Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Apologies have been received from Deputies Ó Cathasaigh and Phelan. Members participating remotely may do so only from within the Leinster House complex. I remind all those in attendance to make sure their mobile phones are switched off or in silent mode.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or entity outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

The purpose of this meeting is to consider the Social Welfare (Liable Relatives and Child Maintenance) Bill 2023. I welcome the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, and her officials here this morning.

I will bring some matters to the attention of members. Any member acting in substitution for a member of the committee should formally notify the clerk to the committee if she or he has not already done so. Divisions will take place as they arise. Members must attend in person in the committee meeting room for divisions although they may attend the meeting generally remotely from within the Leinster House precincts. Members attending this meeting in accordance with Standing Order 106(3) should be aware that, pursuant to that Standing Order, they may move amendments but cannot participate in voting on those amendments.

I invite the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, to make her opening statement. I had indicated to the Minister's office on Monday that at the outset of this meeting I would seek clarification from her on the Supreme Court judgment on the case of the widower, Johnny O'Meara, which has relevance to the Bill before us today. In a nutshell, the Supreme Court effectively stated that the State can promote family based on marriage without the need to discriminate against non-marital families.

This judgment gives rise to a number of significant questions. The most urgent one is, what now is the position of those in similar circumstances who applied previously to the Department for the widow's pension and were refused or those who did not apply due to the legislation that was in place? It is imperative that they are not excluded and that the maximum six-month arrears cap that is currently in place would not apply in these circumstances, as the legislative provisions that were in place have now been found to be unconstitutional. While this judgment only relates to the surviving parent of children, what is the position regarding the surviving cohabitant partner with no children? Does family, in terms of widows, now include situations where there is a fostering situation or an informal care arrangement for a child? Furthermore, could this lead to a situation where more than one widow's pension would be paid out after one individual passes away? Finally, what is the impact of this judgment on pension entitlements of cohabiting couples versus married couples? This has many implications but these are some of the pertinent questions that are being asked. There are thousands of people across this country who are impacted or potentially could be impacted by this judgment and any clarity the Minister could give the committee on this matter here this morning would be helpful.