Results 12,481-12,500 of 18,736 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: It is fascinating to be told by people that we know nothing about constitutional law when they produced equal status legislation which was flung out by the Supreme Court.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: The Deputy was having a senior moment when that was dealt with a moment ago.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: He must have been having a senior moment as that was dealt with a moment ago.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: A political consensus is emerging towards legislating in this area, hence this debate tonight. This mirrors an emerging international trend to provide enhanced rights and recognition to cohabitants and particularly to same-sex cohabiting couples. However, there is no uniform international approach to statutory recognition and protection for same-sex civil unions. A small number of...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: The Bill is also premature because it would clearly be unwise to attempt to provide a statutory scheme equivalent to marriage for same-sex couples until the Supreme Court appeal on the recognition of a foreign same-sex marriage has been decided. I look to section 5 of this Bill which would purport to decide the issue before the Supreme Court in the Zappone case and I do not believe it is...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: The Government fully accepts that same-sex couples and other unmarried cohabiting couples require heightened legal protection. Many cohabiting couples share property, home life and income, and want to care for one another, to be next-of-kin to each other and to be cared for in that context and to have legal rights to do so. While it is open to couples to regulate at least some aspects of...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Legislative reform in this area might then include a civil registration scheme alongside the contract and redress models recommended in the Law Reform Commission report. The working group and the Law Reform Commission suggest that such an approach would allow cohabitants either to opt-in to a set of rights and duties towards each other and attain a formal and public status or make a...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I have asked and I have discovered what is the situation.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I do not believe we should walk the road of saying, "We know best; this is the way to run a gay relationship". The only State recognition available for a gay relationship is if it is on the same basis as marriage. That is not fair to gay and lesbian people, and is highly unrealistic.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: The Deputy should listen.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Will the Deputy stop heckling? He has been heckling and speaking for over an hour. He should keep quiet.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: It is not fair to say to gay and lesbian people that only one model of State recognition is available, namely, that one must take on all the incidents of marriage. It is not fair to say to heterosexual cohabiting couples that the only basis on which they can be recognised is if they enter into a marriage equivalent.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: It is not right to say to people who have a non-sexual relationship and who want to give next-of-kin rights to each other, or who want to be recognised for those purposes, that they can have no support from the State unless they decide to also take on the incidents of marriage.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Those are not fair propositions. The Deputy has not thought this through.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Some couples may prefer a form of civil partnership which protects certain rights of importance to them but which may not have the full set of legal implications of marriage. I want to do something for them.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: We are working on it.

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: While Deputies may find it funny, we are working on it. Of course I acknowledge that many same-sex couples seek full equal status with opposite-sex couples by having the option of marriage extended to them. I respect that ambition but legislative reform is possible only to the extent permitted by the Constitution. On the question of constitutional reform — I want this point made as a...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Equally, the Irish Human Rights Commission-commissioned report on the rights of de facto couples offers the view that, while desirable to anchor any future legislation in this area, constitutional reform is not prescribed under our international obligations. My view is that it is beneficial for those in cohabiting relationships, and for society, to provide a legal framework of recognition...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: An opposite-sex couple may want to stay outside the legal marital relationship but may nevertheless want to create some mutually enforceable rights and obligations in their dealings with each other and with society in general. On the other hand, as the law stands, gay and lesbian couples are excluded from marriage and cannot make a full legal and social commitment to each other. Just like...

Civil Unions Bill 2006: Second Stage (20 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: It says nothing with regard to non-sexual relationships. It turns its back on the concept of civil partnership and states that there should be only civil unions for gay and lesbian people, and then deals with the matter in what I believe is an unconstitutional way. Rather than suggest the Bill is the answer to all our questions, which I do not believe it is——