Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire, an Teachta Calleary.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am delighted to speak about the first Bill I have introduced in the Seanad. I welcome to the Gallery colleagues from Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, Safe Ireland and Women's Aid, who have expressed their support for the Bill. It is a modest but vital proposal rooted in one simple idea, namely, that freedom of movement can mean freedom from harm. The Bill will provide survivors of domestic violence and their dependants with three months of free public transport. It is a small, humane intervention for people in crisis, designed to ensure no one is forced to stay with an abuser because he or she cannot afford to leave. It is not radical and it is not expensive but for those trapped by violence, fear and lack of means, it could be transformative. It is the bare minimum we should be doing as a society that claims to have zero tolerance for gender-based violence.

I am deeply disappointed that the Government is proposing a timed amendment to the Bill. It is cynical and it does not bode well for the co-operation and collaboration we aim for across this Chamber. We have seen this practice with several Opposition Bills since the start of this term. The reality is that despite having a zero-tolerance strategy in place, we have seen cases of domestic violence rise year on year. I am not suggesting for one minute that my Bill would fix that but it would help those who are trapped and cannot afford to escape. When presented with a sensible, straightforward Bill, I wonder why the Government is delaying it. Not even allowing it to go to Committee Stage is a little cynical. The whole purpose of Committee Stage is to tease out the implementation aspects of a Bill but the Government is not allowing that. Delaying the Bill stifles room for debating this critical topic, which affects people throughout the country.

If the Government would allow the Bill to proceed to Committee Stage, we would have space in the Chamber to debate these critical matters. Despite the rhetoric of urgency we often hear, there are timed amendments and delays. I find that attitude and approach a little depressing. It can take many years for a woman to make the decision to leave. Why, then, does the Government want to delay a Bill that is designed to support people fleeing domestic violence and reduce their barriers to leaving? Does the Government not consider it a good Bill? Does it not think the issue it addresses is an urgent problem?

In fact, the scale of this problem is significant and increasing. Domestic violence is not rare; it is pervasive and it cuts across income, geography and background. Women's Aid tells us that one in four women has experienced abuse by a current or former partner. When we talk about women leaving, we sometimes discuss it as though it were some sort of single act, as if a woman simply packs a bag one day and walks out the door. Those of us who have listened to survivors know it is rarely that simple and straightforward. Research shows a woman will endure abuse for years before leaving and will attempt to leave multiple times before she is able to break free. Why is that so? The reason is that leaving is so dangerous. Leaving often escalates the violence and can mean losing one's home, income and sense of self. All too often, the State makes it harder, not easier, to go. Limited refuge spaces and a failed housing policy make it very hard for women to leave because they do not know where they will end up.

Another reason it is hard to leave is that leaving often has a cost. When we talk about poverty in the context of domestic violence, we usually mean financial poverty. That is real and it is crushing. Abusers often control access to money, transport, telephones and work. Survivors are told they will not survive without the abuser. There are also other forms of poverty. There is the poverty of isolation when an abuser cuts a woman off from her friends and family, when she no longer has anyone to call and when she cannot risk a lift from a friend because he might see. There is poverty of opportunity where a woman cannot get to her job, college or her child's school event because she has no car, no fare and no safe way to travel. There is poverty of time when every single hour is spent navigating fear, searching for safe routes and waiting for someone to call back. There is poverty of self-esteem when a woman is told for so long that she is worthless that she begins to believe it. This Bill cannot undo all of that but it can start to chip away at those barriers by giving survivors mobility, connection and a small bit of independence.

Domestic violence rarely affects just one person. Children live it, too. They may not always be hit but they are always harmed. Children who grow up with domestic violence can experience anxiety, depression and difficulties in school. When a mother leaves, she is not just saving herself; she is saving her children's future. That is why the Bill extends the free travel provision to children and dependants. For a child, a train ticket might mean getting to school safely, attending counselling or visiting relatives who can provide comfort and stability.

Throughout history, controlling women's mobility has been a means of controlling women's lives. When a woman cannot move freely and cannot leave her home, town or country, can we say she is free? In rural Ireland, especially, transport poverty is an incredibly gendered issue. Women are more likely to rely on public transport but less likely to have access to frequent or affordable services. If a woman is living in a small village with no car and her abuser controls the money, even getting to the nearest refuge can seem impossible. The Bill recognises that mobility is safety and that a ticket can be a lifeline.

As a social democrat, I believe in a society where public services provide real freedom and the State enables people to live safely and with dignity. This Bill very much embodies that principle. It does not rely on charity or chance. It relies on the State to step up, as it should, to remove one barrier that keeps women trapped. Social democracy means recognising that violence against women is not a private issue but a structural one. Domestic violence thrives when there is inequality. It is our duty to remove every barrier we can to create a more equal society. By creating a clear, accessible pathway of free travel for survivors, we make the State not just a responder to violence but a partner in recovery.

I acknowledge the work being done under the national zero-tolerance policy. The recent progress on co-ordination, the setting up of Cuan, the commitment to data collection and the funding for services are all very important. However, the reality is stark and the numbers continue to rise. Far too often, we see news reports of women murdered by their partners or ex-partners. Refuges are full. Women and children fleeing domestic violence do not have access to sustainable, long-term housing options. Nine counties still do not have dedicated refuge spaces, meaning even longer distances must be travelled and women are placed further away from any supports they may have. There is an additional expense that comes from that.

Given that these services do not exist, why will the Government not allow this very modest Bill to proceed? It is especially important for those families who are in need of support right now, not in 12 or 24 months' time. Women and children fleeing domestic violence are some of the most vulnerable in our society. They are among the worst impacted by the continuing housing emergency. The Government cannot keep repeating the concept of zero tolerance while women are forced to remain in danger because the system moves too slowly or the price of a bus or train ticket stands between them and safety. Zero tolerance must mean zero barriers.

That is what the Bill aims to achieve. Transport should be a lifeline, not a luxury. We have seen how free travel for students, older people and people with disabilities opens doors, creates connection and restores people's dignity. The Bill applies that same logic to survivors of domestic violence. It proposes that for three months, survivors will not have to worry about how to get to where they need to go. They can take the bus to their refuge, to their GP, to their solicitor, to court and to their child's new school. They can rebuild their life.It is a really short window but it can make the difference between despair and recovery. The cost of this intervention would be fairly minimal to the State. Currently, the average amount allocated to each potential user, specifically the main card holder and the companion on the free travel scheme, is estimated at €55 per person per annum.

This Bill allocates a free travel pass for three months. Given the principle of the Bill, it is likely that people fleeing domestic violence would use this pass more frequently due to the upheaval in their lives, as they try to start a new life free from violence. We conservatively estimate a €55 cost per person for three months. Women's Aid reported that it made 6,424 refuge and local domestic violence referrals in 2024. The likely cost of the proposal, therefore, would be about €350,000 if every single one of those referrals made use of the three-month pass. It is unlikely that every single person would use it, but even if we were to double that, a cost of €700,000 per year is the upper end of the probable cost of this Bill. That is a very small cost to the State when weighed against the potential to save lives, protect children and help survivors to rebuild.

Leaving is not the end of the story; it is the beginning of a long and often lonely process of recovery. There are practical hurdles such as finding housing, securing income, accessing counselling and rebuilding relationships, but there is a really profound emotional and psychological journey that comes with it too. Survivors must learn to trust again, hope again and believe that they can be safe. Mobility and the ability to move freely and to travel without fear is part of that recovery. It restores people's agency and gives them empowerment. Three months of free travel will not solve every problem by any means or stretch of the imagination, but it does send a powerful message that the State believes them and believes they deserve the empowerment and autonomy to rebuild their life and to live freely.

Sometimes progress is not made through really grand gestures but in small acts of decency that make survival a little bit easier. This Bill is one such act. It costs little but it would mean so much to the people who access it. It is an acknowledgement by the State that leaving is hard and rebuilding is hard but we trust them, we believe in them and we want to support them. It acknowledges that safety is not only about locks and alarms but also about access, connection and opportunity. It recognises that women do not live their lives in isolation and that when we support survivors, families and communities will prosper in the future.

So often in instances of domestic violence a woman will experience coercive control, psychological abuse and financial abuse. She will be isolated from her loved ones, friends and family. This will offer people an opportunity to rebuild those connections and relationships with parents, grandparents, friends and family who they might not have seen or been connected to for many years.

Some people might say that a refuge will pay for a taxi and ask whether that is not a solution. However, if people have to go to a counter or call a phone number every time they need to get to A, B or C, it means they have to ask for permission when they need to do this or that. People who have spent much of their lives being controlled in an coercive, abusive relationship should not have to call up somebody and ask permission for a taxi fare. They should have the power to do that themselves and move freely. That is fundamentally what this Bill is about. It is restoring people's agency and their dignity after it has been stripped away for so long.

None of us can undo the violence that has already happened but we can change the systems that make it harder to escape. This Bill is a small but concrete expression of solidarity. It is the State saying that it will meet them halfway on the road to safety. For too long, that road has been too long, too expensive and too lonely. With this Bill, I ask us to shorten the road and make it free to travel.

Laura Harmon (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister. I am proud to be part of the cross-party group with Senators Stephenson, Noonan and Cosgrove. I commend Senator Stephenson's Bill. It is a very simple, progressive Bill. It is extremely disappointing that, again, we are seeing a pattern from the Government of introducing a timed amendment, effectively kicking the can down the road when it comes to such an important issue and such a simple solution.

More than 65,000 instances of domestic violence were reported to An Garda Síochána last year. That is a shocking statistic. The level of violence is an epidemic. It is simply unacceptable. We know that similar steps taken in Britain and Northern Ireland to provide free rail travel have helped more than 10,000 people to avail of travel to seek refuge since that scheme was introduced in 2020. That is the equivalent of six people per day. We can imagine the effect it would have in Ireland and what that would mean at a time of crisis and trauma for so many. Many of those who are escaping physical or mental violence, or psychological or financial abuse, have no access to funds. If the Government could provide this service it would be transformative. This is something that needs to be supported this evening in this Chamber. By guaranteeing free travel we can help to alleviate the costs survivors face in these situations. Nobody should be forced into poverty as a result of abuse.

We know that 35% of women in Ireland - more than one in three - have experienced abuse from an intimate partner. In 2024 there were 32,144 contacts to Women's Aid. I acknowledge the groups in the Gallery today who are working at the coalface, and also Deputies Rice, Gibney and Cian O'Callaghan, who are here to support their colleague.

I am proud to support the Bill and to share a cross-party group with Senator Stephenson. This is a really progressive piece of legislation. It is simple. It makes sense and it needs to be passed.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

- "Seanad Éireann resolves that the Domestic Violence (Free Travel Scheme) Bill 2025 be read a second time on this day 12 months, to allow for the issue of travel supports for victims of domestic and gender-based violence be tabled for consideration by the Government."

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Domestic Violence (Free Travel Scheme) Bill 2025. I commend Senators Stephenson, Cosgrove, Noonan and Harmon on bringing it forward. This serious, thoughtful legislation rightfully highlights the role of mobility, something many of us take for granted, in supporting those fleeing domestic violence. At its heart, the Bill recognises something that we all must accept as a society: that escaping domestic violence is not just about courage; it is also about access to support, safety and mobility. For too many survivors the cost of transport remains a real barrier to fleeing abuse or attending court, counselling or refuge.

This debate is a valuable one, but more than that, it is necessary. Everyone in this House shares a common goal to ensure that survivors of domestic and gender-based violence are supported by a system that is compassionate, responsive and effective. Fianna Fáil in government has made it clear that we are committed to doing everything in our power to support survivors of domestic and gender-based violence. The Bill aligns with that commitment and adds to the suite of supports we are putting in place.

I acknowledge the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Calleary, for engaging with this Bill seriously and respectfully and for proposing a timed amendment that ensures the spirit of the Bill can be realised through a mechanism that is workable and accountable and can be delivered within the broader social protection framework. The amendment will allow for a review and implementation phase to ensure the free travel extension meets its intended outcomes without unintended consequences and is properly targeted at those most in need.

While legislation is vital, we know that funding and service delivery are just as important. Budget 2026 contains a ring-fenced allocation of €80 million to support Cuan, the new statutory agency tasked with tackling and co-ordinating responses to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, and to expand the range of services survivors rely on. The investment represents not just numbers on a page but also a meaningful expansion of refuge spaces, outreach workers, counselling services, legal assistance and public awareness campaigns. It is a reflection of our belief that survivors deserve a compassionate wraparound support from the moment they seek help.

I want to highlight the special provisions now in place for survivors to access short-term housing support. Through cross-departmental collaboration, we are ensuring that survivors are not left in limbo when leaving a dangerous situation. Leaving an abusive home often means leaving behind a roof over one's head.That is not a decision anyone should take lightly. That is why we introduced streamlined access to emergency accommodation alongside local authority discretion for housing allocation in cases of domestic violence. These are targeted, trauma-informed supports designed in collaboration with experts on the ground to ensure survivors are not retraumatised by the very system that is meant to help them.

Let me be clear: Fianna Fáil remains fully committed to the implementation of the third national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. This strategy is the most ambitious ever undertaken by an Irish Government because it has to be. It lays out a whole-of-society response, preventing violence, supporting victims, ensuring justice and driving cultural change. From the roll-out of consent educational skills and the increased number of refuge spaces to the enhanced training of gardaí, we are embedding a systemic response that is long overdue. There is more to do and there always will be, but we are moving in the right direction. In closing, I thank the Senators who brought this Bill forward. The free travel scheme extension has merit. With the Minister's amendment, I believe we can move towards a version that is both workable and effective. I again ask the Senators opposite to accept the amendment.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome to the Public Gallery members of the Belgium-Luxembourg Chamber of Commerce in Ireland. They are very welcome. They are here as guests of Deputy Barry Ward. Fáilte romhaibh.

Gareth Scahill (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is welcome. I thank him for the opportunity to speak on the Domestic Violence (Free Travel Scheme) Bill 2025. I commend the Senators on bringing this Bill before us. It is a very simple, practical idea that could make a big difference in people's lives, especially to women and children trying to escape violence at home.

I come from County Roscommon, one of the nine counties the Senator referred to that currently do not have a domestic violence refuge. However, work has started on that, and a multiagency approach is taking place in Roscommon at the moment. None of these things happen overnight. Cuan and Roscommon County Council are putting proposals together and working through them. A memorandum has been done up for this. My constituency colleague Deputy Daly has brought this up with the Minister. We are getting there. We are working through that.

To highlight that, since August 2025, Roscommon Safe Link can now offer two safe-home units to survivors of domestic abuse. We are gradually getting there and, as I said, these things do not happen overnight. However, when I spoke to representatives from Safe Link, they did say that a major barrier for most is safely accessing their service, especially when there is no means of transport. They told me they had situations where clients had been extremely reluctant to leave unsafe situations due to the fear of having no transport to maintain their children's education and no means of even travelling to a refuge or safe home in the first place. With a project as large as a refuge development, they acknowledged that it will take a significant amount of time to progress. That is why they are working with the bodies there that are trying to work with them, which directly results in their organisation having to refer people to refuges outside of County Roscommon. They said that without a means of transport, alternative refuges often result in survivors staying in unsafe situations, as the Minister said himself.

In principle, this is a very good Bill. In principle, there are a lot of the means in there that are going to address issues like people is Roscommon having to travel outside of the county to Galway, Sligo, Longford and elsewhere to find safe refuge. It is addressing an issue for those people. This Bill would give survivors of domestic violence free travel passes for three months with an option to extend it if needed. The Senators have put a great provision in there for Bus Éireann, Dublin Bus, Irish Rail, Luas, Local Links and participating private operators. It would be issued through trusted organisations. I mentioned Cuan already, but also domestic violence services so survivors do not have to tell their story over and over again. I must commend the Senators on that.

The free travel scheme is something that this Government and previous Governments have constantly invested in, and it is very well supported. The estimated expenditure on the scheme in 2025 is €107.6 million, so it is not a small figure that is going into this. What the Minister has always tried to do is ensure that those who need it most are getting that particular service. I acknowledge the compassion and common sense of this Bill. It is about using the systems that are already in place to make life a little bit easier for those at their most vulnerable. Therefore, I support this Bill in principle, but I ask, as my colleague beside me said, that the amendment be accepted by the Government to have the Bill read a Second Time in 12 months to allow for consideration and ensure that the measures are workable, implementable and sustainable.

Nicole Ryan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I strongly support the domestic violence Bill 2025, which is compassionate, practical and deeply necessary legislation that will make real and measurable differences in people's lives. At the heart of this Bill, it is about dignity, as Senator Stephenson said. It is about recognising that when a person, most often a woman, makes the decision to flee a violent home, that decision comes with enormous personal, emotional and financial cost. It is about understanding that the journey to safety should not be one more barrier, one more source of fear or one more bill that pushed a survivor into further hardship. The Bill creates what is being called a safe passage travel scheme. It is a three-month free travel pass. It is three months; it is not 12 years. It is three months to give someone breathing room to try to escape a situation. It is simple, survivor-centred and powerful because sometimes the difference between staying and escaping is something as basic as having the means to go on a bus or train. For many women and children, leaving the home means leaving behind their job, school and community and starting from scratch. Too often, survivors are moved to refuges that are far from their homes and far from the support networks simply because that is where the space is available. Then come the costs of travelling to court hearings, meeting solicitors, going to counselling appointments, bringing children to new schools or simply travelling to work to try to keep a life stable.

Housing supports were mentioned and, yes, emergency housing is well and truly needed for people who are fleeing this, but the emergency housing is for 12 weeks. What can a woman who is fleeing her home do in 12 weeks' time? Nothing. From the women I have been speaking to, I have heard them say they would rather stay in the abuse than face homelessness. That is the reality people are facing on the ground. Therefore, it is well and good to say these supports are here, that it is great and that we are doing it bit by bit, but it is not enough because women are choosing to stay.

I have met with the superintendents in my constituency in Cork North-West. We have the second largest number of domestic incident reports to the Garda. Last year, over 600 incidents were reported, and those are the ones that were reported. The Garda also works with people who do not report incidents and whom it tries to get out of these situations but they are so sensitive and so delicate. Yet, we do not have a refuge. We live in a very rural area. The closest refuge to my constituency is in Cork city. If someone is trying to uproot a family from Charleville to bring them to Cork city, travel is then another barrier because our travel infrastructure in Cork North-West is not great. We do not have great public transport there. It is just ludicrous to think that the Government would push back on something as simple as this.

We know that domestic violence does not just destroy safety. It drives people into poverty. The Bill acknowledges the truth and acts to ease it, providing a lifeline in those fragile first months for someone who has fled violence. What makes the scheme so well designed and thought-out is its emphasis on privacy and trauma-informed access. Survivors will not have to recount their stories again and again to strangers at a ticket desk. The pass will look identical to any other travel pass, and it could be issued discreetly through approved domestic, sexual, and gender-based violence, DSGBV, organisations under Cuan, ensuring that dignity, safety and confidentiality remain at the centre of all of this. That is how policy should be made - empathetically, practically and with respect for people.

I want to take a moment to commend Senator Stephenson and the Cross-Party Group, who brought this forward. Senator Stephenson has been an outstanding advocate for those voices that are too often unheard, survivors from minority groups and all those who live along the shadows of abuse. Her dedication to the domestic violence sector, her sensitivity to the realities faced by the survivors and her ability to bring people together across political lines are to be applauded.We need more legislators like her - people who do not just speak about compassion but build it into law.

This Bill represents what politics can be, which is collaborative, people-focused and rooted in lived experiences. I think about the many women in Cork North-West who have spoken to me about the impossible situations they faced. A mother in Macroom told me she could not take a refuge place in Cork city because she had no way to get her two children to the school. She had to stay in an abusive situation. Another woman spent her first week after fleeing home relying on neighbours to drive her to GP and court appointments. It takes courage to walk way. It is not a simple decision and, for many of these women, it is a life-or-death situation. Women are most in danger when they leave.

The Bill is not proposing to change the whole system. It seeks to make a small, practical change such that survivors can leave without having to worry about the cost of travel. I particularly welcome the provision to include mechanisms for review and gathering feedback from referral bodies and transport providers to ensure the scheme will continue to meet survivors' needs. Those of us working in communities, urban and rural alike, see the gaps in provision every single day. We know how much difference one practical support can make. This safe passage scheme is not a grand gesture. It is not grounded in immediate intervention but it can change lives.

I commend the Bill. I am really disappointed the Government is putting forward a timed amendment. As other Opposition speakers have said, all our Bills are being pushed back by 12 months. It takes ages for legislation to get through this House. There is nothing to stop the Government from letting this Bill proceed. Let it go to Committee Stage, where the Government can make its amendments. Some women will not have 12 months to wait. Women will lose their lives because they will not be able to flee. The Government's amendment is really disappointing. I thank Senator Stephenson and the Cross-Party Group for bringing forward the Bill.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I get a sense that the general feeling in the Chamber is not one of support for the Government's amendment. Sometimes, listening to Members from the Government parties speak, one can tell there is not an energy behind wanting to delay something. That can be felt in how Members present their contributions on a topic. I can sense that here today. I encourage colleagues opposite not to provide tellers for the vote on the amendment. Beyond the substance of the issue we are discussing, which I will get to, we all, whether representing the Government or the Opposition, should have faith in the job we do here and in our ability, whether as officials, Departments, experts or legislators, to work together to come to arrangements about legislation between Second and Committee Stages. That is what the legislative process is for. It is about working issues out at each Stage.

For some reason, in the ten years I have been here, a brand-new feature of the legislative process has been created over time by the Government. I refer to the putting forward of timed amendments. That started happening two or three years into my term in the House; it did not exist beforehand. Timed amendments were brought in purposely to delay legislation because the Government did not want to be seen to vote against something about which many people within the parties of government cared, because the parties had policies on it or because they could see the proposal might not align with the intentions of the Government of the day or the relevant Department. This is one of those moments.

As an Independent Senator who has had a lot of my legislation passed in the House, I have always been able to come to arrangements with Departments that I would not table a Bill for Committee Stage until there had been robust engagement on the crux of the proposals and until we had agreement that what the Bill could look like when it came back on Committee Stage, what the operational part would look like and what amendments there might be. I did that with former Ministers Charlie Flanagan and Deputy O'Gorman. All those Bills were passed in this House, having been worked out by way of the normal process. A 12-month delay is not needed. We should have faith in our capabilities and capacity. On my first day in this Chamber, everybody spoke about the need to work collaboratively. Delaying legislation is not working collaboratively. We work collaboratively by recognising legislation on its principles, merits and what it can achieve. The Government might want some changes but that can be worked out between us before Committee Stage. What should not be done is delay the legislation. I ask for some reflection on that in the time we have left. Will the Government allow us to be legislators and have faith that the Department and the Minister will be able to have those discussions between now and Committee Stage without a time delay?

I will not lecture anyone on why this Bill is important. I accept that everybody in the Chamber knows that. I will give some examples of where it comes into play outside of rural areas. Without giving away the locations of refuges, some are in the suburbs of Dublin for people from Dublin Central. One woman I supported refused to go into a refuge because there was no bus route to the suburb of Dublin where it was located. She did not want to disrupt her children's school day because their lives were already disrupted enough. She wanted them still to have one constant in their day, which was the teacher and friends they were used to. She was terrified to take that refuge space because she might not be able to get the children to school. Being unable to get them to school was not just a question of disruption but the worry that Tusla might get involved. All the barriers presented, layer upon layer, and then the panic came and she said she could not go. She needed safety but she was terrified of all the other things that would happen when she sought safety. Sometimes, seeking safety can reduce one's safety.

Those are the types of decisions people are making on a daily basis. I supported a woman years ago when I worked in addiction services who was in a situation where someone had complete financial control of all her payments and access to money. When I asked whether she had access to her children's allowance payment, she said she did not because the State now required a stamp from her child's school to prove the child was still attending school past 15 years of age. There are really vulnerable people who struggle to get their children to school, whether because of additional need or trauma in the household. Over the years, with very little uproar, women's children's allowance payment has been associated with their children still being in school, completely ignoring all the issues a family may face and further pushing vulnerable women into poverty.

There are loads of reasons women do not have the ability to travel, whether to school or appointments. An issue I encountered on many occasions from people trying to leave difficult situations was that when asked why they had not called me or another safe person, they said they did not want to be a burden. They did not want to pull another person in because that person knew their partner's sister, say, and they were terrified the partner would be contacted. All of a sudden, the web of fear cripples the person and prevents them being able to ask for a lift or money for a bus or taxi. People are terrified to pull others into their situation. When they are safe, they may pull more people in but when the ground is moving beneath them, they are afraid.

What is proposed in this Bill is a very conservative measure. When I read it, I wondered whether Senator Stephenson was for real in providing for only three months of free transport. The provision is extremely modest. I ask everybody to pause for a moment. It is not too late for the Government to take a different approach. The Minister's Department, with the will of the Government, can work with Senator Stephenson to ensure the Bill can be operational, is funded and will do what it says on the tin. We do not need a timed amendment to achieve that.

Linda Nelson Murray (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I had not initially planned to speak in this debate but I am glad the Acting Chairperson called me. I got Senator Stephenson's email and I am here in the Chamber, as is my colleague Senator Ní Chuilinn, because we support her Bill, everything she has said this evening and what she represents. We have all dealt with people who have suffered domestic violence. We can see this is the right thing to do and we are here to support Senator Stephenson.

Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Many speakers, on both the Opposition and Government sides, have spoken passionately about this Bill. I completely agree with Senator Ruane that there is an opportunity for the Government to step back and take out the amendment. As Senator Nicole Ryan said, the proposal is for only three months of free travel. Senator Ruane noted that when she first read the Bill, she thought it would surely pass. When we found out today there would be a timed amendment, none of us could believe it. The Bill proposes a very simple solution that can completely change people's lives.

I am very happy to be part of this very brave and liberal legislative proposal. It offers a thoughtful and practical way to address an issue about which there is so much talk at the moment.We know the rate. My colleague Senator Harmon said there had been 65,000 calls to An Garda Síochána last year regarding domestic violence. That is 200 people a week. We know the Bill is limited by the three months but it is significant in its ambition and in the financial and psychological impact it will have on survivors and their families. The Government should pause and think. We all should. We can see the support here. It is okay to say that we made a mistake. We do not need to have a timed amendment. Why have it? As a new Senator, I do not understand the idea behind timed amendments. All they do is delay things. We have raised this before. I represent a rural constituency. Sligo and Leitrim are counties where there are no women's refuges. That is being worked on. The availability of Local Link services has transformed rural Ireland. The Minister knows this but providing a three-month pass to someone is a no-brainer. Financial control is a major part of domestic violence and coercive control. Access to money means freedom from that control. This is a very basic measure that, if introduced, could save people's lives, similar to what Senator Dee Ryan said earlier. I hope the Minister will reconsider the amendment he has introduced today.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. This is the Cross-Party Group's fourth piece of legislation. On every occasion, we have used our Private Members' time to bring forward legislation that I think is progressive. We are trying to bring in progressive legislation. The last Bill we brought in was also subject to a timed amendment. It related to vacancy and dereliction. This Bill is far more urgent. I have seen it from the other side. I have been in government. I saw very good legislation coming from the Opposition only for a timed amendment to be applied. It is unfortunate. I can appreciate the different priorities but the proposal to allow the Bill to progress while fine-tuning it and dealing with those elements the Minister would have to address from a social welfare point of view could be accepted.

I commend Senator Harmon on bringing forward this legislation. We want to use our Private Members' time to bring forward progressive legislation. If you look at other legislatures across Europe, including those across the water in the UK, opposition Bills are routinely accepted by government. That shows progressive politics and collaboration across a house. I welcome the Minister's response but this is urgent. I am fortunate that, in the constituency where I live, there is the Amber Women's Refuge in Kilkenny. We hope that Carlow is about to be served with a refuge as well. The issue here is about a State that cares about women fleeing domestic violence. Every single measure we can bring forward as a State shows that we care and that we take a zero-tolerance approach. This legislation is practical and implementable and would make a meaningful difference to women and families fleeing situations of domestic violence.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas leis na Seanadóirí. Déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Seanadóir Stephenson as an mBille seo. Nílimid i gcoinne an Bhille. Táim an-soiléir faoi sin ach tá a lán obair le déanamh againn. Those who know me will know I am not in the business of putting things on the long finger. I want this to work but I want to make sure it is workable and practical. That is why we have proposed a timed amendment. We have a work plan as part of that. This is not kicking the can down the road and saying that no work will be done for 12 months. I will go through that with the Senators. I commend Senator Stephenson and congratulate her on her first Bill. I welcome her colleagues from the Lower House. I look forward to working with her on a lot of issues. I assure the House that this is a priority for the Government but I want to make sure it is practical and can be implemented meaningfully and rapidly.

We already provide a range of services and supports for victims of domestic violence through a number of Government Departments. The most important thing is that we integrate any new services such as this in an effective manner. Cuan was established as a response to those who looked for a joined-up service. It was established by the Minister, Deputy McEntee, to tackle and reduce domestic and gender-based violence. It has been given the very specific remit of delivering services and supports to victims of domestic violence. Since its establishment, it has been working hard to deliver on that remit. Budget 2026 has allocated over €80 million to Cuan and other services that are supporting victims and survivors of gender-based and domestic violence.

While it may seem simple to add a short-term free travel option for victims of domestic violence onto one of the existing free travel schemes, for example, the scheme for recipients of long-term social welfare payments, it may be more appropriate and speedier and provide a better solution for those victims of domestic violence to offer this option as part of a package of services and supports provided through Cuan. This would mean service users seeking support with transport costs could do so through the existing service providers supported by Cuan. These providers are experts in the field of domestic violence and are already helping victims with accommodation and other services. That is why I am putting forward a timed amendment. It is not about opposing or delaying the Bill. We want to do this in the best way possible. The timed amendment will allow time to explore options with all of the relevant service providers and stakeholders to ultimately provide the best solution we can.

In putting forward the timed amendment, I note that what is proposed in the Bill is a short-term scheme linked and limited to specific domestic violence offences. The scheme the Senator is proposing is very different from the free travel scheme that is funded and operated by the Department of Social Protection. That scheme is designed to support recipients of long-term social welfare payments and is provided as a service feature on the qualifying persons public services card. It is not time-limited. The entitlement is not separately assessed but is automatically enabled once a person is in receipt of the underlying payment. The free travel functionality is attached to the card and is integrated into the tap-and-pay terminals of most transport operators. What Senator Stephenson is proposing is essentially a short-term travel card option that is not associated with a welfare payment. Entitlement conditions would have to be established and eligibility to access this free travel entitlement would be assessed by a competent provider. It is not clear whether this would be best delivered by the Department of Social Protection rather than a service provider supported by Cuan. As I have said, services for victims of domestic violence are co-ordinated by Cuan and, regardless of where and who we reach through front-line providers, Cuan will be centrally involved in my work on this matter.

Senator Harmon spoke about the scheme in Northern Ireland. I want to look at that scheme and to incorporate elements here to ensure there are no differences between the schemes. We must also look at transport providers. A number of Senators who spoke are from rural constituencies. We know the difficulties there are in accessing rural transport rapidly. Taxis are not necessarily available in rural areas in the way they are in cities. Every other service is timetabled. However, the new TFI Anseo service is being trialled in a number of places. This provides a daily service for much longer. We want to engage with Local Link operators as to how we can provide services that would be needed urgently in these areas.

I assure the Senator of my support for the Bill but I need time to work through the logistics. I assure her it is not being put on the long finger. This is an urgent situation for those seeking to flee. They need support and confidence that the support is there. It is most important that we do not make supports available only for them not to work when a person needs them, often at very short notice. We accept the principle of the Bill but I want to make sure that, when we expand this service, it will work and that, when a woman needs it urgently, she will know it will be there for her. There is no sense in giving the benefit if we cannot provide an accessible service. I want to make sure that happens on the ground. Many Senators have spoken about the lack of refuge services in many areas. We want to make sure that, when somebody makes this incredibly brave and very difficult decision, transport will be there if they need it. That is the kind of work I want to do.The timed amendment is 12 months but I assure the Senator that we will have a lot of work done quickly on this. We are engaged with senior officials’ groups, and we will engage with Cuan and a number of providers as to how we can quickly move this on.

While we do that, my Department continues to support initiatives to help victims of domestic violence. Easier access to the rent supplement scheme is available to victims of domestic violence. A protocol to assist victims of domestic violence in accessing the rent supplement was introduced in August 2020. As part of the protocol, the accommodation needs of victims of domestic violence are met through a joined-up service delivery model provided by Cuan, with the close involvement of the various housing authorities nationwide. In that case, as officers in my Department are not qualified to adjudicate on domestic violence cases, we have established a protocol based on a referral system by Cuan, or by prescribed and State-funded service providers authorised by Cuan. This provides victims of domestic violence with a fast-track approval and screening process, with a simplified means test to get immediate access to rent supplement, so they are not prevented from leaving their home because of financial concerns. In this case, my Department is involved because it funds and provides the rent supplement.

This model may work for a free travel option but, in fact, it may be possible to introduce a simpler approach that does not require multiple handovers, where the service providers themselves can issue a free travel card. I want to take the time to explore this option further, and I had discussions this afternoon with officials as to how that might look and work. It could be done relatively quickly as opposed to establishing a whole new scheme and entitlement. We will engage with Cuan and the Senator on that. I want to make it very clear that my door is always open for engagement pre-legislation and post legislation. Any of our engagements will involve the Senator and the colleagues in her group.

We continue to provide additional needs payments as part of the supplementary welfare allowance. Those payments are available through the community welfare officers. We are moving many of our services online to give people that confidential option of seeking that service online and not having to engage with somebody they may know in their community to seek those supports. Through mywelfare.ie, that kind of support will be available to give the person further confidence in this regard. We often use additional needs payments to assist victims of domestic violence. Travel supplements are being paid in exceptional circumstances where a person has a recurring travel expense but does not have sufficient resources. Those supports are available. I will provide a summary of the supports to all Senators so they have access to that information.

I assure the Senator that I am not opposing this Bill in its intent. I want to make it practical. I want to work with the Senator and the providers in this space. I want to work especially with Cuan. We have already tasked a senior officials’ group of the Government to look at the Bill and get working on it. I am working with the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, in the Department of Transport, which has been assigned responsibility for this within the domestic violence strategy.

I have not worked with Senator Stephenson before. The Senators in the House who have worked with me know that I will not tell you I can do it if I cannot do it. If I am saying it is a timed amendment, I am not saying that I am not going to talk to the Senator for 12 months. The work is getting under way as to how we make this happen and action this, but I share the Senator’s intent and ambition. However, there is no sense in us passing legislation unless it can actually work on the ground, and unless, when somebody needs that service, the service is available to them at the point at which they need it.

A transport service is essential for many when they make that decision. Senator Ryan spoke about Cork North-West. I want to make sure that when people need it, it is there and it works. That is why I reiterate my intention to engage with Senator Stephenson and, most importantly, with Cuan and the providers in this space, so we can provide a system that works when somebody needs it. If it is not there, if we provide the entitlement and it is not there when somebody needs it, that would be a worse situation.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is the first time that I and the Minister have spoken. He said that we have not worked together before. I welcome his positive words about the Bill. I understand that he has a commitment and a desire to pass this. However, with all due respect, this is not just about his Department. This is something that has happened across the board with all different types of Bills. Passing this Bill, allowing it to go to Committee Stage and allowing Committee Stage debate would not prevent the Department from strengthening the Bill or the Minister’s work with Cuan from happening. It is for that reason that I cannot accept the timed amendment. I would love the Minister to trust me as much as he is asking me to trust him, in the sense that I do not want to ram through bad legislation. If, in the meantime, while we allow the debate to happen and we allow the space to have these important conversations, the Minister came up with a Bill that worked better, I would of course withdraw my Bill. I understand that the Minister has the Department behind him.

I have consulted many providers around this. I did not pull this out of thin air. I recognise that the Minister would definitely need to speak to Cuan as the main lead. I am delighted to hear that the Minister thinks there is a different option of service providers having a pass that they hand out instead of the application process with the photo. All of those things are brilliant. I respect and understand that the Department has given this a lot of thought, and I thank the Minister for that. Again, I feel that this can still happen in the normal legislative process.

I wonder why we have Opposition Bills if the feeling is that once we put in a Bill and spend time, it will just be delayed by 12 months. As a new legislator, it raises questions for me about the purpose and role I play in this House. That is where I am coming from. Senator Ruane made it clear that all of the changes, suggestions and strengthening that the Minister is coming forward with, which I respect, could be done if we moved this to Committee Stage. We would not be passing the Bill tonight anyway, and it would be following through various stages of the legislative process with space to be strengthened.

The Minister will have heard from other Senators that we have had this challenge across the board. We have a good, sensible Bill that clearly has a lot of support. I thank all of the Senators on the Government side for attending and providing that support. I know it means a lot to them, and I know they have may have personal experiences, the experiences of friends and family, and instances in their own constituencies where this comes up. This is a modest Bill. I accept it may not be the most straightforward legislation, and there are components that the Minister's Department and the Department of Transport would need to iron out, perhaps also with the Department of justice. However, I think those things can be done as part of the normal legislative process.

That is why, while I am sorry, I am not in a position to support the 12-month timed amendment. While the Minister says that it does not mean he is putting it on the long finger, it does mean that we cannot debate the Bill again for 12 months in this House. In that sense, there is a kicking to touch from our perspective. I know it does not mean the Minister would not be working on it behind the scenes, but he could also be working on it behind the scenes if we moved to Committee Stage. It is not like Committee Stage would be next week. That is not the reality, although we would love it to be an option. That is not how it would normally work because so many things are coming through on the agenda.

I thank the Minister for his engagement and that of his team and the Department.

Pat Casey (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When is it proposed to sit again?

Seán Kyne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 4 November.