David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Yes. I am certainly impromptu. I do not read my speeches, but I am going to read a few things into the record. This is not acceptable. I am going to set out why it is completely unacceptable. The draft heads of the Bill suggested that there would be a resolution to the issue of gay male couples not being entitled to adoptive leave or benefit. As it stands, only single male adopters or women can avail of this. The Bill, as drafted, does not include the sections that would have corresponded to heads 36 and 39 of the general scheme of the Bill, in which this issue was addressed. This lacuna in the law was addressed when the general scheme of the Parental Leave and Benefit Bill 2019, as it was then known, was issued in April. As Senator Warfield stated, it was noted at the time in the press release from the Department of Justice and Equality, in Gay Community Newsand in articles in The Irish Timesthat the Bill would resolve this anomaly. However, the relevant section has disappeared. I have correspondence from people who have written repeatedly to the Department of Justice and Equality without receiving a single reply. Not once have they received a reply.The Minister of State can shake his head as much as he likes but I am taking the word of my correspondents. This has been going on for quite a long time. I point out that at the time of the Seanad debate on the Bill in July 2016, this very same Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, stated that he was aware of the anomaly but it was not possible to resolve it in the time available for the Bill. That was three years ago yet we are still getting the same excuse that there is not time.

The Minister of State had three years and that should have been enough. He stated that the Department of Justice and Equality would bring forward amendments to the Adoptive Leave Acts following examination of the adoptive leave and social welfare legislation provisions that would need to be amended. He stated at that time that this would be done "in other legislation as soon as possible and not later than the end of the year," which was three years ago, in 2016. What is the problem? I would certainly like to know.

My correspondents state that the current lack of provision makes it less likely that male same-sex couples will adopt as the cost is increased hugely if one partner must give up their job to care for the child, rather than being able to avail of adoptive leave, and would also potentially face a loss of future earnings if unable to re-enter the workforce at the same level. That is the situation on the ground.

They continue:

While it is not likely that a child would be placed with us before the end of the year, it is also not unlikely. It is a cause of some concern to us that we still have no clarity on what to expect and so will not be in a position to make fully informed choices on whether we potentially decline the placement of a child with us, or consider whether one of us must give up their job.

That is the real human situation they are in after three years of procrastination and delay without adequate explanation.

They continue:

As children being adopted from the US often have developmental or addiction issues, we would definitely want and need to have one of us full-time with any child we adopt for longer than two weeks (the current extent of parental leave). We would want to act in the best interests of that child and provide full-time care from one parent. The shifting timelines make it difficult to plan and we have already ourselves delayed moving forward with the adoption for a number of years, pending same-sex marriage legislation, permission for same-sex couples to adopt jointly, and now this. We could of course wait for the legislation to be amended at some point in the next years. However, we may by then be too old to adopt. We did call the Workplace Relations Commission but their advice was simply that they could not advise us unless we took a case, which we could only take after a. adopting a child, b. applying for adoptive leave, and c. being turned down (at which point one of us would have had to quit their jobs to care for the child). It will be really difficult to go into a situation where we tell a birth mother that the income of her child's new family will probably be halved after the adoption or that we will have to enter into a legal battle with my employer in order to get time off.

This clearly is not equality. It is not just fathers but mothers as well. I have had a communication from two women. I will not go through the whole communication but they wrote a poem and I would like to end by putting the poem on the record.

Considered a single mother and yet,

Our girls have two parents. And don't you forget...

That we voted for marriage equality.

But what we have is not equal. Not really you see.

It's a double standard and every way we lose.

All we want is fairness - yet we can't even choose,

To have both our kids parents recognised in law.

We are Irish citizens - and yes we are both Mná.

Something so simple, a passport application.

Should have been easy, but for a small stipulation.

That I sign away my wife as though she doesn't exist.

My entire life with a single signature dismissed.

My family is equal though my country doesn't see.

All the hurt and humiliation it's been causing me.

And countless others who are in the same boat.

Come on Ireland we can do better. Didn't we already vote?

I would say to the Minister of State, "Come on, Minister, you can do better." He gave the excuse in 2016 that he did not have time to draft the legislation. In the heads of the Bill, the appropriate sections were drafted and it was announced to the press yet, once again, we have a situation where this has to be rushed through and there is no room for gay people in it. That is intolerable. It is not acceptable in this House. With the greatest regret, because I support parental leave, I will be calling for a vote, and if I am allowed a vote, I will be voting against this Bill. It is time that manners were put on the Department and that it lived up to its responsibilities to look after all the children. It is not in the Constitution but it is in the Proclamation that we cherish all the children of the nation equally. This Government, this statement and the speech of the Minister of State today, with its hurried reference to same-sex couples, which is not in the printed text of the speech, is not good enough, and I, as a parliamentarian, do not accept it.