David Norris (Independent)

While I did not hear it, I accept that an unfortunate remark may have been made, which is a pity. The issue of domestic violence, principally against women, although not exclusively, is a highly important one and I welcome the consensus that has been evident. I also welcome the indications from the Minister that the civil liability Bill will be introduced, that there will be other legislative changes and that funding will be provided. I am confident the House will live up to its duty to monitor these promises and ensure they are carried out.

A societal change has taken place during my lifetime. I remember when domestic violence was something in which the State would not get involved. When police were called to scenes of considerable domestic violence, they would go away saying it was a family matter, as if the fact that it took place within the family permitted this kind of gross abuse and violence. I welcome the fact that society has changed and that we do not regard it as permissible to violate family members simply because they are within the family. The statistics are perfectly clear. The vast majority of this kind of offence takes place within the family and are perpetrated by close family members. I welcome the fact that the Garda is prepared to intervene and that, in certain circumstances, legal aid is available.

We also need to look at the psychological impact of such events on victims. I looked at media reporting of the re-opened case of Sophie Toscan du Plantier. I do not think I am trespassing on any dangerous legal ground by saying he admitted battering his partner on a number of occasions, yet she went back to him and defended him in court.

This is an interesting phenomenon which I have come across in the area of social work where young people were battered to a considerable extent by older people in relationships. There is almost an addiction to the violence by the victim. This is an extraordinary issue which I have come across time and again. Why do victims go back? One of my colleagues referred to the fact that, on average, it takes 35 attacks before somebody will report an offence. I have never quite understood that. Very often the victims are people of low personal self-esteem and, pathetically, at least they are getting attention — they are in a strong emotional focus. At least the person who is battering them cares enough about them to batter them. The emotional excitement involved in this almost becomes a drug. It is a dreadful thing to say but I am afraid it is true. This is something that needs to be examined.

Children are often victims in a number of ways. As has been said, they are witnesses to the violence. It is a dreadful thing for a cowering child to watch his or her parents, who should provide that arch of security, instead attack each other and sometimes turn on their children. An extraordinary degree of cross-over exists between adults who abuse their spouses and also abuse their children and this needs to be addressed.

Senator Minihan's point, that the violence is not exclusively against women, is valid. Undoubtedly, there are cases of violence against men. I do not think the incidence is at the same level, but this hardly matters that much. If a human is battered, humiliated, degraded, frightened or injured, he or she has a right to be protected. It does not matter a damn to me whether the victim is a man or a woman.

We ought to examine this. There have been some worrying judgments on both sides. I think of a recent case where a woman who stabbed her husband was given the benefit of the Probation Act; both parties were drunk and had a row in a pub. I do not think this is acceptable and it raises questions.

There is also the recent case of a rape committed upon a male. I am preparing a domestic partnership Bill because the gay community is not currently protected. It is not possible for a partner in a gay relationship to get a barring order. That is not right; they have a right to be protected by the State. This is worrying and I ask the Minister of State to relay this to the Minister. The absence of proper recognition of these relationships is one of the things that militates against the existence of barring orders. If anyone thinks such orders are not necessary, or that this is just my view, he or she should read the report by a non-gay person, Finbar Murphy, in a book entitled Coming Out. Mr. Murphy is the excellent Garda liaison officer with the gay community. He does not simply deal with queer bashing; he also deals with serious incidents of violence inside relationships.

It is appropriate that we should have the debate at this time as I have been saving the material from the "16 facts for 16 days" campaign by Women's Aid which arrived on our desks on a daily basis, the affect of which was cumulative. It is interesting to put the short, brief facts together as one gets a composite picture. Of the 83 women murdered in Ireland since the end of 1995, 54 were murdered in their own homes. That tells a story about Irish family life. Of these 83 murders, 45 cases have been resolved and of these, 37 were killed by men they knew — 12 were murdered by their husbands or partners and six by ex-partners. This indicates the possessiveness of the average male. Women are in particular difficulty and danger at the moment of separation as the "property" is seen to be sliding away. Men want to grab and smash them as they feel that no one will have "it" if they cannot have "it". Regrettably, women are seen as "it" in these circumstances.

Many Members have spoken about the excellent briefing paper distributed byWomen's Aid, which contains a number of recommendations for action. The organisation suggests that "civil legal aid should be properly resourced and the private practitioner's scheme re-instated to ensure that victims of domestic violence have access to legal advice and representation". I think there would be all-party support for this. Further recommendations include "proper resources must be allocated to service provision for victims of domestic violence, including emergency safe accommodation; support and outreach services; and supported transitional housing." Behind this lies the human aspect where battered women who approach agencies have nowhere to go and must go back to the place where they were battered, perhaps to suffer further violence. This is a significant failure of the State which must be addressed.

The third recommendation seeks to "ensure that all victims of domestic violence can access protection through the courts, the Government must honour its commitment to amend the Domestic Violence Act 1996." I think this commitment has been given. Couples with children that do not live together are not covered by this legislation and this gap must be addressed.

The recommendations continue:

4. The family law system should be adequately resourced to allow the timely processing of cases involving domestic violence.

5. The national steering committee on violence against women and the RPCs should be resourced to implement the recommendations of the task force on violence against women and to further its strategic plan.

6. Initiatives such as the national domestic violence intervention agency, NDVIA, which are attempting to link the various elements of the legal system in order to increase victim safety, should be resourced and evaluated.

7. A legal working group to examine the issue of child custody and access in relation to domestic violence should be established to ensure that the safety of women and children is central to all responses and decisions.

All these recommendations should be considered and implemented. The briefing paper alsostates:

It is essential that the additional needs of women who face further structural barriers and discrimination because of poverty, disability, immigration status, ethnicity, sexual orientation [I think I am the first Member of the House to have raised this issue] educational disadvantage or behaviour that is viewed as non-conforming, are incorporated in all responses to women experiencing male violence.