Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I raise this matter because I am very concerned about a particular case in County Clare where the Equal Status Act and Equality Tribunal are being abused by an individual. To date, an individual in the county, Ms Heather Rosen, who is an advocate on behalf of the Traveller community, has made 1,300 complaints against Clare County Council to the Equality Tribunal under the Equal Status Act. Thus far, between 70 and 80 cases - I am not sure of the precise figure - have been adjudicated on by the tribunal and all have been dismissed. Since 2003, as a result of the complaints made-----

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator should not name individuals in the House as they are not in a position to defend themselves.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The matters I raise are on the public record.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator may not name individuals in the Chamber.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In that case, I will refrain from doing so. The cases in question are, however, in the public domain as they were brought before the Equality Tribunal and have been covered in the media.

Anyone may make a complaint to the Equality Tribunal. While the tribunal does important work, the problem I have is with the complete absence of procedures. An individual can write a complaint on the back of an envelope and submit it to the tribunal which is then obliged to carry out an investigation. Moreover, the institution against which a complaint has been made is obliged to mount a defence. If all 1,300 complaints to which I referred are investigated and ultimately dismissed, taxpayers will be exposed to costs running into millions of euro. Clare County Council has already borne significant costs as a result of having to defend the cases in question. Frequent adjournments of cases on various grounds further increase costs.

The Equal Status Act is extremely important legislation in an extremely important area. However, elements of the Act, particularly as regards the reporting of cases to the Equality Tribunal, can be abused if people so wish. I call for the introduction of an amendment to the Act to ensure the Equality Tribunal is not abused. That is not its purpose; this should not happen and it must stop. There is a provision in the Act, whereby the Minister can introduce regulations relating to how the Equality Tribunal carries out its business and adjudicates on cases, but to date no such regulations have been introduced. The legislation remains important but some tweaking is needed. If we are to have an effective tribunal which is run efficiently and to do what it is supposed to do, an amendment is required to the Equal Status Act. I call on the Minister of State to follow up the matter.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. Before dealing with the substantive point raised by him, I will outline some of the background to the Equality Tribunal and the legislation under which it operates. I am taking this Adjournment debate on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy alan Shatter, who is unable to be present. I will pass on to him the points made by the Senator.

The Equal Status Acts prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods and services, the disposal of property and access to education on any of nine grounds. The Acts outlaw discrimination in all services generally available to the public, whether provided by the State or the private sector. These include facilities for refreshment, entertainment, banking, insurance, granting credit facilities, transport and travel services. Discrimination in the disposal of premises, the provision of accommodation, admission or access to education courses or establishments is also prohibited, subject to some exemptions. Under the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2008, the Equality Tribunal deals with complaints of discrimination based on nine grounds, namely, gender; civil status; family status, including pregnancy; age; disability; race, including nationality; colour or ethnic-national origin; religion or belief; sexual orientation; or membership of the Traveller community.

The Equality Tribunal is an impartial, independent body, set up to investigate and decide or mediate cases brought under the equality legislation. Its decisions and mediated agreements are legally binding and it has extensive powers. The tribunal is a quasi-judicial body, in that it does not have to decide cases on court procedures and can follow relatively accessible and informal procedures. It is, however, bound by the principles of natural justice, which means that it must act impartially in considering complaints before it and must ensure fairness for both parties in its procedures. The service is free and parties are not required to have legal or other representation.

Complaints in respect of registered clubs and premises may only be referred to the District Court and may no longer be referred to the Equality Tribunal. Any person who believes he or she has experienced discrimination by a service provider which is contrary to the Equal Status Acts may seek redress by making a complaint to the tribunal. Before referring a complaint to the tribunal, a complainant must first notify the service provider and has the right to ask for information in that notification. The notification must be in writing and sent within two months of the incident complained of, or, in the case of repeated incidents, the most recent one, stating the nature of the allegation and the intention to seek redress under the Equal Status Acts, if the complainant is not satisfied with the service provider's response. The service provider is not obliged to reply, but the Acts state the tribunal may draw such inferences as seem appropriate if the service provider does not reply or provides a false, misleading or unhelpful reply.

Any person who believes he or she has experienced discrimination which is contrary to the Equal Status Acts may, after notifying the service provider, seek redress by referring a complaint to the Equality Tribunal. The Acts provide that a claim may not be referred to the tribunal after six months from the date when the discrimination or victimisation occurred, or, in the case of a repeated act, last occurred, unless the complainant applies for an extension of time. If the delay was caused by the respondent misrepresenting the facts to the complainant, the time limit runs from the date when the complainant discovered the misrepresentation.

I turn to the substantive point raised by the Senator. The position is that section 22 of the Acts allows the tribunal to dismiss a complaint without a hearing at any stageif, in the opinion of the director or an equality officer, it has been made in bad faith or is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or relates to a trivial matter. This provision is robust enough to ensure any attempts to abuse the legislation can be stopped as soon as such abuse becomes apparent. I cannot comment, nor can the Minister for Justice and Equality, on individual cases. I can, however, inform the Senator that the Minister has been informed by the director of the Equality Tribunal that the tribunal exercises this power, as required. Moreover, if a complainant does not pursue a complaint lodged, the director may dismiss the complaint after one year for non-pursuit. Once a complaint goes to hearing, an equality officer will dismiss a complaint if the complainant fails to establish a prima facie case. It is important to note that the failure to establish a prima facie case does not mean that the complaint was made in bad faith, was frivolous, vexatious or misconceived.

The director of the Equality Tribunal has further informed the Minister that the number of cases lodged under the Equal Status Acts has fallen significantly in recent years. The backlog of outstanding cases has been reduced. All cases which were lodged in 2010 and which have not been settled at mediation or withdrawn have now been assigned to equality officers for investigation and decision. The number of claims made under the Acts is not a particular burden on the tribunal.

If the Senator raises individual cases, I will be happy to ask the Minister and the Department of Justice and Equality to pass on the points raised to the Equality Tribunal. What the Minister and I cannot do, given the statutory independence of the director and the quasi-judicial role of the tribunal, is comment on individual cases or involve ourselves in any way in making inquiries about the process or the basis of individual cases. I again thank the Senator for raising the matter.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive response. The best way of describing the case I have raised is to say it is a corporate effort by an individual to abuse the ethos of the Equality Tribunal. How can one individual make 1,300 separate complaints? If the Equality Authority was operating in the real world, it would have dealt with this matter. It is completely unacceptable that what is, by and large, a very good organisation which does exceptionally good work has been entirely blocked. Its reputation in my county is at a very low ebb because the public is very angry about-----

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Senator's question relate to the 1,000 complaints made?

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will get to that matter. The Minister must do something. I will not mention the details of the case referred to but every single complaint has been dismissed. A further 1,300 complaints from the same individual remain to be assessed. The local authority is stretched to the limit in trying to make ends meet, but it has to bring forward a defence and send people to Dublin.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator must ask a supplementary question. He had his opportunity to make a statement.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is important.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know it is, but I am adhering to Standing Orders.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We would have finished the discussion if the Acting Chairman had not interrupted me.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Or if the Senator had asked a supplementary question.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The reality is that there has been what I would describe as a systematic attempt to undermine the Equality Tribunal. In a case in which multiple complaints are reported to the Equality Tribunal by one individual, surely to God the Minister for Justice and Equality can do something to bring the matter to an end.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The short answer is "No", the Minister cannot do so. In the first instance, the Equality Tribunal is a very important part of the architecture of our democracy. We cannot say we will limit the number of complaints a person wishes to make. It is clearly not a burden on the tribunal which has dealt with every case that has come before it. There is a queue and it is dealing with these cases, too. However, if one were to go down the road of trying to limit the number of complaints an individual could make, no matter what the Senator's opinion of the case is, that would be a retrograde step. As already stated, the tribunal is sufficiently robust to deal with issues of this nature. If the Senator is conscious of continual complaints being made in this instance, then I am sure the tribunal is also aware of them. The tribunal has dealt with the matter in the way it has chosen. We must allow bodies such as the tribunal to deal with complaints as they see fit.

Martin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was seeking an alteration to the legislation.