Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

I welcome that the Government is not opposing this Bill. That demonstrates the change that has taken place in these Houses. Three years ago, the Government voted down a Bill in the Seanad that was weaker and less far reaching. This change has come from below rather than above, through movements of tens of thousands of people who campaigned for an end to homophobia, discrimination and inequality. In particular, it reflects the movement that enabled the marriage equality referendum to pass. It is clear that the Government intends to pass the Bill on Second Stage and then leave it to gather dust while it proceeds with the Bill introduced in the Seanad by Senator Bacik. We are not precious about our Bill just because it was introduced by the Anti-Austerity Alliance but we will not accept a minimal approach which simply raises the bar on discrimination while allowing it to persist. Any legislation which maintains the right to discriminate against workers in health care, education and charities will also be opposed by those who campaigned for marriage equality.

The protest that took place this evening welcomed that our Bill will pass Second Stage but the protestors are now focusing on the weakness of Senator Bacik's Bill. The first flaw in that Bill is the distinction it draws between services which are publicly funded and those which are not. We do not see why workers in services run by religious orders without public funding should be discriminated against or entitled to fewer employment and equality rights than workers in publicly funded services. Nowhere else in employment law is such a distinction made between publicly funded and privately funded workers. Senator Bacik's Bill would mean that an educational or health care service run by the church could continue to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation, parenting status or religion as long as it is not publicly funded. For example, a lecturer in a privately run third level institution could be discriminated against because he or she is openly gay on the grounds that it is against the institution's religious ethos. It is wrong to make a distinction between publicly and privately funded services. The proper distinction is between the way in which a religious order runs its own affairs and way in which it runs a service, irrespective of whether that service is publicly funded. There should be no grounds for allowing discrimination in respect of a service run by a religious institution.

The second flaw is that religion is maintained as grounds for discrimination regardless of whether public funds are involved, albeit with a higher bar in terms of requiring that the occupational requirement be genuine and legitimate. Even if a school is publicly funded, a religious order could make the case that a teacher's religion is a justified reason for discrimination where he or she is teaching a religion class. This is a clear example of discrimination against atheists and those of a different religion to the institution which controls the school. It might also offer a back door for discrimination against LGBTQ people who, by being openly gay, are not conforming to the teachings of a certain church. There should be no discrimination of any form in church-run health or education services. The only place where we think discrimination can be permitted is within the religious institution itself. That would meet the Constitution's provisions on the right of religious denominations to run their own affairs. Those affairs do not extend to the operation of schools and hospitals but religious orders clearly have the right to discriminate in favour of people of their own religion when appointing priests or ministers.

The marriage equality referendum revealed to us the demand for equality. Those who mobilise for equality will not tolerate half measures. The "Yes" vote in the referendum was not for half equality. In its analysis of Senator Bacik's Bill, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties made the point that equality is a binary state. Either one is equal or one is not. The council urged the Oireachtas to seize this opportunity to eradicate all forms of discrimination. We need full employment equality rather than a higher bar for discrimination; and we need that equality before next September.

See this speech in context