Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, to the House. On 18 October last, we had a good debate here on this serious topic. The Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, agreed with the main thrust of the debate, which was, the idea of clarifying the current status of pre-nuptial agreements in Irish law and looking at the effect of their possible introduction. There was unanimous support in the House for the whole concept. In the past 30 or 40 years, we have undergone major economic and social changes. People are marrying later in life and, consequently, entering marriage with considerable assets which they own in their own right, with no input by their new spouse. People are remarrying and, in that context, may also have built up considerable assets. They may have a family from the first marriage and would see much benefit from a pre-nuptial agreement. In addition, there is the issue of those who own businesses and farms, so these matters affect a wide range of people.

I was amazed at the reaction to the debate in the House on 18 October. Initially, it may have been thought that pre-nuptial agreements concern only American multi-millionaires, but it was soon realised such matters apply to a wider number of people. During the earlier debate, we disagreed on one point. I urged the Minister to ask the Law Reform Commission to examine the issue of pre-nuptial agreements, but he suggested the establishment of a working group which would produce a report more quickly. That was six weeks ago, however, and the working group has still not been established. I am concerned that despite the unanimous decision of this House, we have not seen progress on the appointment of a working group and neither have we seen its terms of reference being clearly laid out. I am aware of many people who would be keen to make submissions to such a working group. Earlier this week, the programme "Ear to the Ground" referred to this issue in the context of marriage breakdown and family farms being divided as a result. If people have been married for a long time I can see why a farm, or half a farm, may be sold. However, if a couple have been married for only a year or two when their marriage breaks down, it is outrageous that, in effect, they end up having to sell the farm and cannot continue in farming. Not alone do they lose their marriage, therefore, but they also lose their livelihood. The Minister of State will be aware that farming has become a difficult endeavour. It is difficult to earn an income from a farm and, therefore, impossible to do so from half a farm. It is vitally important to clarify the law in this area. If people opt for a pre-nuptial agreement, the State should recognise it.

I look forward to the Minister of State's reply. I hope it will not be a general and ambiguous answer, as is normal with Adjournment matters, but will deal in specifics. The Minister of State should tell us exactly how many people will be on the working group, when they will be appointed and what the group's terms of reference will be.