Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

It is difficult to feel enthusiastic about this referendum. There is no denying that the wording in the Constitution in respect of women in the home is outdated and sexist but, other than being generally insulting, it has no impact on the lives of women or careers. The paternalistic celebration of women's work in the home has never resulted in women having a legal right to State support in order to carry out that work. Unfortunately, as the replacement wording makes the provision gender-neutral but still restricts the value of care only to the family, it is just symbolic. What tangible change will this referendum make to the rights of women and carers? Will there be such a change? If so, I am genuinely interested in hearing it.

There are more than 299,000 unpaid carers in Ireland. That figure has grown by 53% in just six years. Every one of those carers provides an invaluable service to the State but the State does not and has never rewarded them for it. It has never even really supported them to carry out that care. The need for care is universal. It is essential for the well-being of children, older people, disabled people or those experiencing illness. It is a key component of the functioning of any state. Although care has always been needed, the societal demands for it shift and change. We have an ageing population, with life expectancy getting higher, and the demand for care of older people, for example, is growing.

Despite the significant societal changes in recent decades which have seen more women come into the workforce, the burden of care still rests overwhelmingly with women. Of full-time carers, a significant majority - 98% - are women. This is an imbalance across the board. There are twice as many unpaid female carers as male. Of childcare workers, 98% are women. Women in Ireland do far more unpaid work -15 hours more a week, on average - than their male counterparts. We stand alongside women in Malta and Romania as those with the highest unpaid workload in Europe.

The referendums we are debating today are set to be held on International Women's Day next year. What justification is there for holding them on International Women's Day, other than it being an obvious PR move for the Government? In that week every year, the House has statements on gender equality and we discuss the steps we need to take to achieve true gender equality. Unfortunately, all Members know we can recycle and reuse our speaking notes year on year because the same problems always remain. We will never achieve gender equality while the responsibility of care remains solidly with women.

Carers are not just largely unpaid for their work; they are actively penalised. Unpaid care prevents an estimated 7.7 million women in Europe, compared with only 450,000 men, from accessing the labour market and the independence and financial freedom that comes with it.

Caring responsibilities make it incredibly difficult for women to progress in their careers. The need for flexibility, part-time hours and the implications of taking long career breaks to care for loved ones mean that women are over-represented in precarious and low-paid employment. The wording in the Constitution is patriarchal and insulting, does not represent modern Ireland and does not represent women. Despite how the current wording pretends to value a particularly sexist view of care in stating that "by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved", it has never actually required the State to give anything more than lip service.

The State does incredibly little to support carers from a lack of or complete absence of respite services to a lack of public and affordable childcare. The State often does the exact opposite and makes life actively difficult and expensive for carers. The wording needs to change. Most of us can be in agreement on that, but there needs to be serious consideration of what wording we change it to.

I made this point on the previous Bill and I will make it again here. Bypassing the pre-legislative scrutiny process is a mistake. As this is our Constitution, every single word and every punctuation mark potentially has an impact. Our role as TDs is to ensure the best possible wording is put forward to voters at a referendum to ensure that if we are asking voters to take time out of their day to vote on a proposed change to the Constitution, they are doing that for an actual reason; that they are voting to deliver actual rights and constitutional protections for all women, families and carers rather than a meaningless change in language. If a "Yes" vote on this referendum does not deliver actual change to people's rights, I have serious worries about voter turnout and then, ultimately, the outcome.

I do not think I need to point out to the Minister what an absolute disaster it would be for this referendum to fail on International Women's Day because of that. Because this Bill was rushed past the pre-legislative scrutiny process, we have no idea going into this debate why the Government has chosen the wording it has presented to us. I have no idea why the Government has chosen to reject the recommendations of the citizens' assembly and the Joint Committee on Gender Equality. I have no idea why the Government has chosen not to recognise the value of care outside of the family home. That simply is not good enough.

I ask the Minister again to commit to ensuring that Committee Stage of this Bill will be taken by the sectoral committee with as much time given as needed, and that Report Stage will not be guillotined. Of the two Bills today, this really is the one that needs serious examination. Changing the wording from "women" to "members of a family" does nothing to change reality. The responsibility of care will remain with women. The citizens' assembly and joint committee suggested an amendment that obliges the State to take reasonable measures to support care within the home and the wider community. The citizens' assembly voted for it by 81% and the joint committee passed it unanimously. Can the Minister tell me what is the point of a citizens' assembly or of the joint committee if he does not accept the recommendations? If the Government had its mind made up and was unwilling to budge, why did it waste the time of the members of that assembly?

Recommendations have been ignored that represent the views of the Irish people - that is the purpose of the assembly - who the wording of this Constitution is meant to represent. Governments have definitely used citizens' assemblies to pass on the responsibility of making decisions to somebody else. Each citizens' assembly and constitutional convention has accurately represented the views of people in Ireland. They voted overwhelmingly in favour of marriage equality, as did voters. They voted overwhelmingly in favour of abortion rights, as did voters. They voted overwhelmingly in favour of a State obligation to support carers. The Minister will not put that one to the voters, perhaps because he knows they will support it. Instead, Government has rejected their recommendations of an obligation to support the provision of care and is replacing it with "striving to support", which is an absolutely meaningless term. "Striving" means there is no explicit requirement on the Government to provide practical or financial support to carers. It is completely against the spirit of the recommendations of the citizens' assembly, which wanted to provide a legal basis for carers to be able to take action in the courts. Those words were chosen carefully after a lot of legal advice and much consideration.

The Government also rejected the idea of recognising care outside the family home. That is not progressive change. It is not a step forward. Women are carers. It is more of a missed opportunity all because, I suspect, the Government is terrified of the idea of having to actually have obligations to support carers who it claims to value so highly. In light of that, the decision to hold the vote on International Women's Day is honestly insulting. The State has no intention of tackling one of the major root causes of gender inequality and is actively denying voters the chance to make a real change in the lives of women and carers. I have no doubt, however, that on 8 March, if this referendum passes, the Government will be celebrating its achievements on women's rights while doing nothing tangible for women or carers and their rights.

See this speech in context