Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Of this grouping, Sinn Féin's amendment No. 3 is probably the most interesting. The rest are concerned with tidying up, providing rules around the Irish language and so on. I support amendment No. 3, which is similar to the proposal that Sinn Féin tabled on Committee Stage of a merit or diversity principle. Under the amendment, when the commission is proposing a list of people for appointment, at least one of them should be someone who furthers at least one of the objectives of the diversity principle, mainly, that the membership of the Judiciary should be gender equal and reflect the diversity of the population as a whole. This is a good idea. I foresee practical difficulties with an absolute obligation that at least one of the names should further the objectives of the diversity principle, but we need to discuss this proposal further.

A Law Library submission on the gender pay gap in the barrister profession in 2017 pointed out that only 38% of the total Law Library membership was female. Worse still, the attrition rate among female barristers was much higher than it was among men, with only 16% of the inner Bar - senior counsel - being women. While it is not a requirement to hold a senior counsel position to become a judge, let us face the fact that, with such an attrition rate, it is likely that a good deal fewer than the 38% of barristers who are female will succeed in getting the full ten years of practice that are necessary to be appointed to the District Court or Circuit Court or the 12 years that are necessary to be appointed to a superior court. We need to factor these issues into our discussion. Granted, solicitors can also seek appointment as judges, but their success rates to date have been much slimmer. Only eight solicitors have been appointed to the superior courts since 2002, with none appointed to the Supreme Court. Of the eight, none is female. This problem needs to be addressed. I appreciate the Sinn Féin amendment's intention of trying to do so. If we do not include such measures, the problem will not be addressed.

If the amendment were to pass, would it lead to more women becoming barristers and more solicitors putting themselves forward for judicial appointment? One would hope so, but I imagine that it would be difficult in the first few years. That said, we should not resist the idea, particularly if it is put up to the Law Library to encourage more women to become barristers and more solicitors, including female solicitors, to apply for the role of judges. This positive principle sets the bar for the Law Library in encouraging diversity. Diversity is necessary and important if we are to have fair and impartial judgments and if judges are to reflect life's diversity when people appear before them.

See this speech in context