I move:
That Seanad Éireann takes note of the Report of the Working Party on Women's Affairs and Family Law Reform entitled `Irish Women — Agenda for Practical Action'.
When this House commenced the debate last week on the report of the Joint Committee on Marriage Breakdown I indicated on that occasion that I thought the subject was of such importance that I should make a speech of some substance in introducing the debate rather than merely move formally the initiative of the motion. I find myself in the same position today. I think the report of the working party which we have before us is an item of great importance for us and accordingly I propose, not to discuss this report in detail — which would take an undue amount of time — but to make a few remarks in regard to it.
I think it is appropriate that the Seanad should debate this report and debate it fairly thoroughly both because of the importance of the topic itself and also because of the nature of this particular report, indeed it is described as an "agenda for practical action". As I indicated on the Order of Business, it is appropriate that we should discuss this report now. The report of the working party was tabled in February of this year and accordingly there has been sufficient time to consider it and I think enough time has elapsed so that we can take up its consideration. We should not leave that consideration too late and I think it is appropriate that this debate at least should be commenced before the Nairobi conference in connection with the closing year of the UN Decade for Women.
It is appropriate that I should initiate this debate by a short speech not only because of the importance of the topic as I indicated earlier, but also because of my own position as a representative of this House on the Joint Committee of Women's Rights and, indeed, as Leader of the House, possibly as an incentive to others to join in this debate.
But how do we take up the discussion on a document like this? Here we have a report of 392 pages. Even in the summary of the report we have 92 main findings. It presents all of us with a great difficulty as to what is the appropriate way to respond to such a report. I think we really cannot do the job in a single debate; we would be either too superficial in trying to cover everything or else we would be too patchy in focusing on a few topics out of the many that are dealt with.
I feel the best thing that this House can do in response to the report of this working party is that we should have a general debate today, possibly next week and maybe even on a third sitting day, in which we could give our initial reactions to this report. It would be necessary to follow this up in the next session of the Seanad by future special debates. Whether these would be in the form of debates on progress reports by the Minister in regard to the subject matter covered by the report of the working group, or whether we should pick out single issues for debates, I do not know. I do not think we should attempt to have an exhaustive debate at this time because I do not think we would be successful in handling that. What I want to do, in a short speech on opening the debate, is to give my initial reaction to the report, to make a few general points. Then what I propose to do is to take each chapter and make a single point in regard to the topic of that particular chapter.
The first point I would like to make is in regard to the context of this working report. It mentions in paragraph 3 of the preface that the members of the working party took as their starting point the 1972 report of the Commission on the Status of Women. I think that particular report must be for us even more than a starting point. It was a starting point chronologically and it also gave impetus to all that was achieved between its publication in 1972 and the work over a decade later of this particular working group. I think the Report of the Committee on the Status of Women is more than that and it is not just a document in the past that we can now leave aside. Even though when we look at that particular report and we find that many of the things which loomed large in it have been the subject of progress, nevertheless, I think it is salutary always for us to look back to the 1972 Report and to look back to it for two reasons. One is that even in the areas in which there has been greatest progress we can still see in that very long-sighted report of 1972 the areas in which progress has not been made. The second reason is that when we look back to the 1972 report written by a commission under Thekla Beere, we find there a statement of the principles underlying all that must be done that are still valid today.
I have made it a resolution for myself, whether it is in a debate of this type, whether it is in the work of the Joint Committee on Women's Rights, constantly to refer back to this report. I always find this enlightening and useful.
It is a pity that this report is now somewhat of a rarity. Every time I go to look for my copy, a slight shudder goes through me and I wonder if anyone has stolen it since the last time I referred back to it. I do not know what would be the cost of reprinting that report. It is not an historical document: it is not something in the past. I have found that in dealing with the topics that are coming up and that we hope will be coming up with greater frequency in the next year or two, it is useful to look back at it. I commend to the Minister the thought that the cause with which she has been charged by the Government might well be served, not perhaps by a reprinting of the report, but rather large sections of it could be published in some fashion, perhaps with a supplementary note on certain chapters of the degree of progress that is being made. It is a charter indicating where we should be going and it is an excellent charter. The work was so well done that we do not have to look to EC or UN bodies for our basic approach. Of course we must also take them as part of the context of our consideration.
The working party have also indicated in their preface that they have taken as part of the context of their work certain other documents: the reports of the Law Reform Commission, those that have been published — and the work is still going on — the work of the Joint Committee on Marriage Breakdown, which has now reported, and some of the legislation that has already been outlined such as the Illegitimacy Bill. In paragraphs 7 and 8 the working group have also indicated that they viewed their work against the background of the national plan, that is, in the context of what is realisable during the next few years.
This latter point brings me on to the consideration of the subject matter of chapter 1, namely, the changing role of women. Anyone with an interest in this topic knows that in this area minor reform is not enough. To solve this problem satisfactorily we require major reform bordering on revolution. As in all other areas of political action, we have to take into account both our ideal and reality. We must continue to aim at the longterm but in aiming at the long term we should not neglect what is immediately possible. Sometimes there is a tendency to do this.
In the chapter on the changing role of women we have an extremely useful compendium of facts. I wonder when we tackle the problem of the changing role of women whether facts are the most important element or whether it is not much more important when handling this problem to pay more attention to perceptions, to the subjective rather than to objective facts. Whether we look at what has happened in the last decade or so, or whether we look forward to the next decade, the motive forces and the means through which change has been accomplished and the means through which change will be accomplished, are to my mind strongly bound up with questions of perceptions. In the past, we have seen a tremendous change because of the revolution of perception by women — perception by women of themselves and of the roles of other women situated somewhat differently from themselves. This has not been accompanied, to anything like the same extent, by a change in perception by men of the role of women. Until that problem is solved we will have recurring difficulties in regard to reform. This was discussed in chapter 2 of the 1972 report. The heading of that chapter is: "The underlying factors which limit women's participation even in the absence of formal discrimination". It is these secondary effects, the things that lie below the surface, that will probably give the greatest difficulty in the implementation of the practical steps that are proposed in this plan for practical action.
If we cannot solve this problem — and this is a long term problem — we cannot achieve reform. In this House in December of last year we debated the first report of the Joint Committee on Women's Rights, which was a report in relation to education. The Joint Committee were very much concerned to point out in that report the tremendously important role of education. To change what happens in formal education is to put things right for the next generation. While this is something that must be carried on, there must equally be an effort to change the perceptions of those who have already left the formal educational system.
As I said before, while we should not hesitate to proceed with minor reforms, we must be absolutely clear that we need major reforms bordering on a revolution. In this regard the term "revolution" is an interesting one. It is a word with a double meaning — it means a turn of the wheel that brings one back to the same point, and it also means a major and abrupt change.
I would like to talk for a few minutes about looking at what has to be done in regard to the rights of women as being the turning of the wheel. Have we forgotten completely what the status of women was in Gaelic Ireland? I am afraid that we have. We said that we wanted, through our independence, to make a State here which would, in the world context restore the historic State which had been submerged. What was the outcome? We said we must restore our culture and we must restore our language. Why did we not think that one of the best things we could have done would be to restore the ancient ideas in regard to women? When we look back we find that while early Irish society, like most Indo-European social systems, was patriarchal women very rapidly acquired an independent legal right. There was a revolution in the sense of an abrupt change in regard to women's rights in Ireland about 700 AD. That change gave women substantial rights, some of which have not been achieved by married women in Ireland in the 20th century. The concept in the Brehon Laws of "a woman of joint dominion", or "a woman of equal lordship" in the case where both man and wife brought property into the marriage settlement, is something we have not completely achieved today.
Then we got, in Gaelic Ireland, in the 9th and 10th centuries, a further revolution when these rights were extended to other women and in effect extended to the majority of married women who could trade and enter into contracts on their own account. Indeed, in many instances they could do so to an extent with the property which the husband had brought into the marriage. All this was swept away by the imposition of English law and by the establishment of feudalism in Ireland. When we come forward with ideas for giving women equal status and equal rights in all things in our Irish society we are in fact seeking to restore something which was very much part of the conquered Celtic social system. There is a famous book by Michael Davitt entitled The Fall of Feudalism in Ireland. I understand it is the only book specifically relating to Irish affairs which was, and still is, in Lenin's private library in Moscow. The fall of feudalism in Ireland will not be final until the revolution in regard to women's rights has been firmly established.
I want to comment briefly on the subject matter of each chapter. Chapter 2 deals with the question of employment. Here we are given the figures which indicate, over the past two decades, the very great increase in the number of married women in employment and also are a reflection of the fact that there has been virtually no increase in the employment of single women. There are factors here such as the earlier age of marriage over those 20 years and the inclusion of many more women in the higher education system, which are reflections of progress. We must still realise that there is a great deal more to be done in this regard.
We can contrast chapter 2 of the report that is before us with the position revealed by chapter 4 of the 1972 Report of the Commission on the Status of Women. We can see a large measure of progress. Can we compliment ourselves on this? Partly yes, but partly no. In a great deal of what has been done here, I would suggest that we have acted under EC impetus. Sometimes we have not acted very promptly. We must be prepared to act on our own account. We should not wait until we are the last of the EC countries to implement directives in regard to the position of women. What should we do? Here I find a difficulty. In the summary of the main findings of this report there are 19 main findings in regard to employment. Reading down through them I find it difficult to evaluate them. There is a need to focus here on a few of these findings and to determine them as being the next necessary things to be done. I would invite Senators whose special interest is in the area of employment and who may be spokesmen or spokeswomen for their groups in regard to this point, to suggest points of selection and points of emphasis here.
The next chapter of the report deals with the question of education. It has already been indicated that this was the subject of a report by the Joint Committee on Women's Rights in October 1984. This was debated by Seanad Éireann in December 1984 when the Seanad devoted a whole day to debating that report. The views of the Seanad, and my views on these topics, are on record. The three specific points mentioned in the present report were all dealt with in that report and debated.
Chapter 4 of this report deals with the question of health. Here it is rather interesting to note that this was not a topic in the 1972 report. At that time that problem had not advanced to this state. I welcome the emphasis on health in this report. I mentioned a few minutes ago that we have tended to lag behind the EEC in regard to the conditions of work for women and in regard to social welfare, etc. Here, I suggest is an area in which we could take a lead. I suggest that the EEC has been somewhat lacking in this regard. The question of looking at the particular concern of the health of women has not been a major concern of the EEC. We could, on the basis of what is said in chapter 4 of the report of the working group, take an initiative here. We could isolate the key questions and bring this topic into the EEC area and bring this up in the European Parliament and take a real initiative.
There is a discussion here on paragraphs 4.64 to 4.69 about the problem of alcoholism and about the differences between alcoholism in men and women. I would like to raise a point that is not directly covered and might well have been taken into consideration by the working party. I am not concerned so much here with the physiological nature of alcoholism but of the stresses that produce either alcoholism or, without producing what strictly speaking can be termed alcoholism, produce an overindulgence in drink. I refer here to what might be called the "housewife syndrome" of the pressures on the woman in the home that can lead not only to the abuse of alcohol but also to the abuse of tranquillizers and in certain cases can lead to psychosomatic illnesses. This can be a very real problem. I would like to see it set alongside the other problems in regard to health which are dealt with in chapter 4. I would like to see an Irish initiative not only in what we do at home but also in the European arena.
Chapter 5 of the report deals with the question of child care facilities. There is an excellent discussion in the report. As the number of married women working increases there is a great need for child care facilities. At this increase goes on we will find ourselves with a shortage of helping grandmothers, apart from the other shortages of facilities in support of the working wife. There is need for a very definite policy. I was glad to see that the working party were ready to re-discuss this question in practical terms. There is a good deal of expense involved in making child care facilities available. There is probably a tendency that when one starts talking about schools one feels there should be provision in schools for married women who are teachers and also in each individual working place. If we go that way, we will run up against impossible financial barriers for quite a long time to come. This problem has to be looked at in its entirety. This seems to be the view taken by the working party. In times of cash shortage it becomes more important than ever that we get as good value as we possibly can for the money we spend.
We in this House still await the Children Bill. I hope the Minister can give us the hope that we will have the completion of all the legislation in regard to children within the next few months.
Chapter 6 deals with the question of social welfare. Next week this House will be debating a social welfare Bill which is very relevant in this regard. I hope also that the House will have the opportunity to debate the second report of the Joint Committee on Women's Rights which was issued in May 1985 and which dealt with the problem of discrimination against women in the social welfare area. Also we would hope that before long we would have the report of the Commission on Social Welfare. The fact that we look forward to discussing the elimination of the remaining forms of discrimination should not blind us to the fact that there has been a good deal of progress in this area and we should be grateful for that. There are in the report of the working party, five major proposals. The fact that I do not intend to discuss them is more a reflection of the fact that there will be other opportunities to discuss them rather than that I do not think that they are important.
Chapter 7 deals with women in rural Ireland and chapter 8 deals with the general position of the woman in the home. There are two points I would like to make here, which are relevant to both these chapters. In chapter 7 reference is made to the fact that farm wives appear in our census returns as being engaged in home duties. Their very real economic contribution is not reflected in our statistical system, for example in our estimates of gross national product. This is a distortion of what the real situation is in regard to all women who work in the home. It is an even worse distortion in the case of many women in rural Ireland.
The second point I would like to make on these two chapters is that I would like to support what is said in regard to the necessity for the training of women, whether they are returning to the work place after a period of caring for a family or whether they have to be trained as part of the transformation of our society in a new industrial age. The recommendations given here deserve our support.
Chapter 9 deals with the problems of single parents. There are 15 recommendations listed among the main recommendations given in the summary at the beginning of the report. This is a reflection of the many things that still require to be done in this particular area. Here again there is the importance of the question of accurate census returns. I mentioned this last week in opening the debate on the report of the Joint Committee on Marriage Breakdown. There has been confusion, and sometimes ridiculous pussy-footing in regard to making correct census returns on marital status. In regard to the question of single parent families, let us see these problems for what they are. Let us have definitions that correspond to the social reality of Ireland in 1985. Let us then see what the position is. If we do not like it, let us go about changing it, no matter what way we want to change it. But to have debates about social matters and to decide whether things should be done or not be done, or to decide whether things should be corrected in one direction or in the opposite direction, on the basis of fuzzy statistics is an extremely silly way of going about solving the problem.
Of the recommendations that are made in this regard, I certainly feel that one of the more urgent is the question of the problems that arise in regard to the maintenance of wives and children. Even the very proportion of a social welfare allowance that is allocated to this, as the report points out, can have serious consequences for a wife when she is not being maintained by her husband. There is the recurring problem of the maintenance of deserted wives where there are still many unsatisfactory points.
Chapter 10 of the report deals with the question of family law reform. Here all we can do is urge that there should be as rapid progress as possible. I would like — and I hope that all Members of the Seanad will join me — to express criticism of the ridiculous delay in regard to the UN Convention on Discrimination against Women, 1979. Six years is long enough even for the Department of Justice to be able to deal with this matter. In regard to this, and other conventions with which we agree in principle, the Department of Justice have done our name harm internationally by the inordinate delay in dealing with these various conventions. I hope that the UN Decade on Women is not allowed to pass away before this Convention on Discrimination against Women, 1979 is fully adhered to by this country.
Chapter 11 of the report deals with other issues, one of which is the membership of State boards. It is dealt with in paragraphs 11.1 to 11.6. This is a very real problem, but it is part of a broader problem. It is part of the problem of a very distinct under-representation of women at the upper levels of higher education and research and the under-representation of women in various posts involving decision making, including political leadership in the broad sense. It is not enough to allow the gradual development over time to cure it. We must take positive action. If in any of these areas we look at the position of Ireland in relation to other countries, we find that we are about mid-way in the European league. While one is glad to find that Ireland is not at the bottom of the league, there is no reason why we should not be further up. If we look at these various tables showing the number of women who are in the critical positions at relatively high levels, we consistently find Denmark outstripping the rest and very often on top. I would suggest to the Minister that it might be well worth while examining in particular how Denmark got to that position, a country which 50 years age was economically and socially in very much the same position as Ireland but which has now outstripped us in regard to its standard of living, so that it has advanced economically but equally has advanced socially. Here we have a country, starting with very much the same position as ourselves that gives the lie to those who say that we cannot make economic and social advances at the same time. I would commend to the Minister that it would be well worth making a special examination of why it is that in Denmark, above other European countries, we find a higher participation of women in Government, in state boards, in higher education, in research, in decision making areas.
In conclusion, I would like to express the hope that there should be a thorough debate on this particular report. It should be a wide debate in the sense that we should not leave any topic out of account. It would also be useful if the spokesperson of the different groups were to take the chapters in this report that relate to their specialities and were able to deal with these in some depth. I would also invite my colleagues in the Seanad to put forward ideas in regard to the question of future debates, as I mentioned in the beginning, whether we should say there should be progress reports by the Minister and a debate monitoring the progress every six months — let us not be too ambitious, let us say six months — or whether we should take the opportunity to link the material here with other material coming before us. But, most of all, I would look forward most to future debates on these topics, which would be debates necessary in this House because legislation in regard to these matters was flowing freely.