Snippet data - viewing only, no editing possible


Label

Field name

Field value


Sitting_Date

11/08/2017 12:00:00 AM


Sitting_Forum


Snippet Ref No

SnippetRefNo

UU00100

Selected Quill

SnippetType

14

Saved Quill

SnippetType_C4D


Selected Quill

SnippetType_1

14

Speaker Name

IndxSpeakerName


Business Category

IndxMainHeadCat

Bills

Sub Category

IndxSubTopic

Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017

Topic

IndxQHeadTopic

Second Stage

See Also

SeeAlso


Part1

TitlePart1


Part2

TitlePart2


Part3

TitlePart3


Volume

VolumeNo

961

Book No

BookNo

2

Pdf Ref

PdfPageRef


Default Business Index

IndexViewCategoryDefault


3 Part Title Business Index

IndexViewCategoryTitle


Default Topic Index

IndexViewCategoryDefaultSpeaker

Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017\Second Stage
Bills\Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017\Second Stage

3 Part Topic Index

IndexViewCategoryTitleSpeaker


Motion Code

MotionCode


Motion Title

MotionTitle


Stage

MotionStage


Amendment No

MotionAmendmentNo


Bill Code

BillCode

BPM2

Bill Title

BillTitle

Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017

Stage

BillStage

Second Stage [Private Members]

Section

BillSection


Statement Code

StatementCode


Statement Title

StatementTitle


Stage

StatementStage


Hour Indicator

HourIndicator

Not applicable

Procedural Instruction

Procedural_Instruction

No

Debate Adjourned

DebateAdjourned

No

Question Askee

QAskee


Question Asker

QAsker


Question Department

QDept


Question ID

QID


Question Reference

QRef


Question Speaker PID

QSpeakerPID


Question Speaker PID To

QSpeakerPIDTo


Questions Asked

QUESTIONSASKED


Speaker Type

SpeakerType


Speaker Name

Senator


Deputy


Minister


Witness


Chairman


ViceChairman


ActingChairmanD


ActingChairmanS


Speaker4Display

Speaker4Display


Speaker

Speaker


SpeakerPID

SpeakerPID


SpeakerText

SpeakerText


OriginalUnidSnippet

OriginalUnidSnippet

7BA1371E6B99211C802581D2006748E7

LastModifiedSnippet

LastModifiedSnippet

02/12/2020 12:26:33 PM

TopicIndex1stCategoryValues

TopicIndex1stCategoryValues

Snippet Contents:

We propose to add a further ground, the disadvantaged socioeconomic ground, making it ten grounds in all. Disadvantaged socioeconomic status would mean a socially identifiable status of social or economic disadvantage resulting from poverty, level or source of income, homelessness, place of residence or family background. Like every piece of legislation there is a political reason we are introducing it. I will explain it by recounting to the House stories told to me about things that happened to people in my constituency, which I believe are unacceptable.
First, at a clinic, a woman asked for my assistance in her job application to a large employer - I will not identify it or where she came from - and I was happy to do so. She told me she would not put the address where she resides on the job application. She lived in a local authority estate and told me that she was not putting her address on the form because she believed that she would be discriminated against because people from that estate did not get jobs. Certain employers discriminated against people from the estate because it had an association with antisocial behaviour or minor criminal activity. I was surprised by this and asked others in the area if they had a similar experience. I was astonished by the extent to which people who live in this local authority estate told me that when they applied for certain jobs, and to certain employers, people who live there do not put down their address because they believe they are discriminated against because of where they live. As so many of them believe this, I think it is sufficient evidence to advance the idea. That is part of the reason we are advancing this ground to change the Employment Equality Act, as it stands.
I will tell a second story, which is similar but relates to the Equal Status Act. I was speaking to a woman in a local authority flat complex where she lived, who told me about her children. I was very surprised when she told me that she did not send her young son to a local national school, but to a private school in the area. I was astonished at the efforts to which this woman went to ensure that her son got the best from his early life. She made valiant efforts on his behalf, and one can imagine the amount of work she had to undertake to put him through a private primary school. She told me that she had applied on her son's behalf to the closest national school but that it would not accept her son. She said none of the people in the local authority flats who had applied to this school had had his or her son accepted there and as a result all the children from the flats had to go to another national school which was further away. She said it was very rough and she did not want her son to go there. It is unacceptable for national schools, our schools, to discriminate and say they will not take children from the flats. For this reason we are bringing forward this small piece of amending legislation to change the Equal Status Act and the Employment Equality Act. I am hopeful that there will be support for it in the House.
The legislation is of a type that is extremely difficult to police but when one looks at the law at present, one is not allowed to discriminate against people because of their sex or their sexual orientation, but there is no law prohibiting discrimination against a person because, as in the examples I just gave, someone comes from a block of flats about which an employer may have a negative view or someone wants to send his or her child to a local national school and the child does not get in because it does not take people from those flats. That behaviour is unacceptable. I do not believe that it is widespread in Irish society but we should change the equality legislation nonetheless so that type of discrimination it is not permissible. Neither is the type of discrimination outlined in the Employment Equality Act and the Equal Status Act particularly widespread but it is extremely important that our legislation sets out that one cannot discriminate against people because they are women, because they are gay, because of their age or because of their religion. Religious discrimination was the most significant type of discrimination since it affected so many people up to 1828 under the Penal Laws. In modern times, we should similarly say that one should not discriminate against people because they come from a poorer background. I believe this to be the most common form of discrimination in this society rather than the other types which are already outlined in the legislation. It is not a competition between the different grounds. Each is commendable and should be there but I see no reason that we should not keep trying to evolve and promote our laws on equality. They continually change along with the society in which we live and it is important that we send out a message that it is unacceptable for people to discriminate against individuals on the basis that those people come from a disadvantaged socioeconomic background.
I apologise for going on for too long, and will hand over to my colleague, Deputy Fiona O'Loughlin.