John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)

Many women experienced this. It was clearly discriminatory.

It is interesting that, when the labour market requires women, the laws can be changed rapidly. During the Second World War, manpower was limited because the men were on the front and women were encouraged back into the labour market. Similarly, in the Celtic tiger era, this country required more women at work so the Government introduced individualisation. That, however, discriminated against women who wished to remain at home. They believed they had not only a right but a duty to do so and that it was best for their children.

In the Celtic tiger era there are many pressures, primarily economic, on the family unit. The mortgage is one such pressure. At a residents' association meeting I attended, one of the people told me: "I live in the third mortgage on the right". That is how he sees his life. It is dominated by the mortgage. Two people are required to pay the mortgage. Often, therefore, both parents have to commute long distances and endure long hours at work. They rarely get to see their children and have to pay inordinately high child care costs. This is the reality for many parents at present. Recently, I had the opportunity of visiting a crèche in the Minister of State's constituency. I was brought there by one of the Green Party's candidates, Patricia Forde Brennan, who is doing good work in Limerick. I listened to the parents. It was a fantastic facility but the parents' lives were ruled by the marketplace.

This legislation has not been drafted with parents in mind. The employers have dictated it, which is unacceptable to the Green Party. Compare our legislation with legislation in Scandinavian countries where there is an entirely different approach. It is child and parent focused. This legislation, however, is primarily about the marketplace. This is reflected in the process of childbirth. Our maternity hospitals are becoming increasingly centralised. In 1970, there were more than 100 maternity units. That is now down to 22 and it is proposed to reduce the number to 12. There is a trend towards further centralisation.

In the past, many women gave birth at home. I believe there is a strong move against home births, which was recently reflected in the Supreme Court decision. I have always been a proponent of home birth. I believe breastfeeding is encouraged by home birth and by the one-to-one care that the midwife offers. Much good work has been done in this area by Marie O'Connor who has shown that there is scaremongering about home births through misleading information. Home births are safe. There should be a change in the 1970 Act to facilitate mothers who wish to give birth at home. They should be given the money to do so. That is real maternity protection. We need to find out what mothers want.

Deputy Gay Mitchell quoted Deputy John Bruton, whose comments reflect core Green Party philosophy. This is that the contribution made by carers and mothers is never factored into the economic statistics. Somebody who produces nerve gas in a factory is a productive member of society but somebody who looks after children does not receive payment and is not seen as productive. The Green Party views that as false accounting.

We should listen to what women are saying. If one compares what is offered in this Bill with what is available in other countries, one can see it is inadequate. Even the UK permits 24 weeks' maternity leave. Fertility rates are plummeting because working mothers believe that giving birth is no longer an option. This is increasingly the case in Ireland. More than 15% of Equality Authority work relates to maternity leave issues. There are particular problems in small to medium sized enterprises where the constraints on women pursuing their maternity rights are acute. This especially applies to the hotel and catering industries.

I wish to refer to breastfeeding. The four month limit is inadequate. The Minister appeared to be nodding in agreement when the previous speaker mentioned this. There appears to be a lack of joined up thinking in Government on this issue. The Department of Health and Children recommends breast-feeding up to six months. We need to sort out the inherent contradictions on this issue. The La Leche League's recommendation for a longer period for breast-feeding has not been taken into account.

It is too loose an arrangement to give employers discretion on breast-feeding breaks given the record of small and medium-sized enterprises in accommodating expectant mothers. There is no guideline on a qualifying time for mothers to take breaks at work. In Sweden, for example, mothers get a 20-minute lactation break every two hours and they are allowed to accumulate time. We have a long way to go.

The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children invited the La Leche League to address it. It pointed out the problems that occur in regard to breast-feeding on which we have a very poor record. This is possibly the best start one can give a child in terms of building up his or her immune system. We need to encourage breast-feeding through legislation, but, unfortunately, the Bill falls short of what is required.

Women have referred to the concept of a mother tax; this is a tax on lifestyle, career and income. One in three women in their 20s fear the impact on their career of having a child, while 42% worry about the effect on their finances if they become mothers before they are 30. Almost one in four people in their late 30s do not have children. One in five people in their 30s without children who want them in future are unsure as to when they will have them. These are the realities of living in modern Ireland.

According to the National Family and Parenting Institute, 57% of mothers with children under the age of five now work, compared with 43% in 1991. More mothers complain of being pushed towards work. Only 1% of women want to work full time when their children are very small. What are we doing about the other 99%? Are we really encouraging them into motherhood or are we encouraging them into the workplace? The answer to that is quite clear. It is regrettable that we are not accommodating those women; that we have moved so far in the ideological direction of the Government. Two thirds of women would prefer to work part time or not at all at this stage of their children's lives. We are falling short in our response to the scale of the problem.

Deputy Moynihan-Cronin referred to some of the issues arising from the Bill. I am interested to hear how the Minister of State will respond to the issues that have been raised by previous speakers. We are all agreed that to avoid potentially significant health and safety risks, the pre-confinement period of maternity leave should remain at four weeks and the total period of leave should increase to 20 weeks to allow a greater period of leave after the birth to compensate. This is dealt with in section 3 of the Bill.

Section 6 deals with the termination of additional unpaid leave. Again, an employee must have the employer's consent to exercise this right. This could lead to an employee who does not have a contractual right to sick pay in the event of certified medical illness, being prevented by an employer from claiming that entitlement simply by the employer refusing termination of the leave. This area needs to be examined and I hope this will happen on Committee Stage.

An employee should be allowed to challenge before a rights commissioner an employer's decision to refuse to allow the termination of additional maternity leave. The employer concerned should be obliged to show that there is an operational justification for such a refusal.

Section 7 deals with postponement of leave where a baby is hospitalised. The Minister of State dealt with some of these issues in the Seanad. I suggest that the potential right to postpone maternity leave should apply at any point during maternity leave. In addition, a refusal to allow the postponement of such leave by an employer should be open to challenge before a rights commissioner. The employer concerned should be obliged to show that there is a justifiable cause for such a refusal.

Deputy Moynihan-Cronin referred to ante-natal classes. This is very important and again, we contrast badly in this regard, particularly with Sweden. These classes should be available to pregnant employees without any loss of pay and we must make sure this is the case.

The legislation needs to go much further. I received many submissions in recent days and while I will not go into them in detail, there is a great deal of disappointment among women that the Bill has not addressed some of the more fundamental questions. It is an improvement but we are only doing so in baby steps, if the Minister will pardon the pun. We are not making the advances which are required to make Ireland a truly equal society and to give women the opportunity, if they wish, to stay at home for longer periods of time to look after their children.

See this speech in context