Speech archive for SEPTEMBER 2005
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Irish Ferries - Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005 (29/09/05)
Irish Ferries - The Need for Partnership (29/09/05)
Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005: Second Stage (29/09/05)
Northern Ireland Class Politics (28/09/05)
Garda Investigations - Murder of Joseph Rafferty (28/09/05)
Early Childhood Education (28/09/05)
Irish Ferries - Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005
29/09/05 - The attitude of Irish Ferries is indicative of the direction Ireland does not want to take. The company is attempting to depress wages, repress workers and bring us back to the future of a spailpín fánach type economy in which immigrants and foreign workers are exploited, Irish workers sacked and money taken from the taxpayer. This irresponsible company will make decent businesses uncompetitive and is a terrible reflection of our economy at international level. Irish Ferries will be at the bottom of the pile when I choose how I intend to travel abroad. This episode also demonstrates the importance of ensuring there are no monopolies. It is an appalling reflection on Ireland and indicates that we appear to have lost our way.
Irish Ferries is trying to turn legislation on redundancy on its head. Sacking an employee and replacing him or her a week later does not constitute redundancy. It is appalling that the management of Irish Ferries has proposed to contemptuously charge the taxpayer 60% of the costs it incurs in putting Irish workers out of work and recruiting foreign workers at rates of pay far lower than those agreed. Those who believe otherwise should apply the company’s logic to their own position and imagine their reaction if they were told tomorrow they would be paid half their previous wage from Monday onwards and that the other extraordinary conditions being put to workers in Irish Ferries would apply.
Why would 70% of workers in the company indicate they wished to accept the deal put forward by management? The reason is terror and the company’s policy of frightening people and panicking them into the lifeboats to protect themselves. Workers are worried about their families’ future and whether they will have something in the bank for a rainy day. Perhaps they were never fully informed. I note the selective use of information in the statements issued by Irish Ferries. They inform us, for example, that ferry car business decreased last year but do not bother to mention that freight business has increased significantly. They also failed to note that we are fast approaching the point at which our ports will no longer be able to cope with the level of exports and imports they are processing.
If Irish Ferries proceeds in the manner it proposes, Ireland would be better off without it and it would be preferable to try to find other employment for workers who wish to work elsewhere. We cannot countenance the company’s proposals which were made immediately before negotiations begin on a possible new national partnership. They undermine trust and confidence.
Little is required in the partnership process, whether on the part of IBEC on the management side, ICTU on the trade union side or the Government, to give sustenance to those who oppose agreement. Opponents will point to the actions of those on the other side and argue that the process will never work. Activity of the type proposed by Irish Ferries will reverberate around the trade union movement in the next couple of months and the company’s name will be mentioned at every upcoming trade union meeting. Members will be asked why their trade unions should enter partnerships with employers or trust Irish business.
Irish Ferries does not reflect business people in general. Most are happy to seek a decent profit, pay their workers a decent wage and remain competitive by arguing the toss between both. Access to accounts and information in Irish Ferries would have prevented us from reaching the point we are at today. This attempt by Irish Ferries to make itself anti-competitive by undermining competition with taxpayers’ money, so it can sack workers and employ and exploit foreign workers to undercut its competitors on other routes, is unfair under European legislation. It is unacceptable, anti-European and uncompetitive and we cannot put State money into it. If we need legislation to copperfasten that position, we should introduce it.
Legislation, however, should not be necessary. Our redundancy legislation cannot be stretched to achieve the outcome Irish Ferries desires. The European directives will not allow us to put money into a company which then, using that money, is in a position to undermine the competition. It is not on, we cannot allow this to happen. It is not something we should be part of and if it goes to the wire on Monday, we should make our position clear. All speakers in this House and people across the labour spectrum have indicated their worries about it. Management is doing this without indicating what level of pain it will soak up. How many people from eastern Europe will be asked to run the company? None. This is an old fashioned anti-worker approach that we cannot accept.
Back to top of the page
Irish Ferries - The Need for Partnership
29/09/05 - I welcome the comments by the Taoiseach yesterday on behalf of the ferry workers. It raises an important point. Over the past seven or eight years, people in this House have discussed Members’ involvement — or non-involvement — in the partnership process. This is a good example of why we need a partnership process. What we see happening at the moment with the ferry workers is anti-community, anti-partnership and is an attempt to bring us back to the future of the Spailpín Fánach, where we oppress immigrant and travelling workers and where we depress wages and give workers no rights. This is a community that has worked hard to give reasonable rewards to workers at all levels in the public and private sector over the past 15 to 20 years. It is not to be thrown away in the interests of greedy, grasping, miserable businesses that want to walk on those workers who have created the wealth that we are all sharing.
This company does not reflect the generality of businesses in Ireland. Most businesses are happy to make their profit and to pay their workers and that is as it should be. This is not an anti-business thing, but an anti-person thing. I would welcome an opportunity for Members of this House to state how they would like to see partnership working in this country, how they would like to see adequate reward for workers, the circumstances in place to ensure that we are competitive, how the wealth created in this nation is distributed and how the money is created for investment in public services. In six months time, people will stand up and claim that deals are being done here, there and everywhere and that the House should have an input into them. This is an opportunity for Members to talk to members of the Cabinet and inform them of what they do and do not want. The beauty of the partnership process is that it forces people of different points of view to listen to each other. They are not sitting in their own corner at their trade union meeting, chamber of commerce meeting or voluntary body meeting; they all must listen to each other. We could do with a bit of it in here. We could put arguments forward, see where the compromises must be made and have some input into shaping the future, a future that will be different from what Irish Ferries wants for its workers.
Back to top of the page
Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005: Second Stage (29/09/05)
29/09/05 - This legislation reflects all that is important and good in the partnership process. It demonstrates that Ireland has come a long way in the 15 years since trade union leaders told employers they should ask their workers to take their brains to work with them, rather than treating them as statistics. The Bill is a further significant step forward. Its importance lies in its provisions to make employees and employers confront the problems faced by the other side. Workers must sit down with management to put their points of view and vice versa and both parties must share, engage and argue. This is how creative progress is made in any proper enterprise and can only be beneficial.
This legislation demonstrates a welcome and positive attitude on the part of Government and reflects maturing partnership. In the past 20 years, we have attempted, through the partnership process, to avoid a race to the bottom in terms of wages and, instead, to increase productivity while maintaining competitiveness and rewarding workers adequately and fairly. This approach has worked extraordinarily well. Only once in the past 15 years — either in 2000 or 2001 — did Irish productivity fail to increase more rapidly than in all other western European countries. I do not refer to economic growth, an important consideration, but to output per person working in the economy. It is important to recognise this fact.
It is also important that those who repeat the rip-off Ireland mantra recognise that the proper and decent reward I and many others negotiated for workers is reflected in higher costs and prices. Ireland is not a cheap country and we are not about to reverse policy and pay people peanuts. Higher prices are the inevitable result of adequate, correct and fair remuneration.
A forum of the type established under the new legislation would provide the relevant information to workers and require them to share with management responsibility for finding solutions to any problems faced by their company. The idea that a workforce should be completely oblivious to problems, risks and dangers confronting the company is daft. The value of the forum is that it will make the job of management easier. Everybody will be made aware of problems and will be required to help find solutions if the company is not to go under.
It is important that we see this Bill as part of a wider scheme to draw in workers. This does not give something away, it offers something. It does not expose the inner workings of accounts or strategies, it harnesses the creativity, views and ideas of the workforce and means that all sides must confront the issues, problems, threats and difficulties faced by a company. That must be a good thing. In the way that social partnership has shown itself a model of progress for economies across the world, this could do the same.
There are responsibilities alongside the legislation. The workers representatives on the forum must know why they are going in: not just to protect workers’ views but to ensure that the enterprise is stronger for their involvement and the establishment of the forum, to ensure they have their input and that they take responsibility for decisions that come out of there. Representation at any level means that once a forum makes a decision, it must be sold by those who made the decision. The same goes for management, it must be courageous and talk to workers in a way to which it has not been accustomed but in a way that can only be good for the enterprise.
This is fine legislation that will be good for the economy. It shows that we are mature in Irish labour, industry and business and we can talk to each other, share information and move forward in a way that is good for everyone in the economy, not just the bosses and owners but also the workers and their families. This legislation is a Chinese bargain, where everyone walks away from the table having gained something.
Back to top of the page
Northern Ireland Class Politics
28/09/05 - The challenge facing us now is to recognise that the greatest difficulty in the North is old fashioned class politics. Protestant working class estates have been left without any hope, opted out of the establishment and have no trust or confidence in the political system. They see no gain, progress, improvement or future in political activity. We should recognise that what has happened in the case of Sinn Féin has been a development into constitutional democratic politics. The same process must be sold, fed and energised in Protestant working class communities in the North of Ireland. Friends of mine in the trade union movement in the North say that is the greatest challenge and most difficult task facing us. A greater value has been placed on education on the Catholic side, especially over the last three generations, as it was seen as the way to escape the oppression which was suffered certainly until 1970. A similar development is required in Protestant working class communities. We must focus on the task and seek answers.
Back to top of the page
Garda Investigations - Murder of Joseph Rafferty
28/09/05 - I wish to make a short contribution to this important debate, which offers Senators an opportunity to acknowledge again the importance of justice as a cornerstone of our democracy. We should take this opportunity to remind ourselves in a significant way of the value of life.
We have almost become inured and anaesthetised to the discovery of bodies following murders in various parts of this island. It is important that this debate should remind us again of the importance of a person’s life. My feelings on the murder of Joseph Rafferty are similar to my feelings on the killings of Brian Fitzgerald, a totally innocent person who was murdered outside a nightclub in Limerick for standing up for what was right, and Robert McCartney. The actions which were perpetrated against the people I have mentioned, who were taken out, represent one of the many evil sides of terrorism. I do not doubt that regardless of the provenance of the person who carried out the terrible murder of Joseph Rafferty — regardless of whether the person is a member of the IRA — the events in question are symptomatic of our society’s free access to killing and easy approach to life.
Senators should stand and salute the members of the family of Joseph Rafferty. Mr. Rafferty’s relatives have shown they are prepared to take a courageous and public stand. They have proved willing to take their case to the greatest court of all — to the people. It is hugely important for them to recognise that although justice and politics are completely intertwined, they are completely separate at the same time. It is quite a difficult concept. As Members of the Oireachtas, we make the law and ensure that it is implemented, but we do not dare to involve ourselves in how it is implemented. It is a tricky set of circumstances, which relates to other matters such as the case of the Rossport five.
It is clear that this is a difficult time for the Rafferty family. While no family wants to be faced with a challenge of this nature, it is impossible for any family to walk away from it. For that reason, the members of the Rafferty family deserve our full support, wherever it can be provided. Every public representative, including those who represent Sinn Féin, has a responsibility to ensure that no stone is left unturned to help them. If members of Sinn Féin have some information about the death of Joseph Rafferty, they have a bounden duty to ensure that such details are brought to the attention of the appropriate authorities. Some people in Irish life have a certain attitude to consultation with the Garda — they question whether co-operating with the force is the right thing to do. There can be no doubt that society regulates itself by means of its law and its police force. As I said at the outset, the justice system, as a means of social regulation, is a cornerstone of what we do.
The importance of this debate is that it is sending a clear statement to all and sundry — I refer to the people at large, Sinn Féin, the IRA, whoever is listening and whoever wants to listen — that there should be no hiding place for people in our society who act like whoever killed Joseph Rafferty. This kind of killing diminishes everyone in society. The manner in which we deal with such crimes is a reflection on how we order and regulate our society. For that reason, we have to ensure that justice is done. Those who are protecting and hiding the suspect in the case of Joseph Rafferty in such an unacceptable manner should be answerable to society at large. Justice needs to be done, and to be seen to be done, quickly. I hope the Rafferty family will take some sustenance from the support of people on all sides of the political stage. I hope we can be of some help to the family during its challenge to find justice for Joseph Rafferty.
Back to top of the page
Early Childhood Education
28/09/05 - There is a considerable amount of material associated with this subject. I sense that the Minister of State has been sent in to bat with a fine speech that says everything but is going nowhere. It is full of possibilities but contains no certainties. He said the NESF report has three clear aims, one of which is to set out an implementation process with key targets and objectives to be achieved at policy level over the next five years. Let me draw the attention of the Minister of State to the fact that the NESF report points out very clearly that we have ample policy concerning early childhood care and education but now need structures to ensure its implementation. That is what I want to consider today.
We should, as a first step, have one Department, headed by one Minister, responsible for the whole area of child care and education. There is an absolute need to increase paid maternity leave to 26 weeks, and we should begin that process immediately. This is absolutely necessary and is in line with what is happening throughout Europe. We also need funded or free universal access to child care for three year olds.
Consider the OECD report, which states we have a very solid support structure for four to six year olds within the national school system. I am glad some of us took a strong stand on this matter 25 years ago. The support structure is now standing us in good stead. It is important that Irish people understand that, in much of the rest of Europe, this age group would be considered to be in the preschool category. The OECD report also recognised that there was a very solid active and voluntary and community sector in the area of early childhood education and care and that there were strong local partnerships upon which we could build. This is linked to what I said about variety. The existing framework provides a structure on which to build. The report calls for publicly funded support structures for three to six year olds. The Minister of State signed up to this, as did we all. The support structures would involve school and after-school activities. Consider the relief that would be created by putting in place the publicly funded support structures.
The National Women’s Council of Ireland has sought a very similar provision, namely, universal access and support structures for children between three and six. It has also suggested that there should be a certain level of support for infants from birth to 12 months and an advanced or different level of support for children from one to three years. It has suggested there should be a more regularised structure for those between three and six years. We must consider these issues. Structures should be formal while the activities and learning should be informal. However, in all cases the system should be structured. There should be a framework. One cannot just let it happen by itself.
The National Women’s Council of Ireland stressed time and again the importance of extending maternity leave and the importance of parental leave. A related issue, dealt with very specifically in a European directive some years ago, concerns the attitude of businesses to women who are pregnant, who have recently had children or who are breastfeeding. I have received many calls from women working in the lower to mid-range of middle management who, on return from maternity leave, are being in some way disregarded and treated with some contempt or are not being afforded equality of esteem because they have taken time out to have children. In order to ensure the continuance of the tribe, we need to be supportive of child care.
I have five points which I ask the Minister of State to consider. I suggest one Minister of State in one Department should deal with the area of child care and child education. I suggest that maternity leave be extended to 26 weeks and that paid parental leave be available for 26 weeks. I suggest universal access for all three year olds to care and education, whichever is appropriate. I suggest an accreditation system for all providers of child care. These suggestions could be written by the Minister of State on the back of an envelope and there is no need for a long speech. These are five easy points.
Back to top of the page
Seanad debates are available in full on the Oireachtas Website
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Irish Ferries - Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005 (29/09/05)
Irish Ferries - The Need for Partnership (29/09/05)
Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005: Second Stage (29/09/05)
Northern Ireland Class Politics (28/09/05)
Garda Investigations - Murder of Joseph Rafferty (28/09/05)
Early Childhood Education (28/09/05)
Irish Ferries - Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005
29/09/05 - The attitude of Irish Ferries is indicative of the direction Ireland does not want to take. The company is attempting to depress wages, repress workers and bring us back to the future of a spailpín fánach type economy in which immigrants and foreign workers are exploited, Irish workers sacked and money taken from the taxpayer. This irresponsible company will make decent businesses uncompetitive and is a terrible reflection of our economy at international level. Irish Ferries will be at the bottom of the pile when I choose how I intend to travel abroad. This episode also demonstrates the importance of ensuring there are no monopolies. It is an appalling reflection on Ireland and indicates that we appear to have lost our way.
Irish Ferries is trying to turn legislation on redundancy on its head. Sacking an employee and replacing him or her a week later does not constitute redundancy. It is appalling that the management of Irish Ferries has proposed to contemptuously charge the taxpayer 60% of the costs it incurs in putting Irish workers out of work and recruiting foreign workers at rates of pay far lower than those agreed. Those who believe otherwise should apply the company’s logic to their own position and imagine their reaction if they were told tomorrow they would be paid half their previous wage from Monday onwards and that the other extraordinary conditions being put to workers in Irish Ferries would apply.
Why would 70% of workers in the company indicate they wished to accept the deal put forward by management? The reason is terror and the company’s policy of frightening people and panicking them into the lifeboats to protect themselves. Workers are worried about their families’ future and whether they will have something in the bank for a rainy day. Perhaps they were never fully informed. I note the selective use of information in the statements issued by Irish Ferries. They inform us, for example, that ferry car business decreased last year but do not bother to mention that freight business has increased significantly. They also failed to note that we are fast approaching the point at which our ports will no longer be able to cope with the level of exports and imports they are processing.
If Irish Ferries proceeds in the manner it proposes, Ireland would be better off without it and it would be preferable to try to find other employment for workers who wish to work elsewhere. We cannot countenance the company’s proposals which were made immediately before negotiations begin on a possible new national partnership. They undermine trust and confidence.
Little is required in the partnership process, whether on the part of IBEC on the management side, ICTU on the trade union side or the Government, to give sustenance to those who oppose agreement. Opponents will point to the actions of those on the other side and argue that the process will never work. Activity of the type proposed by Irish Ferries will reverberate around the trade union movement in the next couple of months and the company’s name will be mentioned at every upcoming trade union meeting. Members will be asked why their trade unions should enter partnerships with employers or trust Irish business.
Irish Ferries does not reflect business people in general. Most are happy to seek a decent profit, pay their workers a decent wage and remain competitive by arguing the toss between both. Access to accounts and information in Irish Ferries would have prevented us from reaching the point we are at today. This attempt by Irish Ferries to make itself anti-competitive by undermining competition with taxpayers’ money, so it can sack workers and employ and exploit foreign workers to undercut its competitors on other routes, is unfair under European legislation. It is unacceptable, anti-European and uncompetitive and we cannot put State money into it. If we need legislation to copperfasten that position, we should introduce it.
Legislation, however, should not be necessary. Our redundancy legislation cannot be stretched to achieve the outcome Irish Ferries desires. The European directives will not allow us to put money into a company which then, using that money, is in a position to undermine the competition. It is not on, we cannot allow this to happen. It is not something we should be part of and if it goes to the wire on Monday, we should make our position clear. All speakers in this House and people across the labour spectrum have indicated their worries about it. Management is doing this without indicating what level of pain it will soak up. How many people from eastern Europe will be asked to run the company? None. This is an old fashioned anti-worker approach that we cannot accept.
Back to top of the page
Irish Ferries - The Need for Partnership
29/09/05 - I welcome the comments by the Taoiseach yesterday on behalf of the ferry workers. It raises an important point. Over the past seven or eight years, people in this House have discussed Members’ involvement — or non-involvement — in the partnership process. This is a good example of why we need a partnership process. What we see happening at the moment with the ferry workers is anti-community, anti-partnership and is an attempt to bring us back to the future of the Spailpín Fánach, where we oppress immigrant and travelling workers and where we depress wages and give workers no rights. This is a community that has worked hard to give reasonable rewards to workers at all levels in the public and private sector over the past 15 to 20 years. It is not to be thrown away in the interests of greedy, grasping, miserable businesses that want to walk on those workers who have created the wealth that we are all sharing.
This company does not reflect the generality of businesses in Ireland. Most businesses are happy to make their profit and to pay their workers and that is as it should be. This is not an anti-business thing, but an anti-person thing. I would welcome an opportunity for Members of this House to state how they would like to see partnership working in this country, how they would like to see adequate reward for workers, the circumstances in place to ensure that we are competitive, how the wealth created in this nation is distributed and how the money is created for investment in public services. In six months time, people will stand up and claim that deals are being done here, there and everywhere and that the House should have an input into them. This is an opportunity for Members to talk to members of the Cabinet and inform them of what they do and do not want. The beauty of the partnership process is that it forces people of different points of view to listen to each other. They are not sitting in their own corner at their trade union meeting, chamber of commerce meeting or voluntary body meeting; they all must listen to each other. We could do with a bit of it in here. We could put arguments forward, see where the compromises must be made and have some input into shaping the future, a future that will be different from what Irish Ferries wants for its workers.
Back to top of the page
Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill 2005: Second Stage (29/09/05)
29/09/05 - This legislation reflects all that is important and good in the partnership process. It demonstrates that Ireland has come a long way in the 15 years since trade union leaders told employers they should ask their workers to take their brains to work with them, rather than treating them as statistics. The Bill is a further significant step forward. Its importance lies in its provisions to make employees and employers confront the problems faced by the other side. Workers must sit down with management to put their points of view and vice versa and both parties must share, engage and argue. This is how creative progress is made in any proper enterprise and can only be beneficial.
This legislation demonstrates a welcome and positive attitude on the part of Government and reflects maturing partnership. In the past 20 years, we have attempted, through the partnership process, to avoid a race to the bottom in terms of wages and, instead, to increase productivity while maintaining competitiveness and rewarding workers adequately and fairly. This approach has worked extraordinarily well. Only once in the past 15 years — either in 2000 or 2001 — did Irish productivity fail to increase more rapidly than in all other western European countries. I do not refer to economic growth, an important consideration, but to output per person working in the economy. It is important to recognise this fact.
It is also important that those who repeat the rip-off Ireland mantra recognise that the proper and decent reward I and many others negotiated for workers is reflected in higher costs and prices. Ireland is not a cheap country and we are not about to reverse policy and pay people peanuts. Higher prices are the inevitable result of adequate, correct and fair remuneration.
A forum of the type established under the new legislation would provide the relevant information to workers and require them to share with management responsibility for finding solutions to any problems faced by their company. The idea that a workforce should be completely oblivious to problems, risks and dangers confronting the company is daft. The value of the forum is that it will make the job of management easier. Everybody will be made aware of problems and will be required to help find solutions if the company is not to go under.
It is important that we see this Bill as part of a wider scheme to draw in workers. This does not give something away, it offers something. It does not expose the inner workings of accounts or strategies, it harnesses the creativity, views and ideas of the workforce and means that all sides must confront the issues, problems, threats and difficulties faced by a company. That must be a good thing. In the way that social partnership has shown itself a model of progress for economies across the world, this could do the same.
There are responsibilities alongside the legislation. The workers representatives on the forum must know why they are going in: not just to protect workers’ views but to ensure that the enterprise is stronger for their involvement and the establishment of the forum, to ensure they have their input and that they take responsibility for decisions that come out of there. Representation at any level means that once a forum makes a decision, it must be sold by those who made the decision. The same goes for management, it must be courageous and talk to workers in a way to which it has not been accustomed but in a way that can only be good for the enterprise.
This is fine legislation that will be good for the economy. It shows that we are mature in Irish labour, industry and business and we can talk to each other, share information and move forward in a way that is good for everyone in the economy, not just the bosses and owners but also the workers and their families. This legislation is a Chinese bargain, where everyone walks away from the table having gained something.
Back to top of the page
Northern Ireland Class Politics
28/09/05 - The challenge facing us now is to recognise that the greatest difficulty in the North is old fashioned class politics. Protestant working class estates have been left without any hope, opted out of the establishment and have no trust or confidence in the political system. They see no gain, progress, improvement or future in political activity. We should recognise that what has happened in the case of Sinn Féin has been a development into constitutional democratic politics. The same process must be sold, fed and energised in Protestant working class communities in the North of Ireland. Friends of mine in the trade union movement in the North say that is the greatest challenge and most difficult task facing us. A greater value has been placed on education on the Catholic side, especially over the last three generations, as it was seen as the way to escape the oppression which was suffered certainly until 1970. A similar development is required in Protestant working class communities. We must focus on the task and seek answers.
Back to top of the page
Garda Investigations - Murder of Joseph Rafferty
28/09/05 - I wish to make a short contribution to this important debate, which offers Senators an opportunity to acknowledge again the importance of justice as a cornerstone of our democracy. We should take this opportunity to remind ourselves in a significant way of the value of life.
We have almost become inured and anaesthetised to the discovery of bodies following murders in various parts of this island. It is important that this debate should remind us again of the importance of a person’s life. My feelings on the murder of Joseph Rafferty are similar to my feelings on the killings of Brian Fitzgerald, a totally innocent person who was murdered outside a nightclub in Limerick for standing up for what was right, and Robert McCartney. The actions which were perpetrated against the people I have mentioned, who were taken out, represent one of the many evil sides of terrorism. I do not doubt that regardless of the provenance of the person who carried out the terrible murder of Joseph Rafferty — regardless of whether the person is a member of the IRA — the events in question are symptomatic of our society’s free access to killing and easy approach to life.
Senators should stand and salute the members of the family of Joseph Rafferty. Mr. Rafferty’s relatives have shown they are prepared to take a courageous and public stand. They have proved willing to take their case to the greatest court of all — to the people. It is hugely important for them to recognise that although justice and politics are completely intertwined, they are completely separate at the same time. It is quite a difficult concept. As Members of the Oireachtas, we make the law and ensure that it is implemented, but we do not dare to involve ourselves in how it is implemented. It is a tricky set of circumstances, which relates to other matters such as the case of the Rossport five.
It is clear that this is a difficult time for the Rafferty family. While no family wants to be faced with a challenge of this nature, it is impossible for any family to walk away from it. For that reason, the members of the Rafferty family deserve our full support, wherever it can be provided. Every public representative, including those who represent Sinn Féin, has a responsibility to ensure that no stone is left unturned to help them. If members of Sinn Féin have some information about the death of Joseph Rafferty, they have a bounden duty to ensure that such details are brought to the attention of the appropriate authorities. Some people in Irish life have a certain attitude to consultation with the Garda — they question whether co-operating with the force is the right thing to do. There can be no doubt that society regulates itself by means of its law and its police force. As I said at the outset, the justice system, as a means of social regulation, is a cornerstone of what we do.
The importance of this debate is that it is sending a clear statement to all and sundry — I refer to the people at large, Sinn Féin, the IRA, whoever is listening and whoever wants to listen — that there should be no hiding place for people in our society who act like whoever killed Joseph Rafferty. This kind of killing diminishes everyone in society. The manner in which we deal with such crimes is a reflection on how we order and regulate our society. For that reason, we have to ensure that justice is done. Those who are protecting and hiding the suspect in the case of Joseph Rafferty in such an unacceptable manner should be answerable to society at large. Justice needs to be done, and to be seen to be done, quickly. I hope the Rafferty family will take some sustenance from the support of people on all sides of the political stage. I hope we can be of some help to the family during its challenge to find justice for Joseph Rafferty.
Back to top of the page
Early Childhood Education
28/09/05 - There is a considerable amount of material associated with this subject. I sense that the Minister of State has been sent in to bat with a fine speech that says everything but is going nowhere. It is full of possibilities but contains no certainties. He said the NESF report has three clear aims, one of which is to set out an implementation process with key targets and objectives to be achieved at policy level over the next five years. Let me draw the attention of the Minister of State to the fact that the NESF report points out very clearly that we have ample policy concerning early childhood care and education but now need structures to ensure its implementation. That is what I want to consider today.
We should, as a first step, have one Department, headed by one Minister, responsible for the whole area of child care and education. There is an absolute need to increase paid maternity leave to 26 weeks, and we should begin that process immediately. This is absolutely necessary and is in line with what is happening throughout Europe. We also need funded or free universal access to child care for three year olds.
Consider the OECD report, which states we have a very solid support structure for four to six year olds within the national school system. I am glad some of us took a strong stand on this matter 25 years ago. The support structure is now standing us in good stead. It is important that Irish people understand that, in much of the rest of Europe, this age group would be considered to be in the preschool category. The OECD report also recognised that there was a very solid active and voluntary and community sector in the area of early childhood education and care and that there were strong local partnerships upon which we could build. This is linked to what I said about variety. The existing framework provides a structure on which to build. The report calls for publicly funded support structures for three to six year olds. The Minister of State signed up to this, as did we all. The support structures would involve school and after-school activities. Consider the relief that would be created by putting in place the publicly funded support structures.
The National Women’s Council of Ireland has sought a very similar provision, namely, universal access and support structures for children between three and six. It has also suggested that there should be a certain level of support for infants from birth to 12 months and an advanced or different level of support for children from one to three years. It has suggested there should be a more regularised structure for those between three and six years. We must consider these issues. Structures should be formal while the activities and learning should be informal. However, in all cases the system should be structured. There should be a framework. One cannot just let it happen by itself.
The National Women’s Council of Ireland stressed time and again the importance of extending maternity leave and the importance of parental leave. A related issue, dealt with very specifically in a European directive some years ago, concerns the attitude of businesses to women who are pregnant, who have recently had children or who are breastfeeding. I have received many calls from women working in the lower to mid-range of middle management who, on return from maternity leave, are being in some way disregarded and treated with some contempt or are not being afforded equality of esteem because they have taken time out to have children. In order to ensure the continuance of the tribe, we need to be supportive of child care.
I have five points which I ask the Minister of State to consider. I suggest one Minister of State in one Department should deal with the area of child care and child education. I suggest that maternity leave be extended to 26 weeks and that paid parental leave be available for 26 weeks. I suggest universal access for all three year olds to care and education, whichever is appropriate. I suggest an accreditation system for all providers of child care. These suggestions could be written by the Minister of State on the back of an envelope and there is no need for a long speech. These are five easy points.
Back to top of the page
Seanad debates are available in full on the Oireachtas Website