for questions and answers. I am sure many members will have points to make. I would point out to the delegation that while members of the committee are covered by privilege, witnesses appearing before it are not. I ask Ms O'Brien to make her presentation.

Ms Bríd O’Brien

Thank you chairman. The paper has just been circulated to the members of the committee. I will not go into everything in it, except to give members a flavour of what it contains. Pavee Point has argued since the mid-1980s that Travellers are a minority ethnic group, that the nature of the exclusion they face is racist and that the denial of human rights to them is at the core of the problem. It is ironic that at a time when racism is finally being acknowledged as an issue to be addressed within Irish society, Traveller organisations find themselves constantly having to remind others that racism is not a new issue and is at the foundation of the marginalisation they face.

What is an ethnic group and why is it not only helpful but essential to recognise Travellers as one? In 2000 a number of Travellers wanted to take a discrimination case in England under the Race Relations Act 1976 against a number of pubs that had refused them service. It was decided that before the case could proceed, it must be ascertained if Irish Travellers should be recognised as a minority ethnic group under the Act. The court took into consideration other cases where the issue of ethnicity had been discussed. In a 1983 case in particular, referred to as Mandla, the judge noted that the two essential characteristics that define ethnicity were: a long-shared history of which the group is conscious as distinguishing it from other groups and the memory of which it keeps alive; and a cultural tradition of its own including family and social customs and manners, often but not necessarily associated with religious observance.

In a New Zealand case cited during the English hearing it was noted that:

A group is identifiable in terms of its ethnic origins if it is a segment of the population distinguished from others by a sufficient combination of shared customs, beliefs, traditions and characteristics derived from a common or presumed common past, even if not drawn from what in biological terms is a common racial stock.

In the end the judgment in England decided that the two criteria, namely the long-shared history and the cultural tradition, were sufficiently satisfied and concluded:

It follows, therefore, that our conclusions, clearly, are that we are satisfied that the Mandla criteria are satisfied in this case, and therefore Irish Travellers may be properly identified as an ethnic minority, so we answer the preliminary question in the affirmative.

By that they meant that it had to be established before the case could proceed under the Race Relations Act 1976. The case did proceed. How relevant are these definitions in an Irish context? A definition of Traveller is included in the Equal Status Act 2000, based on that used in the Northern Ireland race relations order. It in turn evolved out of British case law. That definition states:

'Traveller community' means the community of people who are commonly called Travellers and who are identified (both by themselves and others) as people with a shared history, culture and tradition, including historically, a nomadic way of life on the island of Ireland.

Travellers are identified both by themselves and others as a separate group within Irish society. It is particularly interesting to note that the inclusion of Travellers within the Republic's Incitement to Hatred Act 1989 gave weight to the arguments for their inclusion in the Northern Ireland race relations order, which, in turn, influenced how they were defined in the equality legislation in the Republic. Ideally, as we argued at the time, the ground of race and the Traveller community issue should have been combined in what could have more properly been called the ground of racism - with Travellers named among the range of issues and communities to be covered.

On the official position, Ireland has never explicitly recognised Travellers as a minority ethnic group, but has, implicitly, in a variety of ways. Travellers and Traveller representatives have been included in committees such as the European Year Against Racism, in 1997, out of which grew the National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism. Similarly, Ireland has reported on the issues facing Travellers and the progress made in this regard, under a range of conventions including Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states:

In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or use their own language.

Likewise, in the Council of Europe's Framework Convention for the Protection of NationalMinorities, the bulk of the report concerned Travellers.

We feel all of these initiatives make the State's stance in the CERD report appear odd, particularly as the State argues that the definition of racial discrimination is not inclusive of Travellers. Racial discrimination is defined therein as meaning:

Any distinction, exclusion, restriction preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.

It is interesting that Travellers are included in the report's appendix. How they are defined there is much in keeping with the definition of ethnicity that has evolved out of British case law and is now included in Irish legislation. The appendix notes that Travellers "are an indigenous Irish community with a shared history of a nomadic way of life and cultural identity". That is a summary of the two essential characteristics established under the Mandla case in England in 1983.

We are concerned that the report states it does not feel CERD covers Travellers. We feel CERD is particularly relevant to Travellers and that it is unfortunate, to put it mildly, that they have not been included in the report.

On a cynical note, we feel one of the reasons Travellers were not included is that the report would not look as good as it currently does, if they had been. In particular, it would have had to be acknowledged that not every citizen may exercise his or her right to vote and that legislation has been introduced to systematically undermine one particular group's cultural identity; in particular the criminalisation of trespass has been implemented under that legislation. We feel it is extremely important that Travellers are acknowledged to be a minority ethnic group - and that their rights as Travellers are acknowledged and their cultural identity resourced. I will leave it at that.

Dr. Joshua Castellino

Respected Chairman, honourable Deputies and Senators, first I wish to thank the committee for the opportunity to address you on this issue. I hold a PhD in international law. I do not speak as a Traveller, or as an anthropologist or ethnicist. I speak as an international lawyer and from the particular perspective of human rights law which is the context in which this issue has now arisen, as was pointed out by the Chairman.

The convention for the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination was essentially signed and negotiated by states to try to work out and eliminate any kind of discrimination that exists against a host of groups. It seems to me that the prima facie reason for this convention is to seek to root out the discrimination that is rife against groups in different societies.

I have given the committee a host of information on this subject which includes a paper that I have written. I will not go through that with the members but if there are any questions the paper will provide easy answers. I have also provided the committee with information from ethnologists, cultural anthropolgists and sociologists in a bid to demonstrate that what is or is not an ethnic group is really a question of scientific examination and not one of ministerial discretion.

There are three arguments that I want to focus on and put to the members of the committee. The first argument concerns the notion of discretion. The second argument concerns the issue of minority rights' definitions and the notion of self-identification which is backed up by international and human rights law. The third argument is that other groups in similar circumstances to Travellers are recognised as ethnic groups, not only in the legislation of their own countries, and my colleague has mentioned Britain and New Zealand, but if one looks further afield to the Czech Republic and Romania, the Roma group have been recognised as an ethnic group.

Essentially, the first argument is the most crucial and in a sense the argument of whether or not Travellers are an ethnic group is immaterial. For the first argument, what is or is not an ethnic group is not to be decided by a government. It ought to be decided by people working in the area, by scientists, through objective and subjective criteria.

The members will find a paper in the handout they were given, by Doctor Robbie McVeigh, who has looked at this issue from a sociologist's point of view. He has examined a range of scientific literature on the subject and it is his considered view that Travellers do fit within the category of an ethnic group. He bases this not only on the criteria established by my colleague Ms O'Brien, when she talked about the Mandla v Dowell Lee case in Britain, which gave us two notions of what constitutes ethnicity, but also on the basis of an examination of literature in the field of sociology and anthropology. I will not go through those arguments because they are made quite convincingly in his paper, but what is or is not an ethnic group is not an area that we or I feel a government ought to decide on. The prime reason for this is the notion of minority rights. If a government has discretion to decide what is an ethnic group, to what extent will a government exercise this particular right. Surely there are features that need to be looked at and evidence that needs to be studied. For my first argument I am not even addressing whether or not Travellers are an ethnic group, merely the fact that I do not believe it is within the Government's discretion to come to this conclusion on what seem to be arbitrary grounds. I say what seem to be arbitrary grounds because I have not seen an explanation as to why Travellers are not an ethnic group.

If it seems that paragraph three of the executive summary is to hold then there has been a conscious decision to de-recognise Travellers as an ethnic group. To be able to do that there has to be a concerted scientific inquiry and, at the very least, there has to be justification as to what grounds in particular have led to this de-recognition. That is the first argument I want to leave with the members.

The second argument gets to the core of minority rights law, which is an area I specialise in. When one looks at minority rights law globally there is an acceptance in human rights law and constitutional law of the notion that democracy is not about numbers but also about values and that every person within a state should be guaranteed their human rights, and, of course, the Irish Constitution upholds this too. On the subject of Travellers, we are talking about very basic rights. If one looks at the statistics, and I do not have them to hand although I am sure many others do and can provide them, one can argue comprehensively that Travellers face discrimination in Ireland. Even the Government's report to the committee admits this and the Government has detailed distinct measures it has taken to try to eliminate the kind of discrimination that exists. The fact remains that Travellers are discriminated against.

In defining a minority there are various definitions that are used in international law - the members have a sheet that gives them four of these definitions. Essentially, to summarise the argument that takes place in international law, a minority group can be defined either by way of objective characteristics or subjective characteristics. The objective characteristics arise from study of the minority group working out whether they are sufficiently different from the majority. There is a set of criteria on that point: ethnicity, linguistics, religion, culture, very often considered central to the determination of minority identity, but very often that in itself is not considered enough.

There is an argument first made by the High Commissioner for National Minorities, which is an office that is part of the Organisation of Security and Co-operation in Europe, the OSCE. The High Commissioner for National Minorities of the OSCE once made a very famous statement. He said he knew a minority when he saw one. His argument was that it is not just about an objective test and whether a minority fits this. Everyone knows what a minority is, which was the thrust of his argument. To further substantiate his argument he suggested that if a group identifies itself as a particular kind of minority then that should be taken as given unless the opposite can be proved, which again links to the first point I was trying to make with regard to the fact that what is or is not an ethnic group is not a decision for a government to make. It is a decision that can be arrived at through scientific inquiry.

Self-identification seems quite a crucial aspect to how international human rights law treats the question of minority rights. We can say categorically that Travellers identify themselves as an ethnic group, thus, if the Government does not want to accept this self-identification as an ethnic group it is imperative that it studies the issue and comes up with reasons. In legal terms, the burden of proof would lie on the Government to prove why Travellers are not an ethnic group.

My final argument concerns the global situation vis-à-vis groups akin to the Travellers. There has been great concern in Europe and the human rights committees in Geneva, about the treatment of groups with nomadic heritage. I stress nomadic heritage rather than a nomadic way of life. Groups with a nomadic heritage are wider than groups who continue to live a nomadic way of life. In this sense it needs to be pointed out that this concern has particularly expressed itself in international human rights legal documents, many of which I have given to the members of the committee in the pack, with regard to the Roma. This committee for the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination passed a general recommendation specifically on the issue of Roma. When the committee in Geneva meets it will find it very difficult to understand in what way Travellers differ from Roma. If the Roma are categorically accepted as an ethnic group it will be very difficult for the committee to understand why the Irish Government has taken a specific stance of de-recognising Travellers under the same criteria. Of course, when one looks at this globally, the cases that Ms O’Brien mentioned in Britain seem to accept Travellers as an ethnic group. The Northern Ireland legislation seems to accept Travellers as an ethnic group. It seems incomprehensible as to why at this stage the Irish Government has taken the particular step of de-recognising Travellers as an ethnic group. I realise that one of the ways in which this question was framed today was the apparent de-recognition of Travellers as an ethnic group. It seems to me that paragraph three of the executive summary is quite clear in saying that Travellers do not belong to this type of category. The language used in paragraph three of the executive summary of the report of the Irish Government to the committee, makes it categorical that Travellers have not been recognised as an ethnic group.

To wrap up, I would like to leave the committee with three points, and I will be happy to discuss any of them. First, an ethnic group is not a matter to be decided by Government, but should be pursued by scientific inquiry. It seems that the scientific inquiry that has taken place comes down on balance to suggest that Travellers are an ethnic group. Second, self-identification is a crucial feature of what defines a minority group. Travellers quite clearly self identify as a minority ethnic group. If we do not want to accept this definition, we need to prove the contrary. Third, other groups in similar situations globally are recognised in their domestic legislation, their constitution and at human rights committee levels as ethnic groups. I find it very difficult to understand that Travellers, who it seems to me are in a similar position, do not have the right to call themselves an ethnic group.

Chairman

Thank you Dr. Castellino. I am sure some of my colleagues will have questions and Mr. Keane and Mr. Joyce will be welcome to respond also to questions.

Senator Mooney

I am from a small town in County Leitrim and grew up with families who lived on the side of the road. We called them Tinkers, but it was not a pejorative term. My mother still refers to the families, the Stokes andMcDonaghs, who were respected in the community, by the name of their trade. They went around selling tin cans, and various domestic implements, which people bought. The community responded when they could to alleviate the obvious suffering of young children living on the side of the road. My earliest memories, and I am sure many rural colleagues will testify, are of a framed tent beside a caravan with a light shining inside. The children went to the local school. While they were not in the community, they were of the community. My father incurred the wrath of a section of our community when he fought 25 years ago to establish the right of three of these families to local authority housing. It was to his eternal credit that he succeeded in getting those three houses. However, look at those three houses today - my father has long since passed on to his eternal reward, God rest him - but were he alive he would be as disappointed as the rest with the consequences. Two of the houses were burned, not by the immediate family but by the extended family who visited and were involved in fights. The third house belonged to the McDonaghs, and there were 21 children

In that family about 14 years ago the mother and father were killed tragically in an accident outside Carrick-on-Shannon leaving 21 orphans who were dispersed among the extended family, many living in Navan. The three houses reverted to the local authority because no other Traveller families wished to be housed there and they are now in private hands. I am giving that background as it leads to a question. Is Dr. Castellino familiar with the Cromwellian plantation and the adage, "To hell or to Connacht" part of our history that gave rise to the unique circumstances that resulted in a dispossessed people? My father often referred to them as the original Irish aristocrats. Is Dr. Castellino familiar with the unique Irish position of those families? I extend this question to the other representatives: how can you reconcile the existence, origins and historical rights of those families to live and be nourished in the island of Ireland with the widespread perception and reality of what now loosely are referred to as Travellers, but in fact are commercial operators living in state-of-the-art caravans? They park on the side of the road, selling items, in some instance of dubious provenance but are referred to also by your organisation, collectively as Travellers. My sympathy lies with theMcDonaghs, the Stokes, the Joyces and original Tinker families and it seems that in this era of political correctness they have been forgotten about and have been lumped in with the commercial New Age Travellers who in my opinion are doing enormous damage to the image of the original families in terms of getting the rights to which they are justifiably entitled. This is my difficulty when I read long legalistic treatises on the rights of Travellers. The Roma is a separate ethnic entity, but many on the roads of Ireland are commercial entrepreneurs posing as Travellers and doing enormous damage to the image of the genuine Travellers, to whom my mother still refers as "Tinkers".

Chairman

The Deputy has posed two specific questions but before I ask the delegation to respond I will call Deputy Davern.

Deputy Davern

Why is it of benefit to members of the Travellers to be seen as a distinct minority? Is there a danger that it might further discriminate against or isolate people who are moving into the community and through the education process becoming settled? My fear is that this would separate them further from the mainstream community.

Dr. Castellino

I will respond to the first question that was addressed directly to me about Travellers being a dispossessed group dating from Cromwellian times. I am sure that everybody in the room understands Irish history better than I do but I understand this is only one of the ways in which Travellers are identified and there could in fact be other ways. I suggest the evidence pointing to that argument is not as compelling as we would believe. There are other ways of defining how Travellers came about that are as compelling to an objective outsider, which is how I describe myself. In terms of Travellers being a dispossessed group from Cromwellian times, there is an issue as to the accuracy of that version of events. I am not suggesting the Senator is wrong, but perhaps alternative visions might also be worth bearing in mind.

To deal with this issue, even if they were a dispossessed people from Cromwellian times, I believe in a human rights and constitutional system that guarantees rights to all. As far as I am concerned, I would look at the indicators of a minority, see the differential in education rates, health expectations, life expectancy, access to service, representation and so on. Irrespective of their origins, I suggest that if we believe in human rights and if we believe, as the Irish Constitution holds, that everyone born on the island of Ireland has these rights, that even if we accept that they were dispossessed from Cromwellian times, they still have rights. This leads me on to the second question on the image of Travellers as wealthy people, as New Age Travellers

Senator Mooney

Some.

Dr. Castellino

I stress that I do not believe that New Age Travellers are an ethnic group. I am willing to state that as categorically as possible. There is British case law on this issue that can back it up. Essentially, we have to draw a distinction between those who travel and those who are Travellers. This is exactly the point as to why non-recognition of ethnicity so riles me. I think ethnicity is about who you are and not about what you do. This is also why when I spoke earlier I talked about people of nomadic heritage rather than those who were nomads. There is an important distinction. If one looks only at the heritage issue, one can quite categorically establish that the New Age Travellers about whom the member has spoken do not have nomadic heritage. They are nomads, but they do not have that heritage. I stress that to members backed up by compelling case law.

Senator Mooney

How does one make the distinction?

Dr. Castellino

One finds out by conducting investigations.

Senator Mooney

I would like to hear that from the other delegates.

Dr. Castellino

I will defer to my colleagues.

Mr. David Joyce

What Senator Mooney says regarding the origins of Travellers is always thrown into the debate on who they are. The argument about the recognition of Travellers as an ethnic group within Irish society is not about promoting their non-Irishness. Irish Travellers and Traveller organisations have never said that recognising Travellers as an ethnic minority within Irish society in any way means campaigning for some romanticised distinction between Travellers and other Irish people. Travellers are a distinct ethnic group within broader Irish society. The member spoke about the background of families from Leitrim. My grandmother is known as a Leitrim McDonagh, so I know about the families in that area.

Another commonly held perception is, particularly in the era about which the member has spoken, that there is mass poverty in the Traveller community. It should also be said, however, that they do not constitute a subculture of poverty. It is certainly an issue in the Traveller community. It was an issue in the 1960s, as it was in the 1940s and 1950s. It is still a problem for many Travellers. However, in the Traveller community there is diversity in wealth. There are social strata just as there are in the settled community. There are wealthy Travellers and extremely poor Travellers, with many in the middle. The organisations for which I work, and the Travellers whom I usually represent, are among those who are suffering from extreme poverty. That poverty has arisen, in many cases, from a lack of services and proper accommodation. They are the families with which my organisation mainly deals. Obviously, the families that the member describes - I realise he makes a distinction between New Age Travellers and what he calls——

Senator Mooney

Mr. Joyce understood what I meant.

Mr. Joyce

"Trailer Travellers" is the main term used by the media and, in many cases, by local authorities. They are representative of Traveller families that have been successful as nomads. That gives the lie to the notion that Travellers are on the side of the road travel only because they live in poverty. Those families have been successful living as nomads. That proves that their way of life is viable economically and culturally. They can survive.

To say that they are not Travellers is creating a lie. In the term used by Dr. Castellino, they have "Traveller heritage". In many cases their families are related to other Traveller families. They can be traced that way. They are not people who decided ten or 15 years ago to buy a nice fancy wagon, move onto the road and become traders. They have Traveller heritage, though in many cases they are extremely wealthy and successful. They can be traced to a few areas of the country.

Perhaps I might return to the original question about the origin and history of Travellers. I am not an historian and cannot prove the origins of Travellers. It is commonly accepted that their lifestyle came about through several major social upheavals in Irish history, including the Cromwellian evictions and the Famine of the 19th century. Those events may have contributed to the number of Travellers or nomads on the road at the time, but were not what created Travellers. Travellers are nomadic groups of people who have been identified and traced historically in Ireland for a much longer period. It is possible to prove that Travellers did not necessarily arise from the Famine or previous events. There are several Traveller communities in other parts of the world who identify themselves as Irish Travellers. In America in particular, there is a population of approximately 50,000 or 60,000 who describe themselves as Irish Travellers as distinct from Irish settled people. They went before the Famine.

Deputy Davern

They are in the south.

Mr. Joyce

Yes, and because of their nomadic way of life, they have been extremely viable and successful as a community.

Chairman

Perhaps I might intervene here. We will not be able to reach a conclusion on every question. Some other colleagues wish to speak. Deputy Davern's question has not been responded to.

Mr. Joyce

Deputy Davern asked about the benefit of being recognised as an ethnic group. It is not about creating a situation where Travellers are portrayed as separate from the rest of Irish society. The advantage is that Travellers are given some legal recognition and therefore legal equality under the international conventions that Ireland signs up to and of which it becomes part. In many cases, Ireland has been quite progressive in bringing about some of those treaties and conventions. I have no wish to knock the country, but it is strange that, as a State that has campaigned for them, it decides not to identify groups within its own community or society, thus excluding them from the benefits of the provisions for which it has campaigned.

Dr. Castellino

I will comment briefly on this important question. One must address the question of whether our giving out more tags causes more differentiation. That is a very real issue. However, the whole rationale for minority rights law is to accept that discrimination exists against groups and makes that a starting point for remedial measures seeking to break the cycle of discrimination that has hit some groups. The concern that the member raises is very real. On balance, I suggest that identifying an ethnic group will allow us to design special affirmative action measures. The Government is already doing that. It is already in place. The organisations that my colleagues represent are examples of that. Recognition or de-recognition will not necessarily cause any more distinctions. However, the question is fundamental. On balance, my answer is that I do not think that the recognition of Travellers as an ethnic group can do any harm. It can only help the acceptance of a community that is different from the mainstream community.

Chairman

My four colleagues all have questions to ask. Before I move on, I will point out that the Dáil is sitting. We must vacate this room soon because another committee is scheduled to meet here.

Deputy Sexton

I have another committee meeting to attend and, perhaps, I might make my point before I leave.

Chairman

I was just about to call DeputyHiggins followed by Deputy Sexton.

Deputy Sexton

If Deputy Higgins speaks for more than two minutes, I will be gone. I have to go to another meeting.

Chairman

I will defer to Deputy Sexton.

Deputy Sexton

I support the Government's decision. I am not a member of this committee. I happened to attend this meeting for other reasons. Before the representatives spoke, I quickly read through as much as I could of the submission. I do not agree with Dr. Castellino that the Government does not have a right to decide this issue. The Government is there to decide. However, it does that having taken into consideration the results of what I imagine to have been a very wide consultation process. I am a member of a local authority as well as of a governing party in the Dáil, but even if I were in opposition, I would still agree with the Government position.

I do a great deal of work with Travellers in a rural community similar to that of Senator Mooney. I will not go back over what he said, since I intrinsically agree with it. The Travellers themselves do not want to be considered ethnic. They want to ensure that all forms of discrimination against them are dealt with. At local level, that is very evident. I also suggest that talk of discrimination and exclusivity in the provision of services is not an accurate reflection of what is happening on the ground. I agree that, in a similar way to the non-Traveller population, there are strata in Traveller society of very wealthy, middle income and poor people.

To consider them an ethnic group or minority would be to roll back all the integration that has taken place regarding Travellers here. It would be a very regressive step. I was previously not really as familiar with the Government position as I am now. I believe that groups such as those represented here do very good work in ensuring that any discrimination that may still exist is brought to the fore and discussed. They also ensure that the legislative process is used to deal with that discrimination. However, it would not do the Traveller population an iota of good to be considered an ethnic minority. I fully support the Government. We will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

I am terribly sorry, but I must go for a vote elsewhere.

Chairman

Neither of my Dáil colleagues has had an opportunity to comment and a vote is due to take place in that House in the next two or three minutes.

Deputy M. Higgins

I profoundly disagree with the previous speaker. Her suggestion that she understands the Government's position is encouraging because few people do. The question this sub-committee has to decide is what are the net advantages and disadvantages of seeking consistency with international human rights law and practice. Would Travellers be worse off if the Government followed the international conventions on racial discrimination or human rights law consistent with the conclusion on this subject in Britain? What are the disadvantages of differing from how it is considered in Britain?

It is time to speak plainly. The argument I have just heard is for an uninformed, commonsense type of perspective against any belief in either the appropriateness of scientific investigation or tracing legal cases on this issue.

Chairman

The Deputy has a great deal to say on this issue.

Deputy M. Higgins

I have.

Chairman

Perhaps the two Deputies could go and vote and we will continue the debate.

Deputy M. Higgins

I do not mind missing the vote. This is an important issue.

Chairman

The Deputy can take that up with his party whip.

Deputy Carey

I will return. I do not share with Deputy Higgins the privilege of missing votes.

Deputy M. Higgins

Neither do I. If the Chairman wishes to suspend for a while——

Chairman

The Deputy may continue, if he wishes.

Deputy M. Higgins

Yes. However, I do not see why I should have to sacrifice my right to offer an opinion when exercising my right to vote.

Chairman

I was suggesting that the Deputy could vote. Senator White has issues to raise too and the meeting will continue. The Deputy is welcome to return to the meeting.

Deputy M. Higgins

That is excellent. The Chairman is kind to consider my position.

Senator Mooney

Is the Deputy leaving?

Chairman

He will return.

Senator White

I am not a member of this committee but I have agreed to participate in a joint committee being set up by the Oireachtas to deal with issues relating to Travellers. Deputy Finian McGrath is involved with it.

Mr. Joyce

Yes.

Senator White

I hope to do the best I can.

I am not sure if the ethnic issue will benefit Irish Travellers. I am inclined to share Senator Mooney's view. I have two very good friends who are Travellers and I cannot see them as not being of the same ethnic group as myself. They are like me but they are poor. The burning issue for Travellers is the way society treats them. That does not mean they are a different ethnic group. In my opinion, they are treated differently because they are very poor. I have said a number of times in the Seanad that if I had been born a Traveller, I would have been dead by ten years of age. My two friends are sisters, Nan and Alice Connors, and given what I know of their lives, I would not have survived their lifestyle. I do not care that they are born into it or are used to it; it is a most unpleasant way of life.

It is a cold life and difficult emotionally. There is no space for them in the caravan. One sister has a house but has huge problems in her family. She is striving to bring her children up to be normal Irish citizens and to send them to school. However, when they encounter the normal problems of children and teenagers, she cannot get the system to help her. The other lady, Alice, has two caravans to accommodate seven people. She had to leave her site in Sallynoggin and is now illegally on a site on the side of a road in County Wicklow. Alice would like to have a site in Wexford. She does not want to move into a house but on to a site. I approached people in the south-east and they told me she could be waiting ten years for a house.

I am not saying the representatives are incorrect to seek designation as an ethnic group but I agree with Senator Mooney's sentiments. My two friends are not different from me. What can we do? There was talk of locating a Traveller site near where I live. Are the proceedings of this meeting confidential?

Chairman

No. This is a public meeting.

Senator White

People approached me because they were annoyed that the Travellers were being put there. I do not mind if they are near me. Once I have my space and my house, I am happy. It does not bother me.

Chairman

I am sure the Senator has more to say. Perhaps we could ask the delegation to respond.

Senator White

I wish to finish. I am anxious to help as much as possible. There are difficult questions to answer. How can we convince people on this issue? Travellers need to be housed. The housing allocation for Travellers that was decided by the Government has not been provided. That is the biggest challenge facing us. How do we get them houses? How do we get the county managers to do it and the local communities to agree to accept them?

Chairman

That is a huge issue in my local authority area that has not been addressed to a successful degree. However, the point we are discussing today is the official Government position as to whether Travellers are an ethnic group. The Senator has made an interesting observation——

Senator White

I am not a member of this committee. I attended the meeting because of my interest in this issue. I am only a new Senator but I want to help the Travellers, if it is possible.

Chairman

We will seek a response from the delegates.

Senator Mooney

Dr. Castellino made a clear presentation on the international situation with regard to the ethnicity of various groups. Most people would consider the Roma a distinctive group but I have a difficulty, similar to that outlined by Deputy Sexton, with the delegates' objections to not including Irish Travellers in a similar group. It would be useful if the delegates would explain why they believe Irish Travellers should be treated, in an international context, in a similar way to Roma. This is the core of the argument. The Government's trenchant position is that it does not recognise Irish Travellers as an ethnic group on the basis of the international criteria outlined.

Ms O’Brien

When the Council of Europe is working on Roma issues, it also includes Traveller and gypsy issues. It now uses the terms interchangeably. Interestingly, in a current work on the issue of nomadism, the generic term used is the word "traveller". In that international work, Roma, Travellers and the communities known as gypsies are seen as similar, particularly with regard to underlying issues.

There are differences. Just as there are differences between Travellers in different countries, there are differences between gypsies in different countries. There are also differences between Roma, depending on the country they come from, in terms of language and how their culture is expressed. There are differences within a variety of groupings.

Discrimination is a huge issue facing Travellers in society. By acknowledging Travellers' differences in a positive way and by acknowledging their ethnicity, we can deal with issues such as discrimination and cultural differences in a positive and constructive manner. We can move away from the assumption that Traveller issues can only be dealt with if they are poor and deserve sympathy. There are differences of wealth among Travellers; some are very well off while others are poor. It is important to acknowledge and ensure such people's rights and culture. It is clear from our work on poverty that many people in the settled community, as well as many Travellers, are poor, so the issue of poverty needs to be addressed. To examine Traveller issues only in terms of poverty, however, is a big mistake. It is the stance that was taken 30 years ago and did not redress Traveller issues because we did not take cultural diversity into account. As a society, we are beginning to examine cultural diversity. While we have been willing to discuss such issues outside the island of Ireland, we have alluded to them here only in terms of the North. We have been slow and reluctant to examine cultural diversity within the Republic, as well as addressing them from a rights based perspective. Without doing so, we will not encompass all the issues that need to be addressed and will view Travellers only as a sub-culture of poverty. That is neither an accurate perception nor a useful starting point.

Dr. Castellino

I appreciate the fact that both the previous speakers are keen to discuss this issue and to become involved in it. Let me give an example. In the 1950s, the International Labour Organisation passed a famous convention that dealt with indigenous and tribal peoples. The thrust of that convention was that, essentially, indigenous and tribal peoples are backward and need to be assimilated. I am talking about indigenous and tribal peoples in North and South America. Since then, however, the United Nations has made a turnaround and the modern ILO Convention 169, which is a good document, takes completely the reverse approach. It recognises that indigenous and tribal peoples are different and have different needs. In the intervening period, significant developments have improved the situation of indigenous and tribal peoples. I am giving this example primarily not to suggest that Travellers are indigenous peoples, but to show that by changing their status and the way in which we regard a particular group, policies have been developed at regional and international level. Brazil is a good example of where this has occurred. Until the late 1980s, underBrazilian law, indigenous peoples were not considered competent to contract. They were treated as minors so they did not have the right to sign contracts. Ultimately, their change of status made a big difference to how Brazil treated its indigenous peoples.

How is this relevant to Ireland and how can the committee help? I am suggesting that by identifying Travellers as an ethnic group, we can identify the fact that there is a group that is different from us, and can then design policy that will try to address the needs of this group.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked what was the downside of recognising Travellers as an ethnic group but that question seemed to fail to raise any issues. As regards whether Roma or Travellers are different, I am not a sociologist and do not intend to suggest to the committee that they are part of the same group. However, received international wisdom on the issue, including literature and law, seems to indicate quite categorically that these are groups facing similar situations.

I accept that the poverty issue raised by members of the committee is an important one but, as my colleague said, it is not the only issue. If recognition of a particular group will alleviate its poverty and particular needs, I do not see the problem in recognising such ethnic groups.

I cannot see how a Government can decide upon these issues. I am uncomfortable with the fact that a Government has the mandate to decide who somebody is. I would object to a Government deciding under what heading to classify me because I know who I am and what group I come from. I would be uncomfortable with any Government anywhere in the world deciding which category and class to fit me in to. That is a dangerous precedent, particularly when basic human rights are at stake.

Senator Mooney

I have a great deal of sympathy with what has been said but, even in these politically correct times, Irish Travellers are different. They speak and dress differently. They have certain cultural differences, including speech patterns. I can recognise an Irish Traveller, whether they are in England or America, by their speech patterns.

Chairman

We will take that as an observation and I will not ask for a response. Senator White had one or two specific queries.

Senator White

There is no point in me sitting here if my questions are not going to beanswered. I feel a bit taken aback.

Chairman

Perhaps the delegation will address what Senator White said.

Mr. Joyce

I appreciate the interest the Senator has taken in the issue and the fact that she has volunteered to be part of the group. I have a slight concern about describing a group of people or a way of life, based on what one has seen, even though they may be living in poverty, which has created the situation. However, I find it difficult to accept the Senator's description of a way of life or an identity, based on the experience she has had with two individuals——

Senator White

I am going back over the experience of a lifetime.

Mr. Joyce

——and based on their very difficult circumstances relating to poverty, as a way of life that is hard and cruel and that she would not survive in for long. As a Traveller, I may walk into a settled person's home and see extreme poverty. I may say to myself that is a very hard way of living because they have little to eat and the house may be falling down around them. Based on that vision, I could decide that the settled way of life is extreme and something that I would not survive in. I am not knocking what has been said because I am very interested in it. However, it is wrong to use as an example of a hard way of life that one would not survive, the case of people suffering poverty because that can occur in both the settled or Traveller communities. That is one of the problems that Travellers experience because people see this as——

Senator White

They tell me that it is hard.

Mr. Joyce

I am sure, yes, but that could be related to some of the other matters that have been identified, including a lack of accommodation and services that would make life easier. Those are some of the reasons such people are in those conditions. That is what is causing many of the problems for those individuals and Travellers generally. The lack of services and provisions on unofficial sites should not be seen as reflecting a life that one could not survive, although it certainly would be difficult.

Senator White

They do not want to live like that. They want a place in which to live.

Mr. Joyce

Yes, exactly, but the point I am making is that they are now in conditions which most people would describe as poverty stricken. This is the point I made earlier about Travellers being seen as a sub-culture of poverty. It is wrong to apply individual circumstances to a culture or an identity. I have seen settled people living in poverty and I could apply the same criteria: that because life is hard for individual settled people, it must be hard for all settled people.

Senator White

How many Travellers do we have in Ireland? Does Mr. Joyce have a figure?

Mr. Joyce

The official statistics in the last census gave a total of 24,000. The local authority counts, which are done every year, suggest that there are more than 5,000 families.

Senator White

So there are 24,000 all over the Twenty-six Counties?

Mr. Joyce

Yes, they identified themselves as Travellers in the last census. I wish to respond to another question that arose concerning advantage. I work with a Traveller organisation and I deal with the social reality that Travellers are treated as being different, whether it is by settled people on the street, private individuals in pubs or clubs, public representatives in local council chambers around the country, or even within the confines of this particular establishment. Travellers are seen, treated and spoken of as being different. That is the social reality I am working with. When a public representative supports 70 residents who are objecting to Travellers being accommodated in a particular part of the country, and tells one Traveller family that Travellers are not really suited to that area and they should not be here, then Travellers are being treated differently. I am dealing with a different group of people. Whatever term we use to define them, Travellers are treated differently. To recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority would give some protection to them, at least in terms of international legal norms. By getting that protection, maybe national laws would fall into line and would give them the same protection.

Senator White

Does Mr. Joyce believe it would improve the status of Travellers in a local community if they were defined as an ethnic group?

Mr. Joyce

It is not about having ethnic status or about wearing a badge saying one is ethnic. It is about the legal and social protections one might get from being recognised as part of a cultural community that is as valid as any other cultural community in society.

Chairman

This is an interesting discussion but what we are trying to progress is the issue of the recognition or, as Mr. Joyce thought, the de-recognition of Travellers as an ethnic group. That is the substantive question before us.

Deputy M. Higgins

I find this method of meeting entirely unsatisfactory, that is, meeting at 10 a.m. at short notice and with the Order of Business at 10.30 a.m. I have arranged with the Whip of the Labour Party to leave me free for the second vote so that I can say a few words on this issue.

I listened carefully to what was said but it is important we address the issue we were asked to address. The question the subcommittee should ask is, what is won or lost by having consistency in regard to international legal definition? The next question is a simple one and has nothing to do with political correctness or otherwise. What are the consequences of recognised difference in the law, including the Housing Act 1988, the Incitement to Hatred Act, the Employment Equality Act and the Equal Status Act? The difference is recognised legally.

Last Tuesday night I raised the issue of accommodation for Travellers in Ennis, County Clare, in the Dáil. The architecture for housing for Travellers is decided separately and differently to the architecture for housing decided by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Clare County Council. A committee is supposed to consult on what is needed. However, one runs into a practical issue, that is, those who are not involved in the housing need suggest Travellers need to be protected by high and wide walls. That has not been asked for by the families involved and, therefore, it has nothing to do with the Housing Act. It has, however, a great deal to do with residents. Can one treat people differently and, as it would appear, with less recourse by way of appeal, design, involvement and so forth while at the same time say a difference does not exist? It exists in a practical recognition in domestic law, in the court decisions of the neighbouring island and in the majority interpretation of that to which we have signed in the European convention and the UN statutes.

One now comes to the practical points that I would like to outline. There should be scholarly investigation into the issue of ethnicity. The issue of culture is capable of being decided. I remember Sharon Gmelch's work and that done by Patricia O'Donovan. There is a raft of literature on this area. UNESCO's document, Our Creative Diversity, refers to documents which recognise ethnicity and difference and under which Travellers would qualify. The report of the Council of Europe, In from the Margins, gives them this recognition. What basis does the Government have to remove itself from all of this? What does it lose by refusing to be consistent? That is the issue the subcommittee must decide and on which it must make a recommendation.

Does such recognition of ethnicity suppress any other right? Senator White correctly asked about the State's duty to a child in appalling circumstances. The child has rights in a personal sense and rights which might arise in terms of the way he or she is perceived or delivered through the group sense or the group identity the child shares. Does one category of rights defeat the other? The answer is unequivocally that it does not. The child does not lose rights nor does the woman under any of the equality laws in regard to the usual protections. Even under our legislation and our constitutional position on abortion, one cannot argue that recognition of ethnicity defeats any of these personal rights. The problem seems to be the nature of the group.

Dealing specifically with the nature of the group about which we are talking, and at the risk of being too provocative about it, the settled community is not a composed group that has not changed over the years. People are living in houses in the same status as landlords less than 100 years ago. The ancestors of the people living in these new chateaux lived in the corners of fields in the 1840s. Their ancestors, if they went near any of these estates, were the wonderful stonemasons who built the pillars on the way in. Their ancestors would have had the smell of soup from the big houses. The settled population is not a homogeneous entity.

I refer to the contested history. I am not as convinced as others, but that is where scholarship comes in. I was a sociologist for 25 years but I was never entirely convinced by the Cromwellian argument. I would like to see it tested in the same way as in Britain. The driving of people from the enclosures in Britain and the change in the vagrancy Acts to deal with the poor in London are important in understanding the gypsy phenomenon in England. I suggest the changed circumstance of unskilled labours in Ireland pre-Famine, post-Famine and particularly in the aftermath of the great emigration to the United States, is a huge factor in understanding the Traveller community. It is a hypothesis and I have not reached a conclusion on that issue.

I do not see why there would be resistance to a category of ethnicity, except in one circumstance. There is a kind of ideological assumption that there is a settled version of life to which everyone should subscribe. I am not denying that there are people on the side of the road who would be better off with water and sewerage facilities and participating in education. However, when a group shares characteristics that have been sustained over time, I cannot see how recognition of its present reality and of its perceived version of itself, its history and the scholarship that needs to be there should, in any way, be an obstacle to anything. What would happen in many cases, as Mr. Joyce made the important point, is that if there was consistency in the interpretation of the international statutes to which Ireland has signed up, it would help one in the framing of law at home. In the framing of law, there is recognition of the possibility of exclusion and an abuse but not of the existence of the group involved.

The question for a councillor - I was a councillor for 18 years - is that when a Traveller family goes into the City Hall in Galway, are they going in to talk about their housing needs in the same circumstance as any one of the other 2,300 people on the housing list. The answer is "no". They will be treated differently. Their constitutional rights will not be suggested. They will be asked where they want to be housed. Many may decide their form of housing will be in the conventional local authority housing. There are two other options - the halting sites or the temporary transient halting site that looks like Mogadishu on a bad day, in the case of Galway. These are the realities. Why are people holding out for this notion that one needs to suppress something to manage to deliver facilities, services and entitlement? It does not bother me what people call themselves. If one says that one favours diversity, one should respect it. If it is recognised in a country's laws, that country should follow through and be consistent.

There is an ignorant, thick populism which suggests that we must eliminate this kind of thing in order to march gaily forward. I agree entirely with what David Joyce said. The poverty in some of the houses I visited was multi-generational in nature, with one hopeless generation following another. People are heroic to remain alive in such conditions. I do not judge that. It is not judgmentalism that is emerging. People are saying that we should stop the nonsense of focusing on difference, separateness, culture, ethnicity and history in order that we can get on with the business of being the same as everyone else.

Chairman

Shilling upon shilling.

Deputy M. Higgins

That is correct. People are told to join the housing list, etc., and meanwhile the property-owing classes continue to define how we should live. I object to the gross, distasteful way that many affluent people in our society make my life uncomfortable. However, I recognise their existence and I am willing to put up with them.

Chairman

Before Senator Mooney contributes I must inform members that there are only approximately eight or nine minutes left for our proceedings because another committee has the room booked for 11.30 a.m.

The question posed to us today is whether we should try to progress this issue of attempting to obtain recognition as an ethnic group.

Senator Mooney

That is what I want to address. It is important to place on record the Government's position on this matter. Deputy Michael D. Higgins, perhaps by implication, turned his argument on its head when he referred to the experience of a Traveller family going to Galway town hall and not being treated the same. Legally, however, that family would be treated the same and its constitutional rights would not in any way be abrogated.

Surely this issue involves changing hearts and minds. We can have all the laws and international statutes we wish, but it is difficult to deal with a basic inherent prejudice. As children, we used to be asked to send a few pennies to the black babies in Africa. Those babies are now adults and we do not particularly want them here. These people were fine when they were in their own countries.

In the briefing it is stated that Irish Travellers are defined as an ethnic group in England and Northern Ireland and that, therefore, they should be defined as such a group here. The Governments position is that the situation in England is not comparable because it came about as a result of a discrimination case taken against pubs which had refused Travellers service. This parallel does not apply because of the Equal Status Act. In Northern Ireland, Travellers are defined as an ethnic minority as part of the race relations order to give them protection equivalent to the protection afforded to them here by Ireland's equality legislation. The position in Scotland is closer to that in Ireland because the Scottish Executive recognises gypsies and Travellers in that jurisdiction as a distinct group which has specific requirements and which may need protection from discrimination and abuse. The task force report on the Traveller community in 1995, while aware of British case law, did not define Travellers as an ethnic minority in Ireland. It instead recommended that equality legislation should define Travellers in a manner that acknowledges their distinct cultural identity. This was done through the Equal Status Act 2000.

If there is a legal framework that protects our guests against discriminatory actions on the part of the citizens of a community in which they live, why do they think it important that we should adhere to the various international statutes? There is a uniqueness about Travellers living here because of their particular history. This is not an issue of race, nor does it call for the use of any of the other definitions that have been employed in an international context.

Dr. Castellino

I was interested to hear Deputy Michael D. Higgins's views on this matter and I fully endorse them. It is interesting that we think that discrimination can be unique and that discrimination in one place can be different from that which exists in others, when the effects of discrimination, namely, exclusion, restriction and preference based on race, colour, descent, ethnicity or language - the very words used in Article 1.1 of the international covenant - are essentially the same. It is also foolhardy to think that the situation we face here regarding discrimination is in any way unique or different from the situation faced by other groups elsewhere. Regardless of the question of whether Travellers constitute an ethnic group, members will agree that discrimination exists. Whether Aboriginal groups in Australia and indigenous groups in North and South America are ethnic groups is immaterial because they face similar kinds of discrimination. That, in a sense, is the root of this argument.

If one is interested in starting the battle for hearts and minds, one can do so by de-recognising a group and informing its members who say, "This is who we are", that "No, that is not who you are". It is interesting that people's hearts and minds can be won from a process that essentially starts with de-recognition and casting a lie on what a particular group calls itself. Irrespective of legal, moral or ethical arguments, in terms of a strategy, it is odd that we would start the process of winning the battle for hearts and minds with a statement that essentially de-recognises Travellers as an ethnic group.

If paragraph three had not been contained in the third report, the issue of whether Travellers constitute an ethnic group would not have arisen. The fact that it is specifically stated that they do not constitute an ethnic group raises these issues. The battle for hearts and minds will not be won from that essentially negative position. Deputy Michael D. Higgins was categorical on that point.

In terms of law, I wish I could rest content knowing that equal status legislation and constitutional equality guarantee equality. Every constitution in the world guarantees equality to everyone. There is no constitution which states that there will be groups that will be privileged and there will be others that will be less privileged. Every constitutional framework has as its basis the principles of equality and non-discrimination. These are fundamental to a legal system. If we could simply look at every constitution in the world, we could perhaps rest content and state that we are covered, because equality provisions already exist, and that we do not need to do anything else. However, that would fail to take account of what we heard today, namely, that, irrespective of what we believe about what the Constitution may provide or whatever the law might state, discrimination is real and affects the victims, first and foremost, and that if we are going to seek to reverse discrimination, the State has an obligation to take measures. Received wisdom suggests that the first step in this process is to recognise what is the problem.

If we had not recognised the disabled as a specific group, we would not have been able to take specific measures to address their needs. We could again have rested content and made the same argument I made earlier and stated that their rights are guaranteed as Irish citizens. However, we did not do so; we recognised the disabled as a specific group and we then designed legislation to cater for them. I suggest that this is what must happen in respect of Travellers and ethnicity.

Deputy Carey

I apologise for the fact that I have been absent for most of the debate. This is an area in respect of which I have a great degree of interest.

Chairman

Before the Deputy proceeds I wish to point out that we are attempting to discuss the question of whether there should be ethnic recognition.

Deputy Carey

I agree that there should be specific recognition of Travellers as an ethnic minority. I do a great deal of work with Travellers, those at Pavee Point and others. Dublin North-West, the constituency I represent, has a large population of Travellers. There is a debate within the Traveller community itself regarding what constitutes a Traveller. That is an area I would have liked to explore if we had more time to do so. However, I will pursue it elsewhere. There is need for protection and recognition, but there is also a need for a debate within the Traveller community as to how it sees itself. Does it see itself as, for example, a homogenous group? What David Joyce said about the hierarchies of poverty to relative wealth is also an issue, as is that of housing and moving from halting sites to sheltered housing to integrated housing. There are also issues involving access to education, employment, etc. I am sorry I was unable to participate for an extended period.

Chairman

I am sorry the sub-committee will not reach a conclusion on this business but it is aware of Pavee Point's concerns and aspirations in terms of securing ethnic recognition. The best way for the sub-committee to proceed is to transmit the group's strongly expressed views and the resultant observations of the sub-committee to the Department. It may be necessary to invite the Minister and his officials to attend a future meeting to delve into the issue.

Mr. Joyce was not in a position to answer all the questions raised by my colleagues and the group will not have been entirely satisfied with all our comments. However, this is an ongoing debate and we should concentrate on the question of ethnic recognition. There is a difference between Pavee Point's aspiration and the Government's position. We will transmit the group's fears and concerns to the Department and seek the attendance of the Minister at a future meeting to discuss the issue further.

Senator Mooney

I do not cast aspersionson Pavee Point and its distinguished membersbut will the sub-committee consider invitinga member of the Traveller community who isexperiencing the life we are discussing toappear?

Mr. Joyce

I am a member of the Traveller community. I am related to the LeitrimMcDonaghs, one of whom is my grandmother.

Chairman

That is as far as we can go. The sub-committee will keep in touch with Pavee Point on the matter. I thank the representatives for their presentation and responses to the many questions raised.

The sub-committee adjourned at 11.35 a.m.sine die.