Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While I welcome any amendment that introduces specific domestic violence leave, the manner in which it is happening does a deep disservice to those it will impact. The first sight any Opposition Deputy had of the Government's proposal was on Thursday. Therefore, it was almost impossible to suggest all of the amendments that might be needed at this Stage. In essence, the Minister's proposed actions have not undergone any scrutiny. If it was not for the work of Deputy O'Reilly on this issue, there may not have been an alternative to the Government's proposals.

Given the short turnaround time and lack of context, I have to admit that I have not been able to examine the full implications of the Minister's suggestions on the issues. The most glaring issue is that the leave will consist of one or two days up to a maximum of five in a year. Witnesses and experts at the joint committee have been unambiguous about how there must be ten days of leave per annum. Ms Marie Mulholland of the West Cork Women Against Domestic Violence Project outlined the importance of these days, especially for women in rural settings who face additional barriers in accessing services all the way to the courts. Women's Aid stated that leave should be a maximum of ten days per rolling 12-month period and, in certain cases, ten days may not be enough and additional unpaid leave may be necessary. Dr. Nata Duvvury from the University of Galway informed us that ten days has become the international norm as a minimum, recognising that, for some women, it might be more. She stated: "A period of ten days' leave is now becoming the universal standard."

Domestic violence and gender-based violence is endemic and the scale is terrifying. We also know that the minimum leave proposed should be ten days. As such, it is inexcusable that the Government is suggesting five. While the Minister's rhetoric on addressing gender-based violence is strong, giving victims and survivors only half of the international norm is not acceptable.