Dáil debates
Wednesday, 2 July 2025
Social Welfare (Bereaved Partner’s Pension and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025: Report and Final Stages
12:50 pm
Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
I am on the record as having welcomed this legislation. I understand its intention and to respond to the judgment was very necessary. It is important, however, when we have the opportunity, that we make the legislation as good and decent as it can be and ensure that it reflects the judgment.
We must remember the Chief Justice placed an emphasis on the rights of all children and the obligations of their parents, irrespective of the status of their parents. We are not talking about large numbers. There are no floodgates, as FLAC has pointed out. As Deputy Coppinger said, and rightly so, FLAC took the case. It has been immersed in this. FLAC, One Family and Treoir all ask the same thing, which is, if possible at this late stage, will the Minister try to include all children.
Most of our amendments have been ruled out of order. This is very regrettable. The Bill has come before us in order to rectify legislation that treated the children of cohabiting parents less favourably than the children of married parents. That was declared unconstitutional, and rightly so, but it is hard to see any justification for the introduction of legislation that treats the children of separated or divorced parents less favourably than children whose parents are married, in a civil partnership or cohabiting.
The amendment being proposed is very sensible. It is simply about the compilation of data and the examination of the potential financial implications. I genuinely do not believe it is the Minister's intention to exclude these people but it is hard to come to any other conclusion. We are standing here telling the Minister there are people and children, not in large numbers, who will potentially be discriminated against. The Minister is creating another class of child, which flies in the face of the judgment. I encourage the Minister to support the amendment and do this work before the Bill is enacted. The intention here is to right a wrong but the Minister will not right that wrong by creating another category, layer and group of children who are excluded.
I know, not from my own personal experience – touch wood – but from experience in my very close family, how important this money is to people at a time in their lives when there are expenses such as funerals and kids to be cared for. It is very tough time and the money is very much needed. It is also a recognition of the children, and this is worth saying. This represents a levelling down. The Bill creates a category of children and a category of family who will be excluded and treated less favourably. Before the Minister presses ahead with this, it is right to support the amendment and take this opportunity to review the financial implications and the potential for hardship for a very small number of people. I want to really stress there are no floodgates about to be opened. We are talking about small numbers but, nonetheless, for every single one of them this is a very important amendment.
No comments