Tony Kett (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to the House. I also welcome this Bill which amends the Adoptive Leave Act 1995. This legislation came about following the recommendations of the working group established for the purpose of amending that Bill. The Adoptive Leave Act 1995 provided additional weeks' leave to adoptive parents at the time. One of the main provisions of the Bill is to increase that time further.

Senator Terry raised the issue of the number of weeks' leave for adoptive versus natural parents, 16 versus 18. One can understand how this happens. A biological mother may need time off prior to the birth of the baby to deal with medical problems an adoptive mother would not necessarily have. I remember when it was recommended that the pregnant mother should take four weeks of her leave prior to the birth of the child. This has now been reduced to two weeks. Is that regulation established in law?

When the recommended period was four weeks, pregnant mothers were inclined to hang on as long as they could before taking leave, sometimes at risk to themselves, in order to have as much time as possible with their child after the birth. I remember when I worked in the Mater Hospital we went out one Friday evening, as traditional, to have drinks with a girl from my department who was taking maternity leave and to celebrate the pending arrival of her child. About two hours into the session we discovered that the expectant mother was not there. On her way to the pub she had to detour to Holles Street hospital to have her child. This woman may have taken a chance by working right up to her delivery. Perhaps doctors were in cahoots with such women. Some people say they were at the time and that they were willing to change expected arrival dates, etc. Women ran a risk by trying to arrange matters so they could take most of the time off after the birth of the baby and sometimes forfeited their health by staying at work too long. However, 20 years on I am sure this woman's child is getting on well.

The fact that we are discussing further equality legislation today confirms the Government's commitment to the equality agenda. The increased leave period and the other improvements recommended by the group are evidence of the growing awareness of the need for greater balance between working and family time. The implementation of the recommendations will make the workplace a better place for pregnant women and new mothers.

Senator Terry mentioned the problem of the lack of child care facilities. The legislation being introduced today will alleviate this in some way through increased parental leave for adopted children. However, while the situation may be alleviated somewhat, child care remains a serious problem. Perhaps the Minister for Finance would consider giving some form of tax relief to mothers and parents who must pay for expensive child care facilities in order for them to continue in the workforce. Only a few years ago we were crying out for people to stay in the workforce and were seeking ways to try and get more people into it. Such an incentive would encourage people.

The achievement of the working group in reviewing maternity protection legislation in its entirety is commendable. The group has done a significant job in the area of this complex legislation. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform also faces a ferocious task in dealing with this and with equality legislation which ranges over issues from disability to equality at work etc. The Government is doing a fine job in that regard and I hope this continues.

Senator Jim Walsh mentioned small businesses. Approximately 40 pieces of legislation have been introduced in the equality area since 1997 and there is no doubt but that these have an impact on small businesses. Has any study ever been done on the impact of this legislation on small businesses in terms of their ability to survive and create jobs, rather than lose them? In terms of the minimum wage, I heard talk that small businesses stood to lose 14,000 jobs. It has been said that 29,000 jobs are at risk overall because if there was no increase another 15,000 jobs could have been created. I raise this matter in the context of our ability as a country to continue to create jobs in small businesses.

If we consider the legislation currently under discussion in the context of a business with ten employees, if three of the staff were on leave at any one time — maternity, adoptive or sick leave — this would have a serious impact on the company which might only be surviving by a thread. Flexibility is important for such small businesses. However, flexibility has tightened as a result of the amount of legislation that has been passed in recent years on contracts, dismissals, equality of working time, redundancy, parental leave, now adoptive leave, stress and bullying. We have had a plethora of conditions, including the major one of health and safety regulations, placed on small businesses. These could have a significant impact on the ability of these companies to survive. We must be careful of the collective impact legislation has on such industry. However, in terms of creating equality for all workers, this legislation is commendable.