Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (Kerry South, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important Bill which I broadly welcome and will not oppose on this Stage. Of all the Bills that have come and will come before us during this session, such as the safety, health and welfare at work Bill, the health and social care professionals Bill and the adoptive leave (amendment Bill) Bill, the Maternity Protection Bill is one of the most important. Anything which affords more protection to our pregnant workers, is to be welcomed. However, it is outrageous that in 2004 we are tightening up legislation which should have been in place for many years as in other European countries. We are lagging far behind our European counterparts in dealing with such issues. More women are in the workforce and, in recent years, women have been targeted to enter the workplaces. While there is no doubt that some opportunities have opened up for women, many issues and obstacles remain in their path.

The statistics bear out just how many women have joined our workforce between 1976 and 1996. By 2001, women in the workforce stood at 50% while the number of women with partners and children working increased from 44% to 50% in recent years. Numerous obstacles prevent women from participating fully in the workplace. The Maternity Protection Bill could go some way to ensuring this would no longer be the case. The Bill needs to address how to make it easier for women to make the transition from maternity leave back into the workplace, if that is what they wish. This Bill achieves that end.

One major obstacle which stands in the way of women returning to the workplace, is cost and the lack of affordable child care. Ironically, this is not addressed in a Bill which deals with maternity rights, but we must consider this. Previous speakers have addressed the issue. While the contents of this Bill are welcome, we must deal with this issue if we are to be serious about helping women to enter the workplace.

The Labour Party believes it is the responsibility of the State to provide child care and not that of the private sector which dominates the market. Every year, parents wait with bated breath for some help from the Government in the budget, only to find themselves repeatedly excluded. Parents are forced to make their own child care arrangements, as public child care facilities are not available in many cases. One of the biggest barriers in accessing child care is cost. Many people, particularly lone parents, earn less than €19,000 per annum. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions has estimated that nearly one third of that income is spent on child care before rent or mortgage payments or any other bills.

Those earning between €19,000 and €24,000 spend an estimated 21% of their income on child care. The ICTU also found that 72% of women who work part time cited child care costs as the reason they work part time. More than 33% of women in the workforce work part time, predominately in the low-paid sectors of employment. How can a mother, who is on the minimum wage, afford to go to work unless we address child care issues?

While being a Deputy entails long, hard work, it has its benefits. However, there is no great encouragement to Deputies considering starting or adding to their families. There is no maternity leave afforded to Deputies, there is no crèche and there are no specific facilities where a mother can breast-feed her child. Politics is not a family-friendly business. It is shameful that in 2004, despite proposals for a crèche in Leinster House circulating for many years, there is still no sign of one. Women representatives with children need the full support of a partner who is willing to spend more time at home with the children.

This is made even more difficult for those who live outside Dublin, as I know. While I do not have a family, if I did, I would probably not be a Deputy. I left home last Tuesday morning at 5.30 a.m. and I will get home tonight at about 11 o'clock. The health board would probably take my children into care if I had any, as I would hardly get to see them. If we had a crèche here, such a facility would be used not only by the women Members but the fathers, including the Minister of State who also lives far away. I was reared in politics at home. We never saw our father and our mother did all the work. We were lucky our mother was able to stay at home and look after us. We were effectively a one-parent family as our father was out and about. That was back in the 1950s and 1960s. However, it is much the same in 2004.

If our predecessors in this House had been able to bear children, we would have state-of-the-art facilities. However, unfortunately the majority of those in the House were male. If we want to encourage more women into politics, these issues will need to be addressed. Otherwise, we are only paying lip service to women. Many women are involved in politics at local and branch level. However, those women are discouraged from national politics due to the lack of child care facilities and by being away from home for so long. Even local authorities should hold their meetings at night to facilitate women representatives to attend when the fathers return home.

If we are serious about Dáil reform, which is topical and on all our minds, we must be serious about families and we must address these issues. We should not be afraid of the media and what it might say about us. It will be talking about us anyway so we might as well go ahead and do what is best to encourage the best people to stand for election. Most of the benefits gained for women in recent years came, not from Government initiatives, but from the demands of European directives.

The Maternity Protection Bill 2003 will provide more protection against discrimination for pregnant employees, which is to be welcomed. There is still a cloud of fear hanging over many women when it comes to telling their employers they are pregnant. It is horrifying that this fear is not without grounding. I know of women who are afraid to tell their employers they are pregnant. It is criminal that in this day and age, some women are still being discriminated against by their employers because they are pregnant, despite legislation being in place to protect them. Implementation of this legislation needs to be addressed. There are still employers who believe they can ignore the law and I hope this Bill will send a clear message to them that they flout the law at their peril.

Laura Fearn was awarded €15,000 by the Equality Tribunal in 2003 after she was found to have been demoted and sidelined for no other reason than she was pregnant. During 2002, the Labour Court reached a decision on 13 dismissal cases. Five of these involved complainants who alleged they were dismissed because they were pregnant. All five cases were upheld with awards of between €6,000 and €15,000, and these are only the cases which were brought forward. There are many women who, out of fear, will not take their case to the Labour Court and this is totally unacceptable.

I hope that these types of high-profile cases will act as a deterrent to this type of discrimination but unfortunately it continues. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions has recommended a fast-track procedure to deal with complaints relating to maternity issues. As we know, such complaints need to be addressed urgently. We also need to extend this anti-discrimination cover to those women who are not represented by a union and who have been employed in an environment where they have felt unable to take action against their dismissal. Unfortunately such cases still occur. While those in a union have that backing, unfortunately there is no union in many workplaces and those women feel very isolated and need our support.

Women need to be informed of their rights in these cases. Employers have attempted to dismiss a woman who is pregnant under the guise of poor work and this Bill should protect against this practice. However, if women do not know about this protection, it is redundant. We need a broad information campaign informing women of their rights. The Minister of State should have leaflets printed and placed in health centres, maternity hospitals, doctors' surgeries and other such places. Many women, particularly those who are not union members, are not aware of their rights. The Minister should consider a public information campaign.

Section 4 of the Bill acknowledges that many women wish to work as close to their due date as possible in order to have as much of their maternity leave spent at home after the child is born. This will allow new mothers to take 16 weeks of their paid maternity leave after the birth of their child, if they so wish. This is very welcome. I could never understand why the legislation insisted that women take a specific leave before the baby was born. A mother or her doctor would never jeopardise her baby. I am glad it is now up to the woman to make her own intelligent choice and I commend the Minister for implementing this change. Pregnant women are not ill and are able to work up until the day their babies are born.

For many mothers who work outside the home, they need this time after the birth because many crèches will not take children below a certain age. This should address the problem of women having to take annual leave after their maternity leave.

During 2002, almost 30,000 women made applications for maternity leave, the vast majority of whom wanted to take their leave after their babies were born.

Section 9 deals with the so-called provision for breastfeeding mothers, allowing them to take breaks for breastfeeding for up to six months after the birth, without defining how long these breastfeeding breaks will last. These provisions were originally intended to last for four months but the Government has since realised this would be redundant as many women are on maternity leave in the four months after their child's birth. This also raises the question of mothers who bottle-feed their babies. Are they not entitled to the same benefits of as those who breastfeed? Some mothers may not be in a position to breastfeed and they should not be discriminated against.

If the measure is to encourage women to breastfeed that is fine, but now that we are debating the long-awaited Bill, can we not deal properly with this matter? The Bill merely pays lip service to breastfeeding. The World Health Organisation recommends breastfeeding until a child is at least two years old. The six-month timeframe set out in this section falls far short of this recommendation. Who is benefiting? Is it new mothers, or is it the Government, patting itself on the back for coming up with an innovative proposal?

The health and safety provisions contained in the Bill must also be welcomed. This should go some way towards affording pregnant workers the safety in work they deserve. Workplaces can be dangerous for pregnant and breastfeeding women. Employers are obliged by law to carry out a risk assessment of hazards in the workplace. Who supervises this? Is it enforced? Perhaps the Minister of State could look into this. Have any employers been taken to task for allowing pregnant and breastfeeding mothers to work in unsafe conditions? What proposals has the Department made for ensuring there are personnel to investigate these very important health and safety issues?

The Bill allows for paid maternity leave to be extended from 14 weeks to 18 weeks, which is one of the minimum amounts of time given to mothers within the EU. Paid maternity leave should be seen by employers as a way of increasing the number of valued employees who return to work after having their babies. It also reduces a company's training and recruitment costs and improves morale within a company. Ireland is still lagging behind its European partners on this issue. Women in Sweden are afforded 96 weeks of maternity leave with one year of maternity leave on 80 per cent pay. The Labour Party believes that maternity and parental leave should be supplemented by a further 20 weeks of paid leave, to be taken by either the father or the mother.

A survey was recently carried out of 400 parents in France, Italy, Denmark and Ireland. Of the Irish parents surveyed, 90% of men and 86% of women had never taken parental leave. For many, the fact that it is unpaid is the biggest disadvantage. The study, which was co-ordinated by Trinity College, also found that 12% of women always use their annual leave when their childminding arrangements fall through, a further 12% often use this option and an additional 30% sometimes use their annual leave. This represents 54% of parents in our workplaces. The State needs to get its act together in the area of child care provision because there is a crisis. I was pleased to hear that the Minister intended to increase the time allowed for adoptive leave from two to 16 weeks in the adoptive leave (amendment) Bill. Many people are now adopting children from abroad and it is wonderful for parents and children to have this time together.

If we are being serious about families we need a whole package of reforms across different Departments. There are important issues facing families and parents, new and old. It was different in my day. Now, listening to the news and reading the newspapers every day one frequently hears about children being attacked and raped. Society has broken down for children. We need a wide range of measures within every Department to cope with this. I hope other Departments will follow the Minister's lead in addressing this issue.

Section 8, which deals with ante-natal classes, is to be welcomed, but it does not go far enough. Both parents should be able to attend, particularly for the last three classes. I appeal to the Minister of State to consider this. Fathers are now very involved in the births of their children and it is important that both parents attend these classes. I welcome the Bill, although it needs to go further in some sections. I will be tabling amendments on Committee Stage to this effect.

See this speech in context