Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am glad we have had these hearings. There was a bit of a discussion some time ago to the effect that we should just proceed with the constitutional proposal as it was, as formulated by the Government. I think this hearing and the previous hearing have been valuable because there is an interesting discussion to be had on this as to whether there should be a simple deletion or whether there should be a replacement. I am in a similar position to Deputy O'Callaghan except on the opposite side of the equation in that I hold an open mind but that I am generally more inclined to replacing the current constitutional provision with something that is gender-neutral and provides a meaningful recognition of the role of carers. Having said that, I retain an open mind on the matter. These hearings are also useful in concentrating our minds, as legislators, on some of the legislative issues that need to be addressed in supporting stay-at-home parents, maternity and paternity benefit, shared parental benefit and leave and all kinds of other issues which need to be addressed. The Constitution is our basic law and there is a statement of principles there too, but obviously the legislation needs to be there too. At present we are dealing with a proposal regarding a constitutional question. I will direct my questions primarily to Mrs. Justice McGuinness but perhaps also to some of the other speakers as we go along. As with Deputy O'Callaghan, if any of the speakers or organisations want to offer a comment on any of the questions, that would be welcome too.

I will correct Mrs. Justice McGuinness if I may. I do not think anyone thinks she has come across in any way as nasty or anything like that. I think everyone very much understands that this is a legal discussion so I think everyone appreciates the perspective from which she is coming.

Regarding Article 41.2, if the wording were to be along the lines of that proposed by the constitutional review group, I think, which was the point put forward by the family carers, if Mrs. Justice McGuinness were a lawyer at this point in time and if someone came to her asking whether he or she could take a case on the basis of that wording, does she think there would be any obvious justiciable angle for anyone who wished to pursue such a case?