Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I also support this amendment. It is entirely sensible and appropriate. The Minister of State has acknowledged that elements of this Bill will have to be changed but cannot be changed at the moment for purely legal reasons, as Deputy O'Dea mentioned. The main explanation given to us on Committee Stage of the debate was that the marriage equality amendment had not yet been passed. Therefore, now that the referendum is over and the amendment is passed, once any legal problems are cleared out of the way, it logically follows that the Government will immediately amend this Bill, if it is still in government, or that any future Government would do so immediately.

The Minister of State made a point earlier in response to me about the significance of the marriage equality referendum in setting a context in which the Government could go further than it is going in this Bill, particularly in the area of dealing with young people aged between 18 and 16 and people under 16, and the other issues that need to be dealt with. I am sure this was discussed before, but the requirement for a person to declare a solemn intention of living in the preferred gender for the rest of his or her life also should not be there. We should be supporting gender self-determination. I do not see why one has to give a commitment to stay in a particular gender forever in order to get a certificate. We should have gender self-determination.

All these things need to be looked at, most importantly the situation for young people. My point about the referendum was not that it forced the Minister of State to make some of the changes he has made. That is largely down to the advocacy groups, who have educated us all on these matters during the course of the debate. I accept his point on that. It is the advocacy groups, TENI and others, that have helped us to understand the issues. My point is that the referendum indicates that the people are way ahead of politicians on matters of equality. Any political hesitation that might stop the Government from going further in this Bill is unwarranted. The people have stated their belief in equality in these matters. The statement made was not just about marriage equality; it was about the need for equality more generally, including in matters to do with transgender people.

There is no political reason to lag behind where the people are - something we have done, sadly and at a terrible cost, in this State for many years. The political system has lagged behind. Big, powerful institutions have held us back and lagged behind where people are. A year is a long time in the life of a young person. Things are pretty tough for young people, generally speaking, and if a year is a long time, two years is a very long time. The Minister of State has spoken about the need for more consultation on these matters. We have had the consultation, we have had the best advice and we have had an extensive discussion. I do not see why he will not accept the amendments, but given that he is not going to, I do not see why he could not agree to the review in a year and making those changes in a year's time, rather than stringing it out for two years, because that is a long time in the lives of young people.

See this speech in context