David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I think it is a first for this new provision has and I am delighted to be here this evening as Chair of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality representing my colleagues on the committee. This, as the Acting Chairman, Deputy Jerry Buttimer, stated, is a new provision that was put in train last year so that the chairs of committee can come into the Chamber and make a presentation on the work of the committee and on the legislation before the House.

The decision to merge the Equality Authority and the human rights commission was made by the Government in 2011, and there has been much consultation since then. A working group was established by the Minister in October 2011 to advise him on the practical issues in the proposed merger. I understand there were four representatives from each of the boards of the two existing organisations together with representation from the Department of Justice and Equality and an independent chair. The group, I am told, reported on 19 April 2012 and made a number of recommendations under 42 separate headings and all of these were accepted by Government. After that, there was a comprehensive consultation process involving 69 submissions. The Minister then decided to refer the general scheme to the joint committee, which it was hoped would also help in raising public awareness.

We considered the general scheme of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Bill in June 2012. In particular, we were asked to examine head 13, which provides for the process in which a new commission would be selected and appointed. We were asked to come back with any proposals within a short period, and we did so. We made a number of recommendations including that the commission should be gender balanced; that those on the commission should have a proven track record and expertise in the field of human rights and equality; and, a person who served on the panel should be ineligible to become a member of the commission the members of which the panel is selecting. The joint committee also stated it would like to meet the members of the selection panel.

The selection panel was put in place. A number of Members already stressed the importance of the independence of the Irish Human Rights Commission, and, of course, the issue arose of who appoints the selection panel. If the Minister or the Executive was seen to appoint a selection panel and then the selection panel was to appoint the commission, it could quite rightly be argued that maybe it was not hands-off enough. This led to a certain amount of confusion. When the selection panel was appointed, the United Nations was consulted by the Minister, who wanted to be sure that everything was being done properly, and at that stage there was a certain amount of discussion and, I suppose, a little confusion. The selection panel actually stood aside because of that because it felt the Government was not hands-off enough at the time. Some discussions took place and then something novel and laudable happened in that it was proposed that the selection panel would come before and present to the joint Oireachtas committee. That gave all members of the joint Oireachtas committee an opportunity to engage with the selection panel, to comment on the persons who were on the selection panel and to ascertain whether they would be suitable to carry on the job - in other words, whether they were independent enough. One should bear in mind that the committee comprises, as all Oireachtas committees have, members from all parties and none.

We engaged quite constructively with the selection panel and when it was over, every member of the committee was satisfied that the persons concerned were independent and fit, and had the expertise and the ability, and the interest and the energy, to nominate and appoint the members of the proposed human rights and equality commission. They went with fair wind, and that was useful. It was a unanimous decision by all members of the committee present. No one dissented. This is not like the situation in some states where there is a kind of star chamber of inquisition. That was not the case. The members of the selection panel had an opportunity to make presentations to the committee and the committee was quite satisfied with that.

The Bill itself was also presented to the committee, which then looked for submissions under pre-legislative scrutiny. We received 15 submissions on the heads of the Bill. These came from the Irish Human Rights Commission and Irish Council for Civil Liberties, two submissions; Equality Rights Alliance, two submissions; European Group on National Human Rights Institutions; Children's Rights Alliance; Mr. Pat McCarthy, a member of the public, which is interesting because it is welcome that individual members of the public, not only NGOs, can make submissions to Oireachtas committees; the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network; Disability Federation of Ireland; Irish Congress of Trade Unions; Pobal; the Equality Authority; the Committee on the Administration of Justice; Senator Ivana Bacik; and, Senator Katherine Zappone.

The committee held two public meetings, on 4 and 5 July 2013, having invited some of those who made submissions to address the committee in person. I thank those who made submissions. A lot of work and thought goes into it. The Equality Rights Alliance addressed the committee in person, as did representatives from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, the Children's Rights Alliance; the Irish Human Rights Commission, the Equality Authority, etc. Following two days of hearings, the committee produced a report with observations, representative of the submissions made as part of the consultation process which was then used to inform the drafting of today's Bill, published on 21 March 2014.

The committee made a number of observations. One was on the definition of human rights and equality, heads 3 and 30. The committee was told that there was an inconsistency in the definition of equality at heads 3 and 30 which needed to be addressed. It is essential that there be one unified definition of human rights and equality under the Bill. I understand, from reading it, that there is no definition of equality in the Bill, as drafted. Maybe there does not need to be. At any rate, there is a definition of human rights. The Bill, as drafted, still contains a separate definition of human rights in Part 3 to the other sections. It was also submitted to the committee that the definition was too narrow and that additional discrimination grounds should be considered, for example, socioeconomic status, trade union membership, past criminal conviction and political opinion.

Independence was also mentioned. It was put to the committee that the new commission should be detached from the Department of Justice and Equality, and that it should not only be independent but also be seen to be independent. The Irish Human Rights Commission specifically recommended that it be directly accountable instead to the Oireachtas.

This has been provided for in section 25, which deals with the strategy statement, section 27, which deals with accounts, and in section 28, which deals with the presentation of the annual report. Section 14 provides for the removal of a commission member from office on the agreement of both Houses of the Oireachtas. During this process, it was also suggested that financial accountability should be directed to the Comptroller and Auditor General. The director, as financial controller, will be accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts and other Oireachtas committees. Section 22 provides for financial accountability to the Comptroller and Auditor General.

The next issue raised concerns the appointment of the director. Most groups that came before the committee agreed that the appointments process was much better and more transparent than previously. However, concern was expressed that the selection of panel members would be decided by the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Public Appointments Service. It was put to the committee that provision 5 of head 17, that the first director of the commission shall be the chief executive of the Equality Authority, is in conflict with the Paris Principles and some contributors strongly recommended the deletion of the provision. I welcome the fact that the Paris Principles are explicitly cited in the new Bill. The appointment of the director is provided for in sections 20 and 21 of the new Bill and a temporary director will take up this position if it is in place before the commission is established.

The body should be empowered to recruit its own staff and there should be no Civil Service secondment to the body at senior level. Recruitment, in general, takes place through the Public Appointments Service. However, section 24 provides for the temporary employment of persons for specialist purposes by the commission. Such persons can be experts in a particular area or topic on which the commission is working and may be released by their public, private or NGO employer to work with the commission for the duration of the project. In accordance with the Paris Principles, the Bill states that all staff employed by the commission will be under the control and direction of the commission. There is no provision for secondment.

Regarding membership of the commission, most groups recommended that more specific criteria for appointment to the commission should be set out in head 13 of the legislation as to the skills and attributes necessary for each commissioner. It is suggested that at least one person on the commission should have experience in governance, administration and organisational management and also experience in employment law and industrial relations. Membership of the commission, as provided for in section 12, will be the current members designate. Members will be to appointed by the President on recommendation by the Oireachtas, with upcoming vacant positions advertised by the Public Appointments Service. Section 13(5) outlines the qualification criteria for inclusion in the commission, such as human rights, matters of law, equality matters of law, public administration and reform and board management and corporate governance. Selection criteria will be agreed by the MinIster for Justice and Equality and the Public Appointments Service. Gender balance and minorities criteria are also listed in parts of section 13. Staff of the Commission will transfer from the current bodies and they shall become civil servants and so not amenable to instruction from Government or Ministers. This is in line with Paris Principles.

Much was taken on board from the recommendations of the committee. Head 36 deals with public service duty and was welcomed by all but it was suggested that the provision should be strengthened. The obligation on public bodies to give consideration to equality and human rights is not sufficiently defined. For example, the term 'give consideration' could be defined as requiring public bodies to conduct equality and human rights impact assessments of all new policies and programmes. Further, sanctions could be established in cases where an adequate standard is not achieved by public bodies. The Bill introduces, through section 42, a positive duty on public bodies to have due regard to human rights and equality and reflects a commitment in the Government's programme for national recovery 2011-16. The commission will assist public bodies to comply with positive duty, including by producing guidelines and codes of practice, as outlined in section 31.

The committee agreed that the legislation generally should ensure that the establishment of the new commission is carried out in accordance with the Paris Principles as interpreted by the sub-committee on accreditation of the International Co-ordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions. Reference was made to that by colleagues concerned about the point. The explanatory memorandum of the Bill states that the new commission is being established with the intention of being recognised, as the Irish Human Rights Commission currently is, by the UN as Ireland's national human rights institution accredited for UN purposes in accordance with provisions of the Paris Principles - best practice standards which ensure independent and effective national human rights Institutions that operate independently of Government and have the mandate and resources to work effectively. The Minister has agreed to increase the budget and has found €2 million for the new body. He has also increased staffing levels.

Section 35 provides that the commission may, of its own volition or at the request of the Minister, conduct an inquiry. This shows the independence of the commission.

I want to be associated with the remarks of colleagues, who are no longer in the Chamber, who condemned the attack on the Minister's house. Human rights, equality and fundamental freedoms are of great importance. There is an ugliness out there at the moment. A candidate for the European elections was spat on and insulted. I am ashamed to say that it happened in Cork. Social media gives a certain licence and freedom to people to violate human rights and attack and insult people. We should have a look at that. More and more people are subjected to bullying and other attacks on social media. It is a growing phenomenon and people can get very upset. People have taken their own lives because of it. We must work to combat this and find ways to track down these people, punish them and ensure they cannot do it again.

I am taken with the convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, some of which include the obligation to respect human rights, the right to life, the prohibition of torture, and the prohibition of slavery and forced labour. Last week I attended a presentation by people concerned with prostitution, slavery and forced labour and trafficking in Ireland. Other principles include the right to liberty and security, the right to a fair trial, the principle of no punishment without law, the right to respect for private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association, the right to marry, the right to an effective remedy and the prohibition of discrimination

These are absolutely essential and should be discussed and taught in every school and in every classroom. These rights should be teased out in transition year classes across the country. What do they mean? What does the obligation to respect human rights mean? What is that about? What does the right to liberty and security actually mean? What do the freedoms of thought, conscience and religion and of expression and of assembly and association actually mean? They should be spelled out in our classrooms. It is one of the most important things we could do if these topics were part of transition year. Some young people from Castletownbere appeared before the Oireachtas committee last week. Deputy Sean Kenny was present for their fantastic presentation on trafficking. They were articulate, inspiring and amazing. Last year, people appeared before the Oireachtas committee and spoke about missing persons. In fairness, the Minister took on the suggestion to have an international missing persons day. It occurred last December. There are major issues we must take on board.

Senator Zappone, a hardworking member of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence, has been listening to this debate. She made a suggestion, which I want to put on record and which I have discussed with colleagues. I have the honour of chairing the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence for the moment and, on foot of this Bill and the importance of human rights, we suggest changing the name to justice, equality, human rights and defence. This adds on human rights and presents the committee as the overseer of human rights provisions in legislation coming before the Houses. This will quality proof and human rights proof Bills. It happens in other jurisdictions, such as New Zealand and the UK, where there is early and ongoing consideration of human rights policy and legislative development. These measures can improve the parliamentary scrutiny of the laws for consistency with rights and freedoms. In New Zealand, a statement of compatibility is produced. The suggestion of a human rights parliamentary scrutiny committee from Senator Zappone is a good one. We should discuss and debate it and see how we can fit in to our procedures and methods of working.

The pre-legislative scrutiny of legislation takes a long time. It is a totally new provision in my 17 years in the House. In the past Bills were produced as a fait accompli. They were introduced in the House on Second Stage and it was very difficult to make any fundamental changes because in some cases one would almost have to redraft the Bill from scratch. Pre-legislative scrutiny means that NGOs, the ordinary citizen and State agencies - anybody and everybody - can examine the heads of a Bill before it is formally drafted and have an input into it. The Joint Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence has gone through this procedure with a number of Bills including the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill, which was previously the Mental Capacity Bill. That was a huge piece of work. The work the committee did and the fact that the Department took on the suggestions, as it did with this Bill, means the Oireachtas committees are having a huge input into legislation before Bills are even published. The National Vetting Bureau Bill (Children and Vulnerable Persons) is another Bill we examined and the Criminal Justice (Withholding of Information on Offences Against Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill. The Personal Insolvency Bill was a huge piece of legislation in which the Acting Chairman, Deputy Mathews, is very interested. We also examined the Mediation Bill, which is due to come before the House shortly. We expect the Gambling Control Bill to be produced in the near future. We are currently involved in the same process in that tomorrow we have hearings on the Children and Family Relationships Bill. The Criminal Justice (Community Sanctions) Bill is due and the criminal procedure Bill, among others. With each of the Bills listed we went through the procedure of inviting submissions, holding oral hearings, engaging with people, teasing out the fundamental issues and sending a report back to the Department and the Minister. In many instances we received letters from the Minister and the Department thanking us for the work we have done and in some cases taking on board all of the suggestions made by the committee, which one should remember in many instances come from society in general. It is a way for people to have an input into legislation at a very early stage, before it is drafted. It is easier to make changes at that time than it is after the Bill is formally published, so much so that a lot of legislation that comes to the House on Second Stage requires little debate given the work that has previously been done by committees, not just the justice committee but many of the other committees also.

In addition, when a Bill reaches Committee Stage we do not have many amendments to make because the fundamental work has been covered already. It is a fantastic way to proceed. It adds to the work of Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas but it is extraordinarily useful and worthwhile. I thank my fellow committee members for their work on all the Bills I outlined and other reports as well in the past three years. The work they have done and the input they have had to very many technical, detailed and in some cases controversial issues.

I commend the Minister on the work he and his departmental officials have done to date on the Bill and other legislation. I accept some Opposition Members have raised issues but my feeling is that there is a huge overlap between the Equality Authority and the Human Rights Commission and it makes sense to bring them together under one commission. The savings made will be ploughed back into the new body which will be stronger, leaner, more efficient and far more effective. That is what we want.

We must be ever-vigilant about human rights and equality. We cannot let our guard down for a moment. We must be most careful, in particular with the advent of social media and texting. One of the first Bills I dealt with in 1999 to 2000 on being elected to the House was on copyright. The previous Bill was from 1963. At that time Members were concerned about the advent of television and the impact it would have on society. In the debate in 1999 and 2000 we were concerned about the new-fangled device of the Internet, whether it would catch on and what impact it would have. As science and technology change we must be ever-vigilant and careful about human rights. We must protect them, champion them and recognise them. We must also educate people about them. Far more is required than just putting a Bill on the Statute Book and saying everything is grand. We must change the mindset of people so that when people stand for election and knock on doors they are treated with respect. It is to be expected that people might not agree with candidates who knock on our doors but they should be treated with a certain amount of respect and although one might say he or she does not agree with the point of view of the candidate he or she should politely thank the candidate and say goodnight. Rather than have candidates being abused I urge people to treat with respect those who put their heads above the parapet and stand for election.

In Afghanistan earlier this week we saw people queuing although they were under threat of life and limb for exercising their franchise. Thankfully, a surprising number of Afghan people voted. A vote is something very precious and democracy is very precious. Democracy is a thin veneer on civilisation. I read a book recently about violence through the ages. I cannot recall the title of the book but it made the point that, thankfully, in western Europe today we live in the safest most peaceful place that ever existed. That is because we have democracy and the rule of law. We cannot ever take it for granted. A number of years ago in south Africa when people got their freedom they travelled for miles in the heat and queued for hours for the right to vote, which is a precious right. We should really cherish it. I urge the media when commenting on politicians and election candidates not to treat them as if they are something one would find under one’s shoe. That happens and such commentary fuels hatred for politicians, elected representatives and the democratic process. It is a dangerous thing to do. I will end on that note.

See this speech in context