Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

——in the backrooms of the Civil Service in terms of what compromises he is prepared to make and how these will relate to the forthcoming budgetary considerations. Given that it was decided in 2004 that this legislation would be enacted by last summer, the Minister of State should have taken a leaf from the book of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform because he is a great man for introducing legislation. He leaves Bills hanging around so that they come to resemble snowballs in terms of amassing amendments and, by the time they are enacted, have become entirely different legislation. Such an approach is sometimes good and, more often, bad because the Minister is inclined to include the kitchen sink.

There is an opportunity to consider a modest gesture to parents by bringing an amendment that would provide for at least a modicum of paid parental leave. It is not too late to do so because amendments may be considered even on Report Stage. The difficulty for the Opposition in tabling amendments in this respect is that any amendment we put forward will be ruled out of order on financial grounds. Therefore, such an amendment will have to come from the Government. The best we can do is to record on Second Stage the unanimity among the serried ranks of the Opposition with regard to parental leave measures. We would not set a precedent by introducing such measures because many other countries have already legislated for similar provisions. The best practice in other European countries should be made available to our citizens. Now is the time to make such a provision because it is impossible for any Minister to claim at present that we cannot afford to do so.

Much of our current legislative discussions concern the workplace, such as our debate on the Employment Permits Bill. The economy is booming and, because there are insufficient Irish workers to satisfy the demand for labour, we need migrant workers from the EU and elsewhere. In trying to attract highly skilled individuals by means of the permits legislation, a somewhat undesirable two-tier system is being developed. Highly skilled workers who earn more than €60,000 will be fast-tracked to residency and citizenship entitlements after two years, if we can believe the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform — who is encroaching on this territory — claims that the relevant measures will be introduced shortly. Less skilled immigrants who expect to have earnings of around €30,000 will have fewer entitlements. There will also be an unskilled pool of labour. Much work remains to bring order to this issue.

With regard to the issue of parental leave, we are a booming economy with wealth levels second only to Luxembourg and that should be reflected in the services we provide to our citizens.

Too often the workplace is dealt with in terms of units of production and of labour. We are attracting women back into the workplace to fill the labour gap, not as part of a career or as something that is beneficial in terms of the whole person. We have attracted large numbers of women back into the work force — although often they do not have very much choice because of the cost of mortgages and crèche facilities — but we are now penalising women in every sense and the family is being heavily penalised by the manner in which we have done so.

It is time to look at the broader issue of the quality of society rather than just the quantity of work and number of workers. Every day in the Dáil the Taoiseach asserts that there are now 2 million workers here, which is 500,000 more than we had in the mid-1990s. That is true but we also have greater gross national product and gross domestic product and are in a better position to provide the services that should be provided.

Paid parental leave would be a very valuable support for those on low incomes. Such people cannot afford to take unpaid parental leave. That is the problem with this Bill. It is a bit like the Ritz, in that it is open to everybody but if one is not able to afford it, then one will not get past the door or, if one gets past the door, one will not get to sample its delights. The benefits of unpaid parental leave are more accessible to those who are well-off, particularly if there is one strong earner in the household. This, in turn, raises another issue, in that it will almost always be the female who will have to leave the work force because, in general terms, female remuneration lags considerably behind male remuneration.

It will be more difficult for people with low skills from disadvantaged communities to avail of the statutory entitlement. It will also be more difficult for women if the entitlement, as proposed, remains because they are likely to be the lower earner in the household. It will always be the lower earner who is expected to take the unpaid parental leave so that sufficient money will still come in to pay the exorbitant costs of running a household.

What of lone parents? How can a lone parent take unpaid parental leave? Let us address that issue. If one is a lone parent, raising one or more children, what does one do? Does one take unpaid parental leave? The only thing one can do is give up one's job. If one takes unpaid parental leave, one has no income. Even if a concession was made in that regard, there are instances in which certain categories of workers will obtain the entitlement to unpaid leave but will not be able to avail of it under any circumstances. Consideration must be given to this issue. Unpaid parental leave is a right that the rich, or the reasonably well-off, will be able to avail of but which will be beyond the reach of the poor.

I referred earlier to the fact that it will be women rather than men who will be forced, through economic circumstances, to avail of parental leave. This compounds the gender discrimination that already exists in our society. Unpaid parental leave will always result in such discrimination. More fathers would be able to take parental leave if it was available without loss of income to the household.

The concept of parental leave is fabulous but the implementation leaves so much to be desired that it will not work in practice in any fair manner. Some people will be quite happy with the entitlement. Those who have formidable incomes will have no problem. They will be delighted to be able to take leave and return to the workplace when it suits them, with no diminution of rights, and their households will do fine because their income is good and steady. However, the vast majority of people are being given a right without the resources to implement that right. Not only are we not giving them the resources to implement it, we are providing the right in a way that will constitute discrimination. It will discriminate against women in the workplace, lone parents and certain categories of workers who will never be able to avail of that right.

While there are financial considerations and implications for paid parental leave, there are few for unpaid parental leave, certainly with regard to the Exchequer, whatever about individual employers who may have to find substitute staff and so forth. Given that fact, would it not be possible to increase the length of time during which unpaid parental leave is available? The Bill provides for 14 weeks parental leave in separate blocks of a minimum of six weeks. Is there any reason unpaid parental leave should not extend to six or 12 months?

We have only just begun to tease out the concept of parental leave and the problems that arise. Parental leave must become a major part of the provision of child care. It is an important part of child care in that it allows for parental contact with children at an early stage of their development, permitting the bonding process to take place. Should it not be a more structured and larger part of the overall child care package?

Parental leave should be given a structure and framework. It does not have a real framework at present and to have one, it would have to tie in with the provision of continuous child care that would cover the critical years from age one to four. Such child care would have different dimensions but parental leave should be tailored in this legislation in a way that will allow it to dovetail into other provisions, namely maternity leave, parental leave, paid parental leave, career breaks, unpaid parental leave and various provisions regarding crèches and pre-school facilities. I would like to see this issue dealt with in that context, as a package that would benefit parents in the home and in the workplace.

See this speech in context