Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)

Women's Aid, the National Domestic Violence Intervention Agency and the Law Reform Commission have all called for legislative reform to address the restrictions caused by the residency requirements of the Domestic Violence Act 1996. The motion, which we urge all parties to support, calls on the Government to produce and schedule time for legislation to make the necessary reforms without delay.

In its report on the rights and duties of cohabitants published last December, the Law Reform Commission argued that the eligibility criteria applicable to co-habiting but non-married persons restrict the grounds on which such persons can seek protection in the form of domestic violence orders. It noted: "In an analysis of the response of the legal system to victims of domestic violence, it was estimated in the Dublin Metropolitan District Court that approximately 10 cases a week were ruled out at preliminary interview stage on grounds of eligibility." This highlights the urgent need for reform. The impact of the residency requirement on individual victims should not be underestimated. An unmarried woman who is living with an abusive partner cannot be granted a barring order until they have been living together for at least six months. In the case of joint tenants of a local authority house, a complicated procedure must be undertaken to grant tenancy solely to the victim, particularly if the abusive partner is not prepared to surrender tenancy voluntarily.

Further reform is also necessary to ensure that protective orders are available to victims who no longer live with their abusive ex-partner. As noted by the Law Reform Commission report, a British study of 200 women who had experienced domestic violence found that after the relationship had ended 76% were subjected to emotional and verbal abuse, 41% were subjected to serious threats to either themselves or their children, 23% were subjected to physical violence and 6% were subjected to sexual violence. Likewise a study by Women's Aid here found that violent men used access to children to further abuse and control their former partners. On a regular basis Deputies of all parties meet in their constituency offices victims of domestic abuse seeking help and support. In cases where barring orders have been secured and the victim returns to the family home, the barring order often does not get the necessary attention because the authorities believe the violent partner will return again. That should not be the case. We must at all times recognise the vulnerability of the victim, often in refuge centres with three, four or five young children. Without any support mechanism it is almost inevitable that they will return to the home.

The necessary legislative reforms cannot wait any longer. Policy and legislative reform and systems change are necessitated not only by the variation in Garda practice, identified by Deputy Ó Snodaigh, but also by the variation in judicial practice. There are significant variations in the granting of domestic violence order applications. Some 44% are granted nationally but this ranges from 33% in Dublin to 59% in the eastern region. The range in terms of barring orders specifically is even greater, with 28% granted in the Dublin region and 70% in the northern region. Legislation and guidelines detailing the relevant criteria and the standard and types of proof necessary for the granting of domestic violence orders must be introduced urgently.

Judges are making decisions in the dark. There is an urgent need to reintroduce a role for the probation service in the family courts, producing safety reports and risk assessments to guide the decision-making of judges. This need has been recognised by the National Crime Council, the Law Reform Commission and the Law Society at various times dating back to 1999. The Government has not acted on any of their recommendations and has no excuse for this failure.

The National Domestic Violence Intervention Agency has introduced and developed a number of system changes in its pilot area of the Bray and Dún Laoghaire District Courts since 2003. The initiatives included developing an aide memoire for gardaí responding to domestic violence incidents and completing risk reports for the courts at post-conviction stage. An independent evaluation of the project commissioned by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, published in early 2006, details the benefits of the pilot project and concluded positively that the interagency work model assists victims to stay with the legal process. This is despite the fact that the project has been hindered from an early stage by the ad hoc and insecure nature of its funding.

I accept that the victims of abuse can be men as well as women. Like women who are abused, men are constantly harassed, criticised and compared unfavourably to others. Physical violence can also occur. As in any relationship, much of this is witnessed by the children. The impact of the abuse on men includes low self-esteem, depression and insomnia, and can also impact negatively on their relationship with their children. Men are aware that if they separate from their wives or partners they may lose their homes and will no longer be in a position to care for and protect their children.

The NDVIA was scandalously forced to suspend the receipt of referrals and pushed to the brink of closure again this year by the failure of the Minister and his Department to make a timely judgment on its future funding. I understand a decision is still pending. The motion we have tabled calls for the extension across the State of the interagency work model that has been developed and piloted by the NDVIA.

Like any caring person, I would say that any man who lifts his hand and abuses a woman verbally or physically is nothing but a coward and a bully. That message needs to leave this House loudly and clearly. More importantly, there is an onus on the Government to introduce legislation to ensure that protection will be to the forefront. We need a mechanism to help people overcome an abusive and violent relationship.

See this speech in context