Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

I and the Labour Party welcome this Bill. It represents progress on the rights of same sex couples and unmarried couples. There has been progress on this issue over the last number of years. That progress has been incremental, as progress should be, rather than happening all at once. The Bill is not perfect but it is progress on which we can build for the future, just as we built on legislation that was passed regarding same sex couples and unmarried couples in the 1990s.

I will speak later about some of the people who have played a part in the progress on this issue. The Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, GLEN, has welcomed the legislation and Dr. Fergus Ryan, who prepared a paper for GLEN on the legislation, commented that the Bill represents a robust and comprehensive step in the right direction and that both practically and symbolically these measures will, if implemented, represent real and substantial progress in the recognition and protection of non-traditional families.

The paper prepared by Dr. Fergus Ryan, who is head of the law department in the Dublin Institute of Technology, is a substantial study of the legal provisions in the Bill. I read it last night. It is a very comprehensive analysis of the Bill and I hope some of the comments made on it will be taken on board by the Minister, the Minister of State and the Department. Some important points are made regarding silences in the Bill and improvements which could be made to it, some of which I hope could take place on Committee Stage and Report Stage and as it progresses through the Seanad. Dr. Ryan also says that the Bill represents the most far-reaching reform of family law in a generation and affects 130 pieces of legislation, many of which are very complex and historic, such as the Succession Act and various pieces of family law legislation which give rise to decisions regarding the family home and so on.

A number of points needs to made on what issues need to be addressed as the Bill progresses through the House or in separate pieces of legislation. We should not lose sight of the fact that this is called the Civil Partnership Bill, but it also deals with the rights of cohabitees. There is not a lot of awareness of that fact. Many people who are cohabitees, because of the way the Bill has been publicised, are not aware that it also affects them. The Government needs to have a campaign of public awareness because when it comes to cohabitees the rights are applied to them without their having to register their relationship. It is important that cohabitees are made aware of the provisions in this Bill.

I am very thankful for Dr. Fergus Ryan's paper because it is a very informative analysis. He makes the point that the effect of this Bill is more significant in terms of the rights and obligations conferred on cohabitees because of the number of families involved. He refers to the 2006 census which estimated that there are more than 120,000 cohabiting couples in the State, some one third of whom have dependent children residing with them. There are 120,000 couples but there are also some 40,000 children who will be affected by this Bill. There is speculation that after the Bill is passed changes will then be made to the legislation on tax and social welfare.

I am interested to know if those changes will also apply to cohabitees because, in terms of how they are currently treated by the law, they are in a catch-22 situation. The social welfare legislation applies to them and treats them as if they are a unit. At the same time the tax legislation, from which they could benefit, does not. Very often cohabitees are negatively impacted upon by social welfare legislation. For example, one member of the couple cannot qualify for jobseeker's allowance because he or she is means tested on the basis of the income of his or her partner, but the couple does not receive the tax advantages of a married couple. I hope the tax benefits married couples receive would also apply to civil partners and cohabitees. The Minister of State might let us know what Government's plans are in that regard.

Dr. Fergus Ryan makes the point that the Bill is largely silent on the children of the couples affected by the Bill. There is a need to do something about unmarried fathers and their rights. We are well behind other countries in that regard. We are making progress, but one area in which we are not making progress is the issue of unmarried fathers. If there are 40,000 children and 120,000 couples, and all the other couples who do not live together, some of whom are in same-sex relationships, something needs to be done about the rights of unmarried fathers. They need to be given automatic guardianship or something similar to the arrangements in Scotland and other countries in Britain where, if one's name is on the birth certificate, one automatically gets guardianship rights. At the very least, we should introduce such a measure here.

Dr. Ryan's paper for GLEN refers to omissions or silences in the Bill. He speculates on whether the Bill will apply in the same way as it does to married couples, but the Bill is silent so there is no clarity in that regard. Those issues need to be explored on Committee Stage and Report Stage because if important areas are left silent, they could become loopholes and people could not be protected in areas in which they need to be.

He also makes some points regarding children, namely, that the relationship between the children of a civil partner and the other civil partner is one which is not generally acknowledged for the purposes of the Bill. He discusses how, despite that, the Bill will contain protections for children, such as the section which asks the courts to have regard to the rights of any other person. He says this may include the child of either civil partner. I take the position GLEN, many others and public opinion would take, that is, we need to make sure our laws protect children. If we do not deal with that in this Bill, we will have to deal with it ultimately, the sooner the better. I hope the Minister will accept amendments to the Bill which will improve the rights of the children of civil partners and cohabitees.

If that is not done, when the Bill is passed we will have to grapple with the issue because if we do not there will be problems down the line. We have to reflect the reality of same-sex partners and cohabitees who have children and recognise it is a large part of the picture on the ground in terms of family formation. It always has been, but it is so now more than ever. Public opinion is well ahead of the Government in that regard.

I wish to refer briefly to those who have contributed to this Bill. Groups such as GLEN and individuals have campaigned for this over the years. People have taken brave decisions, including the former Minister, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, in 1993. I remember being here for that debate. It was a significant step at the time and yet, when we look back now, the opinions then were out of date compared to now. It was a very brave move on the part of all those who supported it at the time. It was a very important and significant step which has, in effect, paved the way for this Bill.

I was in the Seanad in 2004 when Senator David Norris had a Bill on this issue. He has played a huge role, as a Senator and an individual, in campaigning for the rights of homosexuals and same-sex partners, something on which he needs to be commended. The Seanad has produced fine Senators, has been very progressive and has been an important part of our Legislature. Other individuals were also involved. This Bill is another step and we will need to make further progress when it, it is to be hoped, is passed very soon.

See this speech in context