Barry Andrews (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)

Members should bear in mind that if Dr. Gilligan and Dr. Zappone lose their case, legislation will be required. However, if they win, it will be needed all the more.

I do not believe the failure to consider cohabitees is of any relevance either. If one takes the United Kingdom legislation as an example, it has no relevance to cohabitees. One reason with which I agree is that cohabitees who wish to avail of the bundle of rights to which I referred may so do by way of marriage, whereas same-sex couples have no such option.

I consider myself to be liberal and want to live in a society in which people are trusted to behave and act in their own best interest. It is important that no message is sent from this Parliament that suggests to young men and women that there is either intolerance at worst, or indifference. Too many young men and women in their teens who struggle to come to terms with homosexuality in a sometimes intolerant society see only one tragic way out of their dilemma. Consequently, great caution must be exercised by all speakers on this issue to avoid a single breath of a word that might be interpreted as intolerance or indifference.

I will make some international comparisons. As Belgium, Sweden, Finland and others in the European Union have already granted these rights to same-sex unions, Ireland is a little behind in this respect. The Dutch have gone even further on the issue of marriage. Seven Canadian jurisdictions have recognised same sex unions, which has given rise to the Gilligan case. In addition, one or two states in America have also done so. I understand the New York state pension scheme has also indicated it will recognise such unions.

These are all important developments and Members should recognise that the Government has passed significant legislation that puts down a marker of its intentions. The Minister referred to them in last night's debate in which he was heckled unfairly. He did not have an opportunity to put his case as fairly as he was entitled. Although he had important things to say, he was barracked. It diminishes a proper debate on an issue of such importance to individuals when it turns into a pantomime.

See this speech in context