Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach Gníomhach agus gabhaim buíochas le mo chomhghleacaí, an Teachta Pringle. Is é seo an tríú huair uaidh chun an Bille seo a chur tríd an Dáil. Theip air sa dá uair dheireanacha ach ní raibh an locht air ach is ar na Rialtais éagsúla a bhí sé mar nár ghlac siad leis an mBille in ainneoin na ndualgas atá againn faoin gCúnant Idirnáisiúnta maidir le Cearta Geilleagracha, Comhdhaonnacha agus Cultúir seo. Níl i gceist anseo ach cearta bunúsacha agus nílimid ag iarraidh ach leasú a chur sa Bhunreacht a leagfaidh síos gur de réir a chéile, ar bhonn céimnithe, a bhainfimid na cearta seo amach. Is é sin an méid atá i gceist. Ní rud radacach ach rud thar a bheith réasúnta agus bunúsach atá i gceist.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this topic and I thank my colleague, Deputy Pringle for his persistence and hard work. It is the third time he has put this Bill before the Dáil. On the last occasions he did not succeed but the blame certainly was not on him. It was on the two Governments that failed to support it, notwithstanding our very serious obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. That covenant was signed and arose out of the horror and the pain of the Second World War. It was introduced on 16 December 1966, and came into law in 1976. We signed it on 1 October, as my colleague said. We signed the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. We took our time until we ratified it. We waited until 1989, I believe, 16 years later. We signed the optional protocol in 2012 but we did not ratify it. This is very important because without ratifying it, there is no recourse for the citizen who is affected by the failures of various Governments.

It is interesting that later today, we will be asked to sanction the appointment of two new members to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, one of whom is Emily Logan, a much respected woman. I am singling her out because she was a commissioner in the Irish Human rights and Equality Commission that made a very strong submission on the last occasion we were examined by the UN committee on how we were implementing this covenant. I read as much as I could of the submission, which runs to over 100 pages. It refers to the Constitutional Convention that recommended that we amend the Constitution and look at implementing it in national legislation.

That recommendation has been ignored. Ms Logan, together with her small, hard-working team of colleagues at the time, drew attention to many issues, including the harsh impact of the austerity cuts on services and supports for the most marginalised. She referred to the absence of the incorporation into our legislation or Constitution of rights that would give a basic threshold below which any Government could not go when it is implementing austerity cuts, some of which are still in being.

I have read the Government amendment and it is an insult. I am sure my colleague, Deputy Pringle, will come back to this. The Government is proposing that the Bill be deemed to be read a Second Time in 18 months without any explanation as to why that postponement is necessary. We are not asking the Government to rush through legislation in the manner in which it has rushed through so many Bills in the past year. Against our better instincts on occasions, we helped the Government in that regard and stood in solidarity with it for the greater common good. This Bill is for the greater common good. Why it would be put back for 18 months is beyond my comprehension. I struggle to understand why the Government would do that. The amendment suggests that it is to give time to tease out the "complex issues concerned". There is nothing complex about basic human rights in the matter of social, economic and cultural issues. Certainly, the implications of the provisions in the Bill may have consequences for any Government that it would not like. I can understand that part, but the rights themselves are not complex. We talk about rights all of the time. The Government is going to put the Bill back for 18 months and, in the meantime, the Department is going to look at it. I have no faith in that proposal whatsoever and I am not sure how the Green Party can accept it. I really do not want to bring parties into this but I have to bring in the Green Party because its Members supported my colleague's Bill on the previous occasion. How has its position changed and why do we need another 18 months of a window to consider the Bill? It is just not acceptable.

Many countries have not only signed and ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights but they also have ratified the protocol to the convention. We are talking about 171 parties or signatories. I mentioned the Convention on the Constitution back in 2013 and 2014, where the members voted in favour of amending the Constitution to strengthen the protection of economic, social and cultural rights. They also recommended that there should be a constitutional provision to the effect that the State would provide progressively - I ask the Minister of State to listen to that word - not overnight, but progressively, for those rights. That is provided for in the wording of the Bill that Deputy Pringle has before the Dáil today. It sets out that the Government would progressively realise the economic, social and cultural rights of citizens and that this duty would be cognisable by the courts. The Convention on the Constitution went on to identify a number of specific rights in regard to housing, social security, rights for people with disabilities and cultural rights, which it said should be enumerated in the Constitution. The difficulty of not having them in the Constitution is that the courts, which rightly have a great respect for the separation of powers, do not want to be seen to make law. On many occasions, they have pointed the finger back at the Government in this regard. It is the duty of legislators to bring in legislation in order that the courts can enforce it. Unfortunately, Government has utterly failed in that regard.

We are talking about economic, social and cultural rights in a context where - I had to check the figure myself because it is so startling - 56 people died in the first 11 months of last year in one homeless situation or another. At one stage, we had 10,500 homeless people in the State; the number is slightly fewer than that now. There is still not recognition that this is a direct consequence of our policies on housing and health. Indeed, in the case of the pandemic, the consequences of it are much worse because our public health system was not fit for purpose. We knew that beforehand. All we are asking the Government to do today is to make our Constitution mean something in terms of social, economic and cultural rights. We all acknowledge that it can only be done on a progressive basis and we ask that the Government take it from here. Putting the Bill back 18 months is not good enough. I hope that the Minister of State will have a little sense in this regard.

Tá súil agam go mbeidh ciall cheannaithe aige - tuigfidh sé an téarma "ciall cheannaithe" - agus go bhfuil rud foghlamtha aige agus ag an Rialtas ón bpaindéim agus ó na ciorruithe tromchúiseacha a cuireadh i bhfeidhm in 2010, 2011 agus 2013 atá fós ag leanúint ar aghaidh. Tá na ciorruithe sin ag déanamh idirdhealú idir na daoine boichte agus na daoine is saibhre. Indeed, we saw recently the figures on the billionaires who have increased their percentage of wealth over the course of the pandemic. Words fail me regarding the amount of wealth they have. What if all that falls on deaf ears?

Perhaps we can look to Professor Eoin O'Sullivan of Trinity College Dublin, whom I believe co-authored the book Suffer the Little Childrenwith Mary Raftery. They have not been thanked in the manner they should have been. Professor O'Sullivan highlights that even if a government does not buy the humanitarian argument, there is an argument that what I propose is just more cost-effective. According to him, while it is difficult to obtain an exact figure - I am not sure why it is because we are able to put a price on everything, and we are not able to put a value on anything - it costs between €35,000 and €40,000 per year to keep someone in emergency accommodation in Dublin alone. I could go on but my time is up. The same figures apply to our failure to deal with mental illness, housing and health. Tá costas i bhfad níos tromchúisí i gceist nuair a theipeann orainn díriú isteach ar chearta daonna.

See this speech in context