Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I was struck by something Deputy Bríd Smith said about the wording of a women's place in the home in the Constitution. I was reminded of somebody who, in my formative years, said that never was a single sentence more responsible for the paving of ways and opening of doors of feminist centres across the country. If she were here to see this, she would agree.

It is important to note, as we speak about care and the role of care, that there are many who would like to be here but who, due to circumstances in their personal lives which leave them to be either the recipient of care or provider or care, cannot be here. They are tuned in online and on television. My party sees them, has their back, stands with them and wants to ensure their voices are heard.

Every day, carers the length and breadth of Ireland perform an invaluable role that far too often goes unrecognised by Government. They are tired and exhausted and they feel strung along by platitudes and nice words from politicians that do not amount to a single genuine change in their life. They desperately need to see change. Carers should feel respected and supported. Instead, they feel let down and abandoned by a Government that fails to stand up for them when it matters.

These referendums should be a positive moment in Irish society, one where we can reflect on the progressive social change and long overdue rights of those who provide care. Instead, there is a concern among the parties on this side of the Chamber and the groups that work with those who provide and receive care that the Government has dragged its heels on this for so long that rejecting the words of the citizens' assembly by providing for this alternative wording that is almost a watering down of the recommendations will cause real damage. It runs the risk of creating a referendum that will be a missed opportunity to deliver the genuine change they need and want to see.

We have seen time and again a Government that is big on promises and slow on delivery. This appears to many to be the case again. This referendum should not be allowed to become yet another example of this. The Government must support sensible amendments and listen to carers and families to ensure it gets this right. I go back to what I said on the Thirty-ninth Amendment of the Constitution (The Family) Bill 2023. It is very much about laying out where this will go from here by providing that the legislation that needs to be changed will be changed and asking what new legislation we need to have in place. Carers do not want to be merely recognised; they want the rights that will make a genuine difference to their daily lives.

The citizens' assembly and Joint Committee on Gender Equality made clear that an obligation should be placed on the State to take reasonable measures to support care within the home and the wider community. That is more than simply a recognition. The assembly and joint committee, of which I was a member, went about their work in a democratic manner. We took into account a wide range of views from stakeholders, civil society groups, experts and constitutional campaigners. All of that was reflected in the final report from the joint committee.

An obligation to "strive" to support care is far too weak and will not deliver the change that carers have asked for a long time. I share their concerns that this term is unlikely to be interpreted as imposing any enforceable obligation on the State to support care that is provided in the home or otherwise.

The wording proposed recognises care obligations within families but places no equivalent obligation on the State to support that work. The Government can argue that the provision that exists in social welfare supports represents a reasonable level of support, yet any carer will tell us about the distress and daily struggle they face trying to keep on top of their basic bills, and that is before the increased cost of living landed on top of them. This should be a matter of shame for a wealthy country such as ours and it should not be considered progress.

There needs to be a more robust text put in place. If the Minister is not willing to do that, he must be willing to come forward and outline in detail what the next steps are. If the Minister truly sees the wording of this referendum as being the catalyst for other things to take place, he should outline what they are and provide a roadmap for them for those who provide and receive care. This is not an issue that we have been speaking about for only the past five, ten or 15 years. If the Minister reads the Official Report of the debate on the night the Constitution was passed by this House, he will see the divisions about the support or lack thereof for this area started then. We know the impact that this has had. It is now the responsibility of Members of this House to ensure that stops and never happens again, and that there is never again an environment in which it could happen again. We must ensure the referendums bring about enforceable rights, stronger constitutional protection and practical improvements in the lives of diverse families, carers and those with disabilities, not only symbolic recognition that results in no real change.

The addition of the new Article 42B would mean the only mention of people with disabilities in the Constitution is the implicit reference to them as being the subject of family care. As FLAC has outlined, this creates a tension between the Constitution and the provisions of the UNCRPD. To my mind, it is also deeply disrespectful to those who receive care and have disabilities.

Many individuals and organisations have been reaching out not only to me and my party but to the other members of the Joint Committee on Gender Equality since its report was published over a year ago. Their concerns are not based on some flight of fancy but on the lived experiences of those they represent, who tell them that things will not change if the Minister is not willing to take the next step and outline what will come after the referendum. If he is genuinely committed to this being the first step, he should outline what the next steps will be.

This referendum should be about placing Ireland on a road to a statutory framework that provides rights to care receivers and care supporters. It is, in effect, in many ways, a once in a generation opportunity to move from care as charity to care as a matter of rights. It is no surprise that we are an outlier among our European neighbours in our statutory entitlements to care services or support for carers. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission's July 2023 policy statement on care states: " Every stakeholder we engaged with in the writing of this policy statement advised that accessing care services in Ireland is a ‘postcode lottery’." The Government must listen to the people and clarify what it is seeking to achieve in this proposed wording and what it will mean in practical terms for both law and policy. Without the Government doing that, this, to my mind, will struggle to pass. If this does not pass, those who provide and receive care will in no way be better off than they were beforehand. They need action, not symbolism; they need rights and not gimmicks.

We need to be aware, as we stand here, that those groups that engaged with the Committee on Gender Equality and in so many other forums over the years, around the rights of those who receive and give care, may go out and call for a "Yes" vote, but they are doing it based on this fraction of an improvement. It is not the monumental step it could and should have been. They are looking and seeing that the improvement is almost negligible but they are not going to go out and ask for a "No" vote for the risk of removing that tiny improvement to the lives of those they represent. I ask the Minister to lay out what are the next steps for them. Let that tiny bit of a vote be a stronger voice. Let us make sure this is supported and that the campaign is run properly with proper information and a shutdown of disinformation. Let us do those who need this to pass the justice they deserve.

See this speech in context