I will continue from where I finished yesterday evening by going through the Bill section by section. Section 1 provides for the Short Title, construction and commencement. Section 2 provides for the definition of the 2005 Act as the Principal Act. Section 3 provides for the insertion of two new definitions into section 2 of the 2005 Act, namely “qualified cohabitant” and “surviving qualified cohabitant”. Section 4 provides for amendments to section 81 of the 2005 Act in order to allow surviving qualified cohabitants to access the death benefit payment under the occupational injuries scheme. Section 5 provides for the substitution of section 123 of the 2005 Act. This section provides for renaming the scheme from widow's, widower's and surviving civil partner’s contributory pension to bereaved partner’s contributory pension. It introduces new definitions for “bereaved partner” and “deceased partner”. This section amends the existing definitions of widow, widower and civil partner to remove a person who is divorced or had their marriage or civil partnership dissolved. This section also sets out where a spouse or civil partner whose relationship has broken down for more than two years shall not be considered a bereaved partner for the purposes of Chapter 18, Chapter 21 and Chapter 6 of Part 3 of the 2005 Act. Finally, the section also contains a regulation-making power to allow the Minister to specify the circumstances where couples are physically living apart for more than two years but are still considered to be eligible for the payment. Section 6 inserts a new section 123A into the 2005 Act to provide for the definition of a qualified cohabitant. As I have said, this definition is based on that of a qualifying cohabitant as defined in the 2010 Act. That Act provides an existing framework for establishing the existence of cohabiting relationships of a particular form that provide rights and obligations to those cohabitants. A person can become a qualified cohabitant where they were in an intimate and committed relationship of two years, where there were children of that relationship; or five years, where there were no children of that relationship. The section also sets out the circumstances that may be considered to establish the existence of a relationship of qualified cohabitation, which is based on similar criteria in the 2010 Act, and includes matters such as financial dependence and the extent to which they presented as a couple. This section also sets out a regulation-making power to allow the Minister to prescribe the evidence that will be required to prove the existence of such a relationship. Section 7 repeals section 124 of the 2005 Act, insofar as it is still in operation, to reflect the finding of inconsistency with the Constitution by the Supreme Court. Section 8 inserts a new section 124A to replace the repealed section 124 of the 2005 Act. The new section includes amendments to introduce the definition of “bereaved partner” and “deceased partner”. It also sets out that a bereaved partner whose claim is based on being a surviving qualified cohabitant shall, regardless of the date of death of his or her deceased partner, be entitled to a pension under this section from 22 January 2024 or the date of death if it occurred after this date. This is an important aspect of the legislation in that it allows for the backdating of payments to the date that the provision was found to be inconsistent with the Constitution. Regulations under the 2005 Act will modify the existing six-month period for the backdating of claims and provide that claimants for this pension will have six months from the date of enactment to make a claim, which will be backdated to 22 January 2024 or the date of death if later. Section 9 provides for saver clauses to ensure persons currently in receipt of a payment under this scheme or who have an entitlement to the payment up to the day of the passing of the Bill will retain the payment or entitlement after the passing of the Bill. This applies to people who were bereaved and were divorced, or whose marriage broke down or civil partnership was dissolved, before enactment of the Bill. Section 10 provides for the substitution of section 125(1) of the 2005 Act, which sets out the social insurance contributions for the pension. The new subsection includes amendments to introduce the definition of “bereaved partner” and “deceased partner” for the purposes of setting the contribution conditions. Section 11 provides for the substitution of Chapter 21 of the 2005 Act, which provides for the widowed parent grant. The substitution of the Chapter includes amendments to the current widowed parent grant scheme in order to allow for surviving qualified cohabitants to access the scheme. This section also provides for changing the name of the scheme to "bereaved parent grant". These changes become effective from the date of enactment. Section 12 provides for amendments to the current widow's, widower's and surviving civil partner’s non-contributory pension scheme in order to allow for surviving qualified cohabitants to access the scheme. This section also provides for changing the name of the scheme to bereaved partner’s non-contributory pension. This section applies the new definitions referenced in section 123 of “bereaved partner” and “deceased partner” to this Chapter. These changes will become effective from the date of enactment. Section 13 provides for the substitution of section 163 of the 2005 Act, which sets out the entitlement to the non-contributory pension. This is done to amend the wording to include “qualified cohabitant” and also to replace the existing definitions with “bereaved partner”. Section 14 provides for the substitution of section 166 of the 2005 Act, which sets out that the non-contributory pension will be lost for the period that a person cohabits. This is done to amend the wording to replace the existing definitions with “bereaved partner’. Section 15 provides for the substitution of section 167 of the 2005 Act, which excludes the possibility of both a contributory and a non-contributory pension. This is done to amend the wording to replace the existing definitions with “bereaved partner”. Section 16 provides for the repeal of section 167A of the 2005 Act, which provided for the avoidance of a double pension in respect of the surviving civil partner’s pension. This is no longer relevant as the amended section 167 will now make the appropriate provision for all bereaved partners. Section 17 provides for consequential amendments to the 2005 Act. These amendments change the scheme names throughout the Act. The scheme names affected are first, the widow’s, widower’s and surviving civil partner’s contributory pension, which will change to the bereaved partner’s contributory pension; second, the widowed parent grant, which will change to the bereaved parent grant; and third, the widow's, widower's and surviving civil partner’s non-contributory pension, which will change to the bereaved partner’s non-contributory pension. Section 18 provides for consequential amendments to section 126 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. These amendments are to reflect the change in scheme names in that Act. All of that technical information is not to take away from the journey involved for anyone seeking this payment, or the journey involved for Mr. O'Meara. Grief is a very real thing and affects people in so many different ways. I thank Deputies for their patience and attention to that particular section of the Bill. The measures contained in the Bill are necessary as a result of the Supreme Court decision in the O’Meara case and to provide equality under the scheme to all bereaved partners whether spouses, civil partners or now, for the first time, qualifying cohabitants. The measures will provide access to the bereaved partner's contributory pension to qualified cohabitants for the first time and ensure that there is a financial payment for these people who suffer a devastating loss, such as John O’Meara and his family. Following the review of a number of complex issues and the existing anomalies highlighted by the Supreme Court, this Bill attempts to treat all bereaved couples fairly and equally, whether this is in the eligibility for these important financial supports or the circumstances where entitlement is lost and relationships end. This is also to avoid paying for multiple payments in respect of multiple previous partners. Turning to Committee Stage amendments which do not directly relate to the issue at hand, Deputies may recall the review on economic crime conducted by Justice Hamilton. One of the recommendations in that review is to allow officials from the Department of Social Protection to sit in on Garda investigations of social welfare fraud, where appropriate. The Revenue Commissioners and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission have a similar provision in their legislation. I assure Deputies that this proposal will be in line with fair procedures towards suspects. Officials from the Department of Social Protection will only sit in on investigation of suspects by Garda invitation. This Government takes economic crime seriously and this proposed Committee Stage amendment is an important tool in that respect. I commend the Bill to the House. I again thank John O'Meara and his children, and remember Michelle as we move to pass this legislation. I pay tribute to Deputy Alan Kelly for walking the entire journey with them.

Sentiment score: -0.01

He normally does not need it.

Sentiment score: 0.00

He has four of them on now.

Sentiment score: 0.00

I thank the Ceann Comhairle. I did not think we would finish this quickly. I thank Deputy McAuliffe and all Deputies who gave me good wishes today. I have listened with interest to all of the contributions. We have taken notes. For Deputies who raised individual cases, I ask them to send me specific details and we will try to action them in as far as we can. It is clear that there is broad support across the House for implementing the main measures of this Bill. It is rooted in many of the personal stories that many Deputies have shared today, and that Deputies and Senators have all experienced in our constituencies. The frustration that we feel on many occasions in dealing with these kinds of cases has been articulated by many. The O'Meara family - John O'Meara and his children - have given great hope and direction to people. We must now move to implement this case. In finding in favour of the O'Meara family, the Supreme Court did so on the grounds of the equality guarantee in Bunreacht na hÉireann. This legislation is designed to now provide for that equal treatment of couples whose relationship and family life is grounded on an intimate and committed relationship other than marriage or civil partnership. It does this by reflecting the existing definition of qualified cohabitants, which is contained in the 2010 Act, as was then enacted by the Oireachtas. We have used the 2010 Act as very much the scaffolding in trying to respond to this issue. The inclusion of qualified cohabiting couples for eligibility for the bereaved partners pension does require us, however, to address circumstances where relationships break down, and then eligibility ceases. The Supreme Court noted anomalies with the existing scheme, including the continued eligibility for divorcees and others whose relationships have long broken down. We have a choice to either address these anomalies, or indeed make them more complex by creating a situation where multiple payments to multiple former partners could potentially be funded through the Social Insurance Fund. That is not the primary purpose of this scheme. It is important to take this opportunity to ensure that the equality provided for accessing the scheme is also applied where personal circumstances change and the entitlement is no longer appropriate. A number of issues were addressed according to a constant theme throughout the debate. First, why did we use the 2010 Act for definition? The Supreme Court noted in its judgment that the State had already defined cohabitation within the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. Therefore, reliance on the existing legal framework is, I think, a reasonable approach for an Oireachtas to adopt in regulating access to the bereaved partners contributory pension for qualified cohabitants. The criteria the Department will use to determine whether someone is a cohabiting couple was raised by a number of Deputies. Again, we have guidance within the 2010 Act on the basis that within that Act, there are a number of areas, including, but not exclusively: the duration of the relationship; the basis on which a couple may have lived together; the degree of financial dependence of either adult on the other, and any agreements they may have had in respect of their finances; the degree and nature of any financial arrangements between the adults, including any joint purchase of a property; whether there are one or more children of the relationship; any social welfare payment and the conditions in relation to the payment, for example, receipt of one-parent family payment or an increase for a qualified adult; whether one of the adults cares for or supports the children of another; or the degree to which adults present themselves to others as a couple. The Department currently applies these tests to other schemes to assist in determining whether a relationship of cohabitation exists. There is a regulation-making power to allow for the Minister for Social Protection of the day to make regulations concerning the types of documentary proof required to establish qualified cohabitation. There is also - this was referred to by a number of Deputies - regulation-making power for the Minister to consider time spent living apart due to medical reasons as not bringing the relationship to an end. A statutory delegation may also be presented on a case-by-case basis to provide evidence. The issue regarding two and five years and the difference between a cohabiting couple with children and a cohabiting couple without children is based on the existing 2010 Act. I was asked for a number of claims that predate 2024. Currently, we have 160. They are only claims, however, and it does not say whether there is that amount of relationships for their claims that we have to date. The issue regarding the backdating of the bereaved parent grant has been mentioned. One of the difficulties there is that grant is paid where there are dependent children at the date of the person's death to meet their expenses in the immediate aftermath of the death. The rate of payment has changed over the years since its introduction, increasing from €1,000 in 1999 to the current rate of €8,000. Attempting to backdate the payment may result in payments for children who are no longer dependent and where other supports, including social welfare supports or additional needs payments were made available at the time. Therefore, it would be very complex to do that. In terms of backdating payment to the date of death, it is currently proposed that payment of the bereaved partner's contributory pension will commence from the date of judgment in the case of death that occurred prior to that date, that is, 22 January. It is important to clarify that where deaths occurred before 22 January, people can make a claim. Some Deputies seem to think people could not, but that the payment will be for after 22 January, when the existing law was found to be inconsistent with the Constitution. To go picking another date in this circumstance would be considered to be arbitrary. Legislation is typically only applied prospectively, hence any retrospective conferring of entitlement requires strong legal justification to avoid creating unwanted precedent, which would affect other schemes. I emphasise that other supports are available within the Department to support people who may face financial issues. I encourage Deputies to provide me with cases and we will try to see if we can put other supports in place. Deputy Carthy made the point regarding the necessity of information and providing information for this. We absolutely intend, once this Bill is enacted, to commence a communication campaign that will be particularly focused on the following issues. First, eligibility, focusing on the time required to be living together in an intimate and committed relationship to be considered as a qualified cohabitant and the information that may be necessary to evidence this in order that people can start getting that together. Second, the phrase "historical deaths" is a very technical one. It does not seek to downplay grief. The Department will emphasise that regarding a claim being based on qualified cohabitation, deaths before the enactment of the Bill will allow a person to access the payment, and all historical deaths, regardless of the date, will be considered once the criteria for payment is satisfied. With regard to backdating, the Department will emphasise that even in the context of all historical deaths being considered, the payment of bereaved partner's contributory pension for qualified cohabitants will commence on 22 January 2024. The Department will ensure that people are aware of the six-month window that is now open in order to avail of the extended backdating. This is an exception to the general rule that provides six months' backdated to the date of the claim. If the claim is made outside of this six-month window, then a person will no longer be able to avail of the extended backdating in this scenario and will be subject to the normal six-month backdating from the date of the claim which applies to current applicants. Again, I want to ensure that we will try to assist and be as flexible as possible for claims in this particular area. We will ensure that all information is made available through multiple communications channels, including social media and Citizens Information. The Department will put on a paid public information case in this regard. There were a lot of questions regarding the 2010 Act. I have put that into context and I will seek to come back to the Deputies regarding any other issues that were mentioned. I thank the Deputies for their contributions today. I have taken notes, and we will seek to reflect on those notes. A number of Deputies have asked whether I will engage with Treoir. We will be making arrangements to have an engagement with Treoir ahead of Committee Stage of this Bill. In concluding what can be a technical presentation, particularly on my part as a Minister, I pay tribute to John O'Meara, to his children and to Michelle. We remember Michelle today, and all of those who have had to take this journey on their own. At the end of the day, we have to ensure that people and people's memories are at the heart of this process. While legislation can be technical, it is very important to emphasise that.

Sentiment score: 0.15