Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We have had a debate in this House on the proposed thirty-ninth and fortieth amendments to the Constitution. I call for an amendment to the Order of Business to bring the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, to the House to explain what knowledge the State had, before it set the date of 8 March, of a case before the Supreme Court, BM and JM v. Ireland and the Supreme Court. This is a case of the most systemic importance, according to the Supreme Court. That court allowed the case to leapfrog the Court of Appeal because of the nature of the case. A carer, the mother of an autistic child with Down's syndrome, has had to go to the courts to secure a carer's allowance for her.

The Supreme Court case is scheduled to be heard on 11 April. If the referendum in question passes on 8 March, the Supreme Court case will fall and that woman will have to seek an alternative route to get justice before the courts. As we know, although the proposed Article 42B relates to a fundamental human rights section of the Constitution, it offers this woman absolutely nothing. There will be no legal basis on which she can claim her carer's allowance under that proposed article.

The Minister has to come to this House and explain what he knew about the case because what is happening appears, on the face of it, to be a most sinister move by a Government to bring in a referendum before a case of systemic importance to carers is adjudicated on by the Supreme Court of this land. It should have been postponed until the Supreme Court case had concluded. As we know, a guillotine was used to ram through the Bills for the proposed thirty-ninth and fortieth amendments to the Constitution and that is not the way to do business. The language is ambiguous. Constitutional language should be clear and easy for citizens of the State to understand. There are so many issues involved, whether tax rights, property rights, inheritance rights or succession rights. They all have to be dealt with but there is no legislation to deal with them.

It is no secret I am calling for a "No" vote, but I want an answer to what appears to be a very dark side of our Government in rushing to a referendum before it has put the proper measures in place, and in denying the Supreme Court the right to make an adjudication for a carer, a woman in the home looking after an autistic child with Down's syndrome.