Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this fantastic legislation and pay tribute to the Irish Cancer Society for all its advocacy in this regard. I also acknowledge that Senator Catherine Ardagh brought a Private Members' Bill on this issue earlier this year highlighting her continued work with the Irish Cancer Society and acknowledging the need for maternity leave to be preserved for very serious illnesses like cancer.

From that perspective, it is fundamental that we have this leave. It is essential that mothers who have undergone such a serious illness have the opportunity to spend time bonding with their children when their illness goes into respite and can be the mothers attending to their children that they so richly deserve to be.

I note that IBEC has contacted all Members expressing concerns about the necessity to include outpatient treatment. I know as an employment lawyer that once somebody has a serious illness, they are categorised as having a disability. IBEC is articulating a concern that disability can be treated both as an inpatient and as an outpatient and that the Bill seems to categorise it only as inpatient treatment. Perhaps IBEC is wrong in that regard. I ask the Minister to provide some clarification on that. IBEC is worried that claims will be taken against employers for discrimination on the grounds of separating out disabilities and deciding on a disability. It also suggests that the decision for the postponement should be with the Department of Social Protection which will also be granting sick leave payments. That may or may not be appropriate but it would be useful for the Minister to address that point.

I need to address the non-disclosure agreement, NDA, element, the children's committee and the sequence of events over the summer. I was asked so support the waiver of pre-legislative scrutiny, which, given the time constraints, was perfectly understandable. The heads of Bill were provided to the committee in July. We operated on that basis.We were coming up with a compromise as a committee that we were not going to waive pre-legislative scrutiny. On the same day, however, we were going to issue a report that responded based on submissions that had been made to us by entities that appeared before the committee to make sure the Minister's legislation was not in any way delayed, particularly given the urgency to legislate for the Leave Our Leave campaign. It also had the crucial non-disclosure agreement, NDA, element. June 2021, when the Seanad was sitting in the Dáil Chamber, was the first time Senator Ruane brought forward the NDA element. I remember talking about how I had been responsible for NDAs, but never when there was sexual misconduct going on. I could see their merit in employment settlement situations. I completely and utterly supported the proposal by Senator Ruane, however. We were moving forward, and as a committee we were really ad idemon the fact that we were very pleased with the Leave Our Leave and NDA elements and yes, of course, that Oireachtas women in politics should be supported. On the day we were making that decision, we got two letters. The meeting was starting at 3 o'clock. We got a letter at 12.51 p.m. and one at 2.39 p.m. stating that the NDA element was out of it until Committee Stage in the Dáil. The difficulty we have is that the Seanad did much of the work and to be fair, it was Senator Ruane and her colleagues who did a lot of work on the NDA. The Seanad passed the Private Members' Bill, and the Seanad actually will not have an opportunity to have a voice on this. That is not very fair. It is not very fair to Senator Ruane and all the work she has done over the years. As a result, we were upset. The Minister did come into the House, to be fair. Unfortunately, I was unable to be there on the day due to a funeral, but I saw his responses and read back over the debate. It did not bode well for the treatment and respect of the committee that we were told such things at such a very late stage, however. I need to put that out there. Government colleagues especially are very supportive. Government colleagues will understand the pressures of a Minister and the commitments of Government and the desire to ensure that we honour those commitments. However, it put Government colleagues in a very difficult position and really, it is the second time this year that we have been asked to waive pre-legislative scrutiny on matters that are important and on which we need to have a say.

I will address surrogacy leave under the amendments section of this debate. They were some of the things that needed to be said and discussed in the context of our report, but I will leave that until then. I completely support the Bill; of course we do. I cannot see anyone in this House who would not do that. However, that the NDA piece is not here and is not getting an opportunity in the Seanad is really not desirable and not particularly fair to the hard work that has been done. I have no doubt but that Senator Ruane will have something to say on that herself. It is not reasonable. It will come back to us to approve whatever goes on in the Dáil, but we will not actually have the time for a robust debate. The speed and manner in which something we have known since 2021 was on the cards was dealt with was not respectful of either the Seanad or the committee.