Victor Boyhan (Independent)

The Minister is very welcome. I thank her officials, who put considerable work into this. I acknowledge the proposers of this Bill, namely Senators Andrews, Nicole Ryan, Conor Murphy, Collins, Tully and McCormack. I support the Bill. Having looked at it, I realise that it has been a long time in gestation. I thank the Oireachtas Library and Research Service, which prepared a very interesting paper in advance of this debate. The service is full of integrity. It provides independent validation and gives us the confidence to stand here and discuss the legislation in the proper context as well as its background.

As other Senators indicated, this is not altogether new. Today, we are dealing with the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025, a Private Members' Bill in the names of Sinn Féin Senators. I wish to set the context. When we are discussing things here, many of these programmes are fed out on "Oireachtas Report" at night. If it is halfway through something, people may not be quite sure what is going on. The purpose of the Bill is to introduce a new ground for discrimination into Irish equality law on the basis of disadvantaged socioeconomic status, which is important. In that context, on 13 May last, Senator Andrews initiated the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill in the Seanad. Generally, both here and afterwards, he got considerable favourable support, but that is politics for you. People will you on the corridor that they will support you, but when you look around you ask where they have gone. Other people are doing other things today at various committees. I respect and accept that.

The purpose of the Bill is to expand the protection of the relevant Acts, namely the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2021 and the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2018, to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disadvantaged socioeconomic status. Let us set the legislative context for this. Currently, discrimination is prohibited under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2021 and the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2018 in respect of employment and access to goods and services, respectively, across nine grounds, which the Senator already set out and I will not repeat them.

I looked at the previous Private Members' Bills on this. A similar Bill, the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2021, was initiated in Dáil Éireann on 27 January 2021. It was sponsored by Senator Chris Andrews, who was then a TD, and Violet Anne Wynne. On 1 March 2023, Dáil Éireann passed an amendment which stated:

Dáil Éireann resolves that the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2021 be deemed to be read a second time this day 18 months, to allow for time to further examine the introduction of 'disadvantaged socio-economic status' as an additional ground in the Equality Acts in the context of the Review of Equality Acts currently under way in the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth.

The Bill then fell because of the dissolution of the Thirty-third Dáil. The point I am making is that there has been a long lead-in time.

I accept that the Minister, Deputy Foley, is new to her post. I also accept that there are new dynamics, a new Government, a new programme for Government and new priorities and that it is not possible to get everything through in a programme for Government. As a result, the Government has to recalibrate its priorities. Politically, it is a coalition Government. which means that compromises have to be made as well. That is political pragmatism, and I understand how it works.

Going back further, on 28 June 2017, the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017 was also initiated in Dáil Éireann. That Private Members' Bill was sponsored by the now Minister for justice, Jim O'Callaghan TD, a fine legislator, a fine Minister and a fine politician with vast experience in legislation and the preparation thereof. He was very happy to put his name to that Bill, to speak on it and to endorse it. Fiona O'Loughlin, then a TD and now here in the Seanad, supported that legislation. The point I am making is that there has been a long lead-in. I will not push it too much other than to say that in 2024, as the Minister will be aware, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recommended that Ireland should adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that includes explicit references to all prohibited grounds of discrimination, including socioeconomic status. Enough of that; enough people have spoken.

Given the amount of lead-in time and in light of all the promises made, the focus should be on getting the legislation through. Are we all committed to getting this legislation across the line? I would like to think that we are. The timeframe may be different for different people, and there may be reasons for that. I have yet to hear what the Minister has to say. I look forward to hearing what she has to say because that will form an important part of my consideration. We need robust legislation. We need to have absolute clarity about the legislation and we need to make sure we cross off any unintended consequences of the legislation.

Those are three important facets. The Minister will know other competing issues relating to some of them that we may not be fully aware of. I would like to think that we could shorten the period from 12 months to, possibly, three. That may be too much to ask; maybe there is too much lead-in time. The Minister knows her resources. She knows the expertise and the people available to her for this legislation, which is only one segment of many pieces of legislation that she is championing and pushing through the Houses. I wish her well with all that.

We need to send out a clear message that we all support this legislation, the timeline relating to its implementation and its robustness. It needs to be thoroughly examined so that it erases any concerns. As this is a two-way process, if there are shortcomings with the legislation, I would like to hear what they are. In essence, I am supportive of the legislation. I am just not sure whether we can reach a compromise between what is being suggested and the Minister's amendment. We have now had two or three in the past two or three weeks, which is a bit concerning. I have been a Member of this House for ten years. I am amazed that we should have so many time amendments in a very short period of time. It is not something I am familiar with or used to. I would not like to see it becoming a habit. Those of us in opposition in these Houses have a role to tease out legislation respectfully and robustly, and I know that is a two-way process.