Averil Power (Fianna Fail)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome representatives from the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, GLEN, the teacher unions, BelongTo, TENI, Gay Doctors Ireland and Ógra Fianna Fáil who are in the Gallery. We are dealing with an issue of major concern to each of these groups, namely, the threat posed to thousands of teachers, doctors, nurses and other employees by section 37(1) of the Employment Equality Act. In proposing this Bill, I hope we can reach cross-party consensus. Tackling injustice and promoting human rights is an issue on which we should be united.

Since I first proposed the Bill, I have endeavoured to do everything I can to build consensus to move it forward. I engaged with the other political parties and Independents. I made it clear that I am prepared to work with any Member on any amendment to make the Bill more effective. On Second Stage we are debating the general principles and on Committee Stage, as we do with other Bills, we can make sure everyone is happy with the precise wording. I had originally planned to bring the Bill into the House two months ago but I agreed to hold off at the request of the Government side to allow time to consult and collaborate on it. We have been doing that over the past two months but we must move on because this is an issue of immediate and pressing concern to so many people.

Under equality legislation, it is illegal for an employer to discriminate against an employee or potential employee on grounds including gender, civil status, family status and sexual orientation. However, section 37(1) of the Act provides an exemption for religious, educational or medical institutions under the direction or control of a body established for religious purposes. It is widely considered that this section could be used to justify discrimination against an employee simply because he or she is lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, separated, divorced, cohabiting outside marriage or an unmarried mother. Some people say this is a hypothetical problem and question whether such discrimination, even though it is legal, could take place. This week, we learned of an investigation by the Ombudsman for Children into a school in Tipperary that refused to enroll a 16 year old girl on the grounds that she was pregnant. Citing his duty to protect the honourable majority of his pupils, the principal stated the school should not be blamed for having a "moral code". If such prejudice can be used against a teenage girl who wants to finish her education, I have no doubt that it can also be used to deny someone a job or promotion in a school or hospital.

People are at any immediate risk and putting this issue on the long finger will leave them vulnerable. GLEN and the teacher unions believe section 37(1) of the Employment Equality Act is causing real problems for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, LGBT, teachers. GLEN states that as a result of this provision, employees or prospective employees, whose lives may possibly be interpreted to be contrary to the religious ethos of some faiths, have lived in fear for their jobs and their prospects within employment. They acknowledge that no case has been taken under the Act but point out that it serves as a daily chill factor for LGBT teachers.

Employees and potential employees of religious-run hospitals are in the same position. According to Dr. Leslie Hannon of Gay Doctors Ireland, "The weight of laws like these impress upon gay doctors the type of self-censorship and 'discretion' that enable and propagate homophobia in general, simply because they serve to downsize us and make us invisible". There are many gay teachers and doctors working in our schools and hospitals but, unfortunately, too many of them feel the need to hide something as intrinsically important as who it is they fall in love with from their colleagues.

I will give an example of such a teacher. Mary works in a Catholic primary school and has been working in the same school for the past 20 years. She is a great teacher and her pupils love how she makes every lesson interesting. Parents are impressed by how well their children are doing in her classroom. The school principal appreciates how she is always willing to go beyond the call of duty and help out with after-school activities. She does a great job of preparing her class for their communion day. Mary loves teaching and it is all she ever wanted to do but she has never been fully comfortable at school. She lives with the constant fear of her colleagues finding out that she is a lesbian because section 37 could be used to take action against her. She hopes the school would not do so but feels it is safer not to test it. When other teachers talk to each other about their families and what they did at the weekend, Mary is very quiet in the staff room. She makes a point of only socialising with her long-term partner outside the town that she works in. Mary is determined that her colleagues will only learn of her relationship with her partner when she brings Susan to her retirement party.

Over the past couple of months, I have received e-mails from many teachers like Mary welcoming this Bill. All make the same point that they do not want any special treatment but want to be judged on the same basis as everyone else, namely, on ability in the classroom rather than on someone else's perception of their private lives. This Bill will ensure that happens.

Freedom of religion is an important constitutional value and one I fully respect but it should not be used to permit discrimination that would be unacceptable and illegal in any other employment. It should not be allowed to significantly reduce job opportunities for an entire group of people. If the Bill is enacted, religious-run institutions will still be entitled to insist that staff members demonstrate respect for the ethos in the workplace and not actively seek to undermine it but they will not be able to dismiss, discriminate against or refuse to hire people just because they do not approve of their private lives. The Bill was drafted to achieve an appropriate and constitutionally proportionate balance between the right of an institution to uphold its ethos and the rights of the individual teacher. It has been strongly endorsed by GLEN, which called on the Government to support it. It has also been welcomed by the INTO lesbian, gay and bisexual group, whose chairman, Cathal O'Riada, has said that removing the ability for schools to discriminate would be an enormous and immediate relief for gay teachers. Representatives from the ASTI and TUI also addressed a briefing session on the Bill for Members in Leinster House and urged Members to support it. At the same session, a representative from BelongTo spoke of the impact that discrimination against gay teachers has on young people by forcing teachers to hide their true identities and robbing young LGBT people of role models they need at a difficult time in their lives.

Fianna Fáil has taken the initiative in putting forward this Bill. As a republican party, we must be committed to fighting discrimination in all forms. This should not be a party political issue. The Bill is in line with a commitment in the programme for Government and is in keeping with the progressive approach the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, has taken to the issue of tackling homophobic bullying in schools. The debate on Second Stage discusses the principle of tackling discrimination. We are not here to sign off on the final wording and, in any case, we cannot change the wording today. That will take place on Committee Stage. I indicated to Members that I am happy to see the Bill amended on Committee Stage. Two specific amendments need to be made, one of which is to include gender and family status as grounds. The wording is not perfect but that is not the point. Two weeks ago, we sat through six or seven hours of Government amendments to the Education (Amendment) Bill because it wanted to tidy up the Bill. We are not here to sign off on the final wording of the Bill. We are here to discuss the principle and whether, as a House, we can send out a united message that we want to deal with the principle. We can sit down on Committee Stage and take input from legal advisers and others and ensure that everybody is happy with the final wording. Obviously I have had the wording cleared by two lawyers who are satisfied and have read the case law, the original Article 26 reference in the Bill and other related case law on the freedom of religion. They are happy that it strikes a proportionate balance because it leaves the protection for the religious ethos of the institution and simply qualifies that religious ethos cannot be used to discriminate against somebody, their inherent personal characteristics or their private lives outside of the hospital or school where they work.

Before Members commence their contributions I want to clearly state that I am happy to work with anybody on any side of the House to finalise the wording and ensure that everybody is happy with it before we go any further. This is an important issue and I genuinely think that all parties should be willing to put aside their differences and send out a united message. The Bill addresses a genuine fear among citizens of this State about whether they can go about their lives free from a threat of discrimination. It is not a hypothetical problem but a real issue that we, as a House, have an opportunity to change today and before the next school year commences. I hope that the Bill will receive cross-party support today, that we can all collaborate and have a final text passed through both Houses of the Oireachtas and enacted as soon as possible.