Statement: Bacik Welcomes Civil Partnership Bill As 'Stepping Stone'

STATEMENT BY SENATOR IVANA BACIK

Labour Seanad Spokesperson for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Wednesday 7th July 2010

BACIK WELCOMES CIVIL PARTNERSHIP BILL AS ‘STEPPING STONE'

7th July 2010

Speaking for the Labour Party today in the Seanad on the Second Stage debate on the Civil Partnership Bill 2009, Senator Ivana Bacik said:

“It gives me great pleasure to speak in support of this Bill on behalf of the Labour Party here in the Seanad. This is ground-breaking legislation, marking an historic moment in the development of our nation. For the first time, it will provide for legal recognition in statute for gay couples. It will allow those in same-sex relationships to obtain legal protection from legislative recognition of their status, in a way they could not previously have done.

I am proud to speak for the Labour Party, the first political party to introduce civil partnership legislation – in 2006 and again in 2007, Brendan Howlin TD introduced Labour's Civil Unions bill in the Dail. Even before that of course, my colleague Senator David Norris, to whom great tribute must be paid for his pioneering work on gay rights over many years, had introduced a civil partnership bill in 2004 in the Seanad – a bill which I had helped him with drafting, and which went a great deal further than this bill we have before us today.

The bill before us today will undoubtedly provide for significantly enhanced legal protections and security for many couples, and we do welcome it. Seventeen years after the decriminalisation of homosexuality, we are finally moving towards greater recognition for gay rights in our law.

However, the bill does not go anywhere like far enough. It does represent progress – but it is limited progress. It is only a stepping stone – it does represent a step toward equality – but it is not equality. Until the rights of gay people to enter marriage are recognised in law, true equality will not be realised.

I want to emphasise that arguing for a more inclusive definition of marriage is NOT an attack on marriage. Indeed, it is far from it – by expanding the categories of those entitled to marry, it gives even greater support and protection to the institution of marriage.

In the past, of course there were different views of marriage; until 1995 in Ireland it was a permanent state, but the introduction of divorce did not destroy the institution despite the doomsday predictions of those against its introduction. Similarly in the US there were previously prohibitions on mixed-race marriage; these now seem abhorrent to us. One day – very soon I hope and believe – we will see an interpretation of marriage that restricts it to opposite-sex partners as being equally outdated.

Indeed, that day has already come in a host of other jurisdictions – Canada, in South Africa and in many other European countries notably Spain and most recently Portugal which just recognised marriage last month. Both countries have a strong Catholic tradition as we do, but they recognised that this was a matter of human rights – that the right to marry should be inherent in humanity, a recognition that each and every one of us whatever our sexuality is capable of entering committed loving relationships.

We should take a lead from Portugal and recognise in our legislation not only civil partnership but also marriage. We should do this for two key reasons.

First, this is not equality. It is not the same the same as marriage in law. It amounts to a second-class citizenship for gay couples.

Second, this matters in practice. It is not the same in reality. What we have is very different to the UK model – it is a far more restrictive version of civil partnership. In particular, the glaring omission is the failure to make any provision for the children of gay parents. There are already many such children living in Ireland and the lack of any legislative recognition for them means that they will continue to be discriminated against legally as they will not have any rights vis-à-vis their non-birth parent in the relationship.

The Advice just published from the Ombudsman for Children makes this point very clearly, in stating:

‘the Bill does not adequately address the rights and needs of children. It is clear that the situation of children was considered at length in the drafting of the bill; it is unclear why that resulted in a bill that did not prioritise the rights and interests of children. Although the situation of same-sex couples will be improved considerably by the enactment of the Civil Partnership bill, the situation of children with same-sex parents will remain largely as it is at present. It should be borne in mind that this is not a hypothetical problem. The omission of robust protections for the children of civil partners will have real consequences for the young people concerned and it is in their interests that the law reflect and provide for the reality of their lives.'

We know that many children in Ireland are growing up with gay parents; that gay couples do foster children; and that gay people can adopt children - although only as individuals not as couples. So it is long overdue that the children of gay families are given legal recognition.

There are other flaws in the bill – notably the area of immigration law, and the recognition of foreign marriages. Also we are still awaiting other legislation to put the principles into effect and we hope that won't drag on too long.

But despite all these reservations, we do welcome the step forward that this bill represents, and we all look forward to seeing civil partnership ceremonies take place here before too long.”

ENDS