Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. I welcome this important Bill of which, as I have said, the Labour group, and, indeed, my colleagues in the Dáil, are supportive. We will campaign strongly for a Yes vote.

We recognise that the referendum, if passed, will significantly reduce the current legal delays, and, indeed, financial burdens placed in front of couples who are suffering the trauma of marriage breakdown. I spoke, on Second Stage, about the unnecessary barriers for couples that the current position represents with the requirement of four out of the previous five years living apart being unduly onerous. Certainly, we neither wish to see any delay to the holding of the referendum or wish to see the process disrupted.

As a veteran of many referendum campaigns, I understand why Governments and those campaigning for a Yes vote tend to be cautious about referendum proposals. Nonetheless, as I stated on Second Stage, we could be somewhat more radical at times. Certainly, on the blasphemy referendum in November last, we should have gone further and not only removed blasphemy from the Constitution but removed the other offences in the same article. It is unfortunate we did not take that opportunity. I note the Minister's expression. Caution was probably advised in that regard. On the other hand, the Constitution is neither the place to be providing for criminal offences or for providing for complex detail of issues of family law, marital breakdown or reproductive health law.

I appreciate Senator Ruane's approach in these amendments. It builds on the approach taken in the 2018 referendum where we simply inserted into the Constitution a facilitative provision enabling the Oireachtas to legislate without setting down the parameters or criteria on which it would have to legislate.That is generally preferable. It is generally preferable that we do not seek to be too prescriptive in the Constitution as to the detail of family law. On the other hand, I very much welcome the fact that the Minister has published the general scheme and that he has indicated in advance what the legislation will look like if the referendum is passed. As I said, I will seek a comprehensive debate on the shape of that legislation on Second Stage. I will debate whether it is necessary to go for the current proposal of people having to have been separated for two out of the previous three years and whether we should instead look to reduce the requirement to one year out of the previous two, which would deal with the issues around proving irreconcilable breakdown. It would also be more in keeping with EU norms in respect of requirements for time spent living apart. If the referendum passes, we will have the opportunity to deal with other means of tackling the legal resolution of marriage breakdown and divorce proceedings through the legislation. We can have this debate at that time. I thank Senator Ruane for giving us the opportunity to debate the concept of this amendment to the Constitution. While I accept the need for caution, very much welcome the current proposal, and will campaign strongly for a Yes vote in the referendum, the point the Senator made is worth considering.