Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State. I also welcome the members of GLEN and the representatives from Labour LGBT who are in the Gallery. Both have been very active on this issue and in seeking legislation such as that before the House. As the person who brought forward this Bill 12 months ago, I am delighted the Government allowed it to pass Second Stage and that it is now facilitating Committee Stage. I am sorry, however, that it has taken this long and it is unfortunate that it is a year since Second Stage was taken. As stated earlier, I am aware the Equality and Human Rights Commission has been compiling a report, which I have not seen, and that the Government wanted sight of that to evaluate how it might improve upon the Bill. On Second Stage, many Senators, including me, stated that the Bill could be improved and made more robust by means of amendment. None of us wanted there to be a delay of 12 months, however, and I am committed to ensuring we will dispose of Committee Stage by Easter. It is very important that if we do not conclude our deliberations on it today, we do so next week. Progress must be made in respect of this matter.

The type of situations to which Senator Norris referred and which were raised on Second Stage by Senator Zappone and others - I refer here to the awful case involving Eileen Flynn - illustrate exactly why legislation of this type is required. Some of us, myself included, referred to the fact that the Bill is somewhat conservative in terms of the way it is drafted. Examining the matter 12 months on, I am of the view that it is vital the legislation be enacted in order that LGBT employees might be protected. I refer in particular to gay people who are teaching in institutions which, as is the case with 90% of them, are run by religious orders. Such individuals live in fear as a result of the fact that the existing section 37(1) remains in place. Let us not allow technical issues relating to the Bill delay its passage. It is extremely important that the Bill be enacted, especially as it relates to a Government commitment that is long overdue for implementation.

I read the submission made by Atheist Ireland and, as an atheist, I support it. However, Atheist Ireland is overly dismissive of the Bill and it underplays the great significance it will have, even if passed in its current format. Atheist Ireland also misunderstands Article 4 of the directive. We will return to that point when we examine the Bill in greater detail.

I welcome the fact that Senators Zappone and Power have put forward constructive amendments by means of which they are seeking to strengthen the Bill. However, we must also be cognisant of the need to have the Bill passed in order that employees who suffer the chilling effect of the continued existence of section 37(1) might be protected. In her amendments, Senator Zappone is seeking to amend the original Employment Equality Act. They are not really directly related to amending section 37(1) but rather involve trying to broaden the religion ground to include atheism. I thoroughly agree with the Senator in this regard but I do not agree with the wording used in amendment No. 1, namely, "that one has a religion or belief and the other has not". As an atheist, I have a belief. It is not that I do not have a belief. It is just a matter of considering how we might improve on the wording to which I refer.