Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank everybody for attending. This has been an excellent meeting. We made the point last week that the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny was demonstrated very well by those who appeared before the committee. That also applies to today's meeting, which has been incredibly helpful. In that sense, I do not have a many questions because the witnesses made a very strong case and, thankfully, most of them took a view similar to my own, namely, that the provision should be replaced and we should tease out how we should do that.

The first thing that strikes me is what people seem to be saying, that this can be - and already has been for me - a very important values clarification process for Irish society at a juncture when we are maybe evaluating a new Ireland or new family life. In that sense, this could be empowering. The Government has put forward a two-tier strategy. It recognises that we need to move from the past but says we will take the provision out and then discuss the future. The witnesses are saying that even by doing that, we would downgrade the role of carers and unpaid work and place a poor value on it. People may want to discuss that two-stage process.

This ties in with a point Deputy Jim O'Callaghan made when he spoke about a symbolic provision rather than a meaningful one, although he probably did not mean it in that way. I hear from the witnesses that symbolism is meaningful. While it is not enough, it is not meaningless either. Perhaps the witnesses will address that. If we all agree that something should be inserted in the Constitution, would the witnesses facilitate a mechanism such as the Citizens' Assembly if it was established quickly with a view to doing what has been proposed, or is it too early for that?

A referendum next summer to tie in with the local and European elections was discussed. Do the witnesses think there is enough time to provide for that?

I have a question for the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, regarding the 2005 report.

Its witnesses said it is the only evaluation that has been done of unpaid work, which is incredible.

The witnesses made their point so powerfully that they almost robbed us of decent questions so I will make a comment instead. We are only valuing paid economic activity and unpaid activity is not given its place, even though it has huge value. Is there any more research on the subject? Mr. Dunne said we were unique in not recognising the carer role. Can he explain what he means by this? The Minister would put it differently. He would say it would be unique to recognise it, which is opposite. All the witnesses highlighted what we need as a society and what our values should be as regards putting care work on a parallel footing to other activity. I am confident that, based on what they have told us, we will meet the six-month deadline next year but I am curious about what others think.