Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, United Left) | Oireachtas source

It is very welcome that we have reached this Stage of the Bill. I welcome the members of the trans community in the Visitors Gallery listening intently to what is being said. While the legislation is welcome, there are still many issues that have not been addressed. They have been raised by a number of other Deputies and it is important to deal with them. I would prefer to see the Minister of State, rather than Opposition Members, bringing forward the suggested amendments on Committee Stage as they would then be meaningful. I hope Members on the Government's backbenches will encourage this. After nearly 20 years of struggle and obstruction and delay on the part of the State, including the legal battle in the European Court of Human Rights, we have reached a very significant moment.

However, certain provisions in the Bill will drastically undermine the progress which would otherwise be achieved. I attended the committee meetings in 2013 attended by members of the transgender community. They made strong points that this legislation should be based on human rights principles rather than on medical evidence. This is a serious weakness in the legislation which needs to be addressed.

The committee meetings did not hear the voices and views of inter-sex people nor of those under 18 years and I regard it as a failure that the committee did not reach those people and hear their views. Chief among concerns are the requirement for an unnecessary and invasive medical statement; the requirement that a married transgender person be forced to divorce; the omission of young people under 16; the onerous requirements for 17 to 18 year-olds; and the total exclusion of non-binary people. The Bill has been drafted without proper consideration of the needs of inter-sex people. The original draft included such a provision but it was removed and it needs to be reinstated.

The Government has been urged repeatedly by transgender people to follow the self-determination models of best practice already in place in Denmark, Argentina and soon to be in force in Malta. That our legislation is based on UK legislation of ten years ago instead of on more progressive and human rights based legislation in Malta, is discouraging. There remains an opportunity for the Government to change the legislation.

It appears that no consideration was given to the examples of Australia, India, Nepal, Thailand, the UK and Germany, to provide some degree or recognition of non-binary transgender people. No satisfactory explanation has been provided by the Government as to the reason this was not done. The Government does not appear to have undertaken any consultation with inter-sex people who have been grouped with transgender people. The terminology in the Bill which has been drafted to deal with transgender people does not include inter-sex people. It is unlikely that the Bill will address the needs of inter-sex people.

I ask the Government to amend the provisions on medical criteria to allow for self-declaration as articulated by Dr. Philip Crowley, the HSE national director who stated that the HSE considers this process to be simpler, fairer, pragmatic and may be easier to legislate for as it takes account of both transgender and inter-sex people with differing background contexts. The omission of young people under 16 years is a disappointment. It is difficult enough for young women and young men to deal with puberty and associated issues but these young people must also deal with being a transgender person and with the impact on their school lives and their future lives. This has led to some disastrous situation. Those young people who are 17 and 18 must attend a endocrinologist and a psychologist but there are only four or five endocrinologists in the country and these are based in Loughlinstown. The waiting times for an appointment can be at least two years by which time the young person would be 18. These provisions are unnecessary restrictions.

I refer to the importance of self-declaration which should be included in the legislation. General practitioners should be considered as the medical practitioner if the Minister of State is not prepared to table an amendment on self-declaration. Both the IMO and the representatives of general practitioners have written to the Minister yesterday to lobby for the use of GPs rather than medical specialists.

Basic human rights should be dealt with and I ask the Minister of State to clarify if this will be included in the legislation. I ask the Government to table amendments to the Bill. I thank the Seanad for being robust in its efforts to force the issue. The review will be very important and I ask the Minister of State to say how he intends to make it a meaningful review which reflects the views of the transgender community.

See this speech in context