Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)

I concur with the leader of the Opposition, Senator Brian Hayes. This is not a polarised debate. We did not set out just to talk about cohabiting couples or heterosexual "cohabitees", a term which the Minister decried because he wished to use a different word. Neither did we set out to talk about lesbian or gay relationships. We set out to discuss the totality of relationships outside the married state. The debate so far has been most interesting. The Minister made the point, as did Senator Henry, Senator Maurice Hayes and many others, that we are well aware of the article in the Constitution which recognises that the State must work positively to underpin marriage — the actual wording is more legalistic than that. We adhere to that and recognise that it should be the case. However, we also recognise that the world — and Ireland is no different — is made up of couples of varying needs, desires and circumstances which lend themselves to other types of relationships. Over time, such relationships gain recognition and demand responses from the State.

Senator Walsh, the party spokesman on legal matters will be in the House before 6.55 p.m. and with Senator Henry will propose a composite arrangement, which we hope will find favour with all Members.

We have come a long way. As Senator Quinn and Senator Henry stated, the world has changed. We could all put our heads in the sand and pretend that nothing exists outside of happy, fulfilled marriages. We are all pleased there are many happy fulfilled marriages and there is no doubt that there are. I was extremely lucky in that regard. However, that does not mean I am not aware that there are many other sad relationships or couples in marriages, which have long failed, who, for some reason or because of convention, are not willing to say so. I know of couples who live in silence and that is sad. They go in and out the one door, meals are eaten and dishes washed in complete silence. To pretend that everyone is like Cinderella or Pollyanna is ridiculous and out of kilter with what is happening in society. I emphasise that I do not decry the state of marriage but applaud it. I applaud people who have entered into it, worked at it, continue to work through various difficulties and challenges which rise to meet them almost on a daily basis and who decide they can work towards a fruitful and happy relationship. It is the most blissful state one could be in.

However, I recognise there are many other relationships. When I was a member of a local authority most of my work there related to housing. At that time local authorities recognised the needs of single mothers. I echo what Senator Hayes said about the work involved in a mother, whether a single mother or a mother who was married and is separated, rearing one, two or three children. It is mostly women who rear children on their own; I do not know of many men who do so. Thankfully, the State has recognised single mothers, but I remember when it did not and castigated them from the pulpit and all sorts of other places. Local authorities decided early on that there are different definitions of family units and dealt with them according to their housing needs, not according to their morals, or as others might say, their absence thereof.

I note from the Law Reform Commission's paper that the number of relationships involving two men or two women is increasing. They have increased from 150 couples to 1,300 couples in recent times. Equally, there has been a major increase in the number of men and women living together. Some 77,000 recognised couples live in a loving inclusive relationship and want to continue in that type of relationship. To decry any relationship, regardless of a couple's gender, which is loving, inclusive and brings happiness is wrong. Who are we to throw stones? Who is anyone to castigate another person because he or she may appear to be different or in a relationship that is outside what, in true Catholic terms, would be regarded as normal? I feel I can talk openly about this issue because I was lucky to be in a marriage that was happy and inclusive, although we also had major difficulties at times. We did not get up every morning and go to bed every night thinking the sun was shining on us.

This consultation paper by the Law Reform Commission is a good start to an ongoing debate, as Senator Brian Hayes said. This paper sets out what various countries are doing in this regard and the different types of cohabiting couples. It also sets out the recognised, contractual and presumptive relationships and what they can yield.

Our justice spokesperson will be here before the end of this debate. He has consulted Senator Henry, myself and others and I hope we can come to an arrangement on this matter. I have dipped in and out of this consultation paper and have read most of it. It is worth reading to learn what is happening in other countries in this area. We cannot put up a big fence and say that people will stay forever in the wonderful orchard of happy marriage. Many will, and good luck to them, I am happy for them, but many will not be able to. If they are not able to, we should start to examine the legislative path ahead. We can do that but it will take a long time. There will not be a metamorphosis in society overnight or a clap of thunder and suddenly everything will be in place to meet the needs of every type of couple. That will require an awakening, which has begun. It will require careful reading in this regard and for the Government to give this matter careful consideration.

This House is the better for being able to have debates such as this where Members of all parties can express themselves freely and not feel they are overstepping the mark or making comments which might be harmful. We are making them with clarity, in truth and with respect. Respect is the key word. We must respect people and their various relationships.