Seanad debates

Wednesday, 18 February 2004

Equality Bill 2004: Committee Stage.

 

1:00 pm

Mary Henry (Independent)

I move amendment No. 26:

In page 29, lines 25 to 31, to delete all words from and including "she—" in line 25 down to and including "grants" in line 31 and substitute the following:

"she requires persons who are not EU nationals or refugees to fulfil reasonable requirements in respect of length of residency in the State".

This amendment means that the practice of continuing to have non-nationals discriminated against regarding third level grants will remain in place. No one wants to try to arrive at a situation where people from all over the world flood the country and apply for grants to attend third level institutions. However, we could take into account the residency of non-nationals in this country. That is what the amendment suggests.

I am grateful to FLAC for drawing my attention to a ruling by the equality tribunal on 28 May 2003. A case was brought by FLAC on behalf of two complainants, both of whom were permanently resident in Ireland together with their families and had been here for a considerable number of years. The equality officer's decision stated:

Clause 4.4 of the Maintenance Grant scheme for Students states that candidates must hold EU nationality or have official refugee status in order to qualify for a grant which, in my opinion, is clearly contrary to the Equal Status Act's prohibition of discrimination based on nationality . . . I consider that a continuing discriminatory rule still exists and accordingly in the interests of preventing future unlawful discrimination, I would suggest that clause 4.4 be annulled completely rather than simply being disapplied as the need arises. I would also recommend that the Department, in designing grant schemes in future should take full account of the provisions of the Equal Status Act 2000.

It is disappointing that no account has been taken of the equality officer's recommendation that the grant schemes be amended to make them non-discriminatory. The Government has instead chosen to approach the matter by amending the Equal Status Act to allow the discrimination to continue. While I understand that there could be legitimate concerns about a potential strain on the grant schemes caused by people coming to this country for the specific purpose of availing of education, the imposition of a blanket nationality clause is both disproportionate and discriminatory. As I have suggested, alternative restrictions such as residency requirements could adequately deal with any potential abuse.

I ask the Minister of State to consider this matter carefully because the provision will not apply to a huge number of people. As the equality officer stated, it would be better not to have this discrimination at all rather than applying it on a once-off case basis whenever such cases arise.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.