Seanad debates

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (Gender Pay Gap Information) Bill: Committee Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of David StantonDavid Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am very pleased to be back in the Seanad to discuss this Bill in the names of Senators Ivana Bacik, Kevin Humphreys, Gerald Nash and Aodhán Ó Ríordáin. I congratulate Senator Lorraine Clifford Lee on the birth of her little boy. It brings to mind the issue of maternity and paternity leave for politicians, an issue on which we should focus at some stage with a view to determining if people want something to be done in that regard. I also note that while a lot of progress has been made on the issue of child care, more has to be done. It is an issue the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Katherine Zappone, has seized upon and, with the support of everybody, I hope we can make further progress on it. It is a very important issue and the Senator was right to raise it.

To get back to the issue in hand, as Senators will be aware, the Government has committed in A Programme for a Partnership Government and an action in the national strategy for women and girls which I encourage colleagues to read because it contains a lot of information to promoting wage transparency by requiring companies with 50 or more employees to periodically complete a wage survey and report the results. This is part of a package of measures envisaged to address the gender pay gap. A public consultation process to inform this work concluded on 4 October and the analysis of the submissions received has started. The findings will be considered at a symposium planned for 4 December to identify the actions needed in the short and medium term, including the most useful methodology to be used in wage surveys. It would be my preference for the Bill to complete Committee Stage but not to pursue further until the Government brings forward proposals following full consultation with stakeholders. Actions are happening in parallel to what we are doing. It is in that context that I approach the Bill and the amendments tabled for discussion.

I should make it clear that I am examining the Bill with a view to bringing forward a number of Government amendments on Report Stage. I have listened carefully to Senator Conway-Walsh's explanation for the amendments and understand and appreciate her intention to address one of the concerns I raised on Second Stage, namely, that no provision had been made which would guarantee that wage surveys would be introduced. However, the Government's position is that the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, should not be involved in wage surveys but rather that the Minister for Justice and Equality, in co-operation with other relevant Ministers, should, subject to appropriate scrutiny by the Houses and based on primary legislation, frame the scheme for wage surveys. It would be a whole-of-government approach which I am sure Senators will agree would carry a great deal of weight.

We understand informally that the IHREC also considers that it would not be appropriate for it to take on this role, but I accept what Senator Ivana Bacik has said about it having an oversight role. That will happen and it is important that it should. A lead-in time would be needed both for the making and administration of a scheme and for employers to gear up to produce the information specified. I take the opportunity to ask all companies, both public and private, to start focusing on this matter now. It is important that all companies, both public and private, do so if they have not already started. I am preparing an amendment to provide for a commencement order to accommodate this approach. I will bring forward the amendment on Report Stage, with amendments to the Long Title of the Bill to remove the references to the IHREC.

Amendment No. 2 would reduce the level of discretion allowed in the making of a scheme. I suggest that when the list of matters to be prescribed in a scheme is reasonable, it may not be necessary to require that all matters be dealt with in every scheme.

I note that amendment No. 3 would reduce the discretion allowed. On the face of it, the making of a biannual report by employers sounds reasonable. However, I am concerned that this provision would be unduly restrictive and not offer the flexibility required to vary a scheme to provide for less frequent publication of information should experience and practice suggest it would be beneficial to do so, for example, in the case of smaller employers.

I raise an additional matter which concerns the information to be published at employer level in accordance with subsection (4) of section 32A to be inserted by section 1. There may be a danger that the pay of an individual might be worked out from the information published. I am advised by the Attorney General that this raises the matter of compliance with Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on the protection of personal data which provides that:

Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her. Such data must be processed fairly for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned or some other legitimate basis laid down by law.

The matter will be discussed further with the Office of the Attorney General and I may bring forward an amendment on Report Stage to take account of it.

For the reasons outlined, the Government is not able to support the amendments, but I assure Senators that we are all headed in the same direction on the need for wage surveys and to address the gender pay gap. We will bring forward amendments on Report Stage when we have gone through the public consultation process I outlined, including the symposium, and carried out the research that needs to be done. We will then bring proposals to the House for debate and consultation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.