Civil Partnership Bill 2009 has been published!

4red

News coverage here:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0626/breaking34.htm

Read the Bill here:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=12249

Goodshape

*Groan*. Equal but different.


Quick question -- if I were to 'register a civil partnership' with my Brazilian boyfriend, would he be given the same rights to Irish citizenship as if we were to marry?


Also.. has this bill been passed now, or is their extra discussion/debate/blah required?

4red

Goodshape, you'll have to read through the Bill, the information will be contained there. But given that the Bill provides tax, inheritance, and next-of-kin rights to gay couples who register in exactly the same way as is currently provided to married couples, I would hope your partner would gain citizenship rights were you both to register.

4red

Goodshape, to answer your second question, publication of the Bill today means it is in effect passed - although 'second stage discussion' will have to take place in the Dail in the Autumn. This is generally a formality, and most legal and other commentators would now see Civil Partnership as a done deal. Once the formalities are through, the Bill should become law in a matter of months. The Minister of Justice has said "before the end of the year".

As stated in the Bill, if you wish to register your partnership you have to provide notice 3 months in advance. So no shotgun weddings!

oisindoyle

Goodshape wrote: »

*Groan*. Equal but different.


Quick question -- if I were to 'register a civil partnership' with my Brazilian boyfriend, would he be given the same rights to Irish citizenship as if we were to marry?


Also.. has this bill been passed now, or is their extra discussion/debate/blah required?

No dont think so ...
Its to go before the Dail and will probably be enacted before the end of the year,,,Mr Ahearn said this Bill IS NOT a steping stone to gay marriage and it wont be happening in the future.......so there you have it FF have come out and said gays and lesbians will always remain second class citizens,,,,,F""k them ,,,the fight begins NOW

Reflector

So I can have the same legal relationship with my brother as I can with my boyfriend.
It's just odd and completely insulting. They'll have to do better.

solice

I find it peculiar that 2 people of the opposite sex cannot enter into a civil partnership:

Civil Partnership Bill wrote:

3.—For the purposes of this Act a civil partner is either of two
persons of the same sex who are—
(a) parties to a civil partnership registration that has not been 5
dissolved or the subject of a decree of nullity, or
(b) parties to a legal relationship of a class that is the subject
of an order made under section 5 that has not been dissolved
or the subject of a decree of nullity.

That is also discrimination!

oisindoyle

Reflector wrote: »

So I can have the same legal relationship with my brother as I can with my boyfriend.
It's just odd and completely insulting. They'll have to do better.

Yes it is insulting .So tell them,, complain ,protest ,e mail ALL members of the Government .Let them know you are not happy at being treated as a 2nd class citizen ..
Its a disgrace

rainbow kirby

*sigh*

When will they learn... "separate but equal" is not true equality.

norrie rugger

I saw this in the boards main page and thought "finally, they are giving equality"
Sorry guys but this look like being an effort at appeasment than equality.

Why you can not show your committment to your partner, as easy as I can baffels me.

I personally think that this is an insult to everyone in a same sex relationship.

Actually it insults me too, that friends of mine will not be equal to me

rainbow kirby

norrie rugger wrote: »

I saw this in the boards main page and thought "finally, they are giving equality"
Sorry guys but this look like being an effort at appeasment than equality.

That's basically what it is, what Fianna Fáil are thinking is along the lines of "Oh look, we can shut those uppity queers up for a while, and maybe they'll vote for us". It's not an attempt at true equality, in fact it's enshrining discrimination in law by recognising same-sex relationships in a different, weaker manner to how opposite-sex relationships are currently recognised through marriage.

oisindoyle

norrie rugger wrote: »

I saw this in the boards main page and thought "finally, they are giving equality"
Sorry guys but this look like being an effort at appeasment than equality.

Why you can not show your committment to your partner, as easy as I can baffels me.

I personally think that this is an insult to everyone in a same sex relationship.

Actually it insults me too, that friends of mine will not be equal to me

Thats a really nice thing to say,Thanks very much your words meant a lot

4red

While I would agree that full marriage equality (including adoption rights) would be the best result for Irish gay people, I am not now going to get into the arguments for or against this - including the fact that to amend the definition of 'marriage' to incude gay marriage in the Irish constitution would require a referendum which would in no way be guaranteed to pass through.

However I would like to speak on behalf of those gay couples, particularly older ones, who face serious discrimination which would be erased by this Bill.

We all know of cases like the following:
A gay man in his late sixties is prevented from attending the hospital bedside of his dying partner by the partner's family.
A female gay couple with a son facing the unimaginable when the biological mother is diagnosed with a terminal illness - the remaining mother has no parental rights to the son she reared with her deceased partner.
A 35 year old gay man who has lived with his 50 year old partner for 12 years is turfed out of their shared home on his partners death and has no inheritance rights whatsoever.

Please bear in mind there are many gays and lesbians who welcome Civil Partnership as a necessary and in some cases urgent legal right.

mobius42

rainbow kirby wrote: »

That's basically what it is, what Fianna Fáil are thinking is along the lines of "Oh look, we can shut those uppity queers up for a while, and maybe they'll vote for us". It's not an attempt at true equality, in fact it's enshrining discrimination in law by recognising same-sex relationships in a different, weaker manner to how opposite-sex relationships are currently recognised through marriage.

And even then, FF only brought it up because the Greens pushed for it as part of the Programme for Government (Not that I'm the Green's biggest fan, either).

The issue of gay rights gets very little attention in this country for whatever reason and I imagine the Liveline brigade would be up in arms at any attempt to introduce gay marriage. However, if a referendum was held on the issue, I think most people would support gay marriage and gay rights in general. Political will is the only thing missing, IMO.

I also find it ironic that Dermot Aherne is the minister introducing this measure considering that he opposed the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1993. The article is too long to completely quote here, so I'll just post a link: http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2008/may/25/ministers-slammed-over-anti-gay-speeches/

4red

"I'm 28 years old … I had surgery when I was 23. My partner was kicked out of the room — at that time, we'd been dating for four years or something — and in the rudest, most f---ed up way. That s--t is real, and that's what I don't think people realize. They're like, "Oh, gay marriage." No, you try being a really scared 23-year-old in this hospital room that's 3,000 miles from home, and the only person that you have is your partner, who can't stay because you're not married or they're not your relative. That's insane and absolutely scares me to death."

— Beth Ditto to Spinner.com, on how the lack of rights for gay couples has affected her personally.

Rev Hellfire

Personally I don't know why you're all getting your knickers in a twist about this.

Its been long documented what would be in the bill. So it doesn't give you everything you want right now, everyone knew this already.

But it does represent a move in the right direction, I would have thought people would see this as another step closer to your goals, rather than a kick in the teeth.

oisindoyle

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Personally I don't know why you're all getting your knickers in a twist about this.

Its been long documented what would be in the bill. So it doesn't give you everything you want right now, everyone knew this already.

But it does represent a move in the right direction, I would have thought people would see this as another step closer to your goals, rather than a kick in the teeth.

You do have a wonderful way with words.....Its ok for you because YOU are not treated as a 2nd class citizen and YOU can marry tomorrow if you so wish ..So gay people have every reason to "get their knickers in a twist"...
Its NOT a move in the right direction ,,only today Mr Ahern stated quite clearly that this is not a stepping stone to gay marriage (or marriage as I call it ,no distinction should apply) and he also said its not going to happen in the near future ...
Well I am sorry thats not good enough for me ,I want and deserve EQUALITY,,,,,,,,FULL STOP

4red

I do think it ironic that the work of marriagequality and others in pushing for full civil marriage is what has caused the Govt. to introduce the lesser civil partnership. But this is the way politics and legal change often works. If you examine many other civil rights movements in the last century, progress came about in stages, not in one fell swoop.

While I do not feel like lauding the Govt. (in particular the Greens) in any particular way, I for one, will be celebrating the Bill during this Pride weekend.

anoisaris

4red wrote: »

While I would agree that full marriage equality (including adoption rights) would be the best result for Irish gay people, I am not now going to get into the arguments for or against this - including the fact that to amend the definition of 'marriage' to incude gay marriage in the Irish constitution would require a referendum which would in no way be guaranteed to pass through.

However I would like to speak on behalf of those gay couples, particularly older ones, who face serious discrimination which would be erased by this Bill.

We all know of cases like the following:
A gay man in his late sixties is prevented from attending the hospital bedside of his dying partner by the partner's family.
A female gay couple with a son facing the unimaginable when the biological mother is diagnosed with a terminal illness - the remaining mother has no parental rights to the son she reared with her deceased partner.
A 35 year old gay man who has lived with his 50 year old partner for 12 years is turfed out of their shared home on his partners death and has no inheritance rights whatsoever.

Please bear in mind there are many gays and lesbians who welcome Civil Partnership as a necessary and in some cases urgent legal right.

I'm not sure why you have used these scenarios as a case for partnership when the partnership bill (as far as I know) affords no legal rights in regard to parenting or the hospital situation I think inheritence is the only issue of those points resolved by the bill? The only true protection awarded by the bill is financial.

Surely your first two points are an argument for marriage not partnership!?

Splatterly

Please bear in mind that some of us welcome this legislation

anoisaris

Splatterly wrote: »

Please bear in mind that some of us welcome this legislation

What aspects of it-out of interest? I'm sure plenty do welcome the interheritence, tax and welfare aspects of course.

Splatterly

anoisaris wrote: »

What aspects of it-out of interest? I'm sure plenty do welcome the interheritence, tax and welfare aspects of course.

I do welcome the inheritance, pension, tax, next of kin and recognition rights in this bill. I welcome the fact that my partner and I can have our ceremony with our family and friends; and it will be recognised.

anoisaris

Splatterly wrote: »

I do welcome the inheritance, pension, tax, next of kin and recognition rights in this bill. I welcome the fact that my partner and I can have our ceremony with our family and friends; and it will be recognised.

Where are the next of kin rights?

the lady

I'm not sure why you have used these scenarios as a case for partnership when the partnership bill (as far as I know) affords no legal rights in regard to parenting or the hospital situation I think inheritence is the only issue of those points resolved by the bill? The only true protection awarded by the bill is financial.

Surely your first two points are an argument for marriage not partnership!?[/QUOTE]

Section 10 of the bill is entitled "Miscellaneous Consequences of Civil Partnership Registration" and covers power of attorney etc.. amending relevant Acts in order to replace the term "spouse" with "civil partner", i think that has the hospital covered and any sort of major decision making but i'll have to have a read of it again in a few days to make sure i've not missed anything

ixoy

Co-habiting opposite sex partners can be treated almost as "married" for the purposes of social welfare claims whereas same-sex co-habitants cannot. I've had a look at the bill but I'm not sure if this will now change? I'm assuming the social welfare thing was some sort of incentive to marriage - so would we now be told to get a civil partnership even though it's not equal?

I couldn't also see anything in the bill about medical treatment - the closest was a clause relating to the Mental Health Act concerning admitting partners. There's also a bit about the right to act as Attorney for your partner but I'm not sure what powers that confers.

Reflector wrote:

So I can have the same legal relationship with my brother as I can with my boyfriend.

No you can't. The Bill covers that -

"A person may not enter a civil partnership with someone within
the prohibited degrees of relationship, as set out in the table 5
below. Relationships within that table should be construed as
including relationships in the half-blood (e.g. sibling includes a
sibling where there is only one parent in common, etc.), and all
the relationships include relationships and former relationships
by adoption."

That includes, for a man brother, father, grandfather, nephew, and uncle as well as adopted siblings and half-brothers. Similar applications for women.

anoisaris

"the Bill is silent in relation to health care. In fairness, there is no

legislation on this point even in relation to married couples, the issue being one
of medical ethics and thus governed by Medical Council guidelines. It is
however, unfortunate that this issue is not explicitly addressed. Given that most
hospitals in the State are denominational, there is an understandable concern that
civil partners be formally recognised as each other’s next-of-kin. Arguably, the
proposed general ban on discrimination against civil partners may address this
concern. The better view, however, may be that the matter needs to be
addressed squarely so that ethos cannot be invoked to prevent partners from each

other’s company at a most vulnerable time."

http://www.iccl.ie/publications/Equality/iccl_book_Web_F12_129579.pdf


The same paper addresses the issue of children in legislative gaps in the bill. (it was in response to the general scheme of the bill but think same applies to bill as now published?)

Rev Hellfire

oisindoyle wrote: »

You do have a wonderful way with words.....

Thanks it's always nice to be appreciated.

oisindoyle wrote: »

Its ok for you because YOU are not treated as a 2nd class citizen and YOU can marry tomorrow if you so wish ..So gay people have every reason to "get their knickers in a twist"...

Yes it rocks to be me. But regardless this is still a recognizable step forward for same-sex couples providing them a raft of legal protections.
True it might not go as far as some people would wish, but its forward motion none the less. For that reason I would have expected people to be a bit more positive about it.

oisindoyle wrote: »

only today Mr Ahern stated quite clearly that this is not a stepping stone to gay marriage (or marriage as I call it ,no distinction should apply) and he also said its not going to happen in the near future ...

Ultimately its for the electorate to decide how far this goes in the long term, he like other misters is there at our sufferance.

oisindoyle wrote: »

Well I am sorry thats not good enough for me ,I want and deserve EQUALITY,,,,,,,,FULL STOP

Bully for you, but I expect many will understandably not cut of their noses to spite their faces and avail of the opportunities this bill provides.

anoisaris

There are not many opportunities to avail of in the bill itself as it stands (tax and welfare etc are promised in a future Finance and Social Welfare bill for civil partnerships but not within the Civil Partnership Bill itself).

Rev Hellfire

anoisaris wrote: »

There are not many opportunities to avail of in the bill itself as it stands (tax and welfare etc are promised in a future Finance and Social Welfare bill for civil partnerships but not within the Civil Partnership Bill itself).

Fair enough, you've most likely covered the bill more than I have. But the fact remains these things are on the way which is a good thing.

norrie rugger

4red wrote: »

I do think it ironic that the work of marriagequality and others in pushing for full civil marriage is what has caused the Govt. to introduce the lesser civil partnership. But this is the way politics and legal change often works. If you examine many other civil rights movements in the last century, progress came about in stages, not in one fell swoop.

While I do not feel like lauding the Govt. (in particular the Greens) in any particular way, I for one, will be celebrating the Bill during this Pride weekend.

You're right but it should not have to be. **** sake, it's the year 2009. Why are we still treating people disequally. We are all the same.
Tell you what, you go on protest to the dail and you have your first straight rainbow flag waving supporter right here

Yoda

norrie rugger wrote: »

I personally think that this is an insult to everyone in a same sex relationship.

Maybe. But we live in a country where the politicians are cowardly, don't we?

Having some rights, responsibilities, and protections is a better thing than having NO rights, responsibilities, and protections. Ireland should do better, but let not the best be the enemy of the good. For the alternative is worse.

The_Minister

Goodshape wrote: »

Quick question -- if I were to 'register a civil partnership' with my Brazilian boyfriend, would he be given the same rights to Irish citizenship as if we were to marry?

Getting married to someone does not give tem an automatic right to citizenship.

solice wrote: »

I find it peculiar that 2 people of the opposite sex cannot enter into a civil partnership:

That is also discrimination!

I would imagine that is to avoid a situation like in Holland, where the introduction of civil partnership led to overnight divorce.
People turned their marriage into a partnership, then dissolved it immediately.

ixoy

The_Minister wrote: »

I would imagine that is to avoid a situation like in Holland, where the introduction of civil partnership led to overnight divorce.
People turned their marriage into a partnership, then dissolved it immediately.

But civil partnerships can't be dissolved immediately either - looking through the legislation the couple have to spend 2 of the 3 last years apart for dissolution.

Splatterly

I'm not as knowledgable on the creation of laws and legislation that I'd like to be. My question is this:
What more does this legislation have to go through before it comes law?

I did read through the bill (not in depth) and the only reference I could see to a date was something about from the date the Minister decrees

As my partner and I are waiting to be "committed" (well, if I said married, I could get lynched!), I would really appreciate it if someone could explain the process of this becoming a law

Goodshape

The_Minister wrote: »

Getting married to someone does not give tem an automatic right to citizenship.

in fairness, I didn't say anything about automatic right.

solice

Splatterly wrote: »

I'm not as knowledgable on the creation of laws and legislation that I'd like to be. My question is this:
What more does this legislation have to go through before it comes law?

I did read through the bill (not in depth) and the only reference I could see to a date was something about from the date the Minister decrees

As my partner and I are waiting to be "committed" (well, if I said married, I could get lynched!), I would really appreciate it if someone could explain the process of this becoming a law

The bill is published and that gives you the 95% of what the new legislation will be. Just so you know how slow this country can be...about three years ago if not more, the new defamation bill was published. This might be familiar more recently because of proposed amendments to it i.e. the new blasphemy law. So despite the fact that the bill was published three years ago, it has not been passed into legislation yet. The oireachtas has not voted on it yet!

More than likely the Civil Partnership Bill will be in law by the end of the year and there will not be any amendments to the bill as you see it. If I were you, I would set your date for any time in 2010. I suggest a spring wedding.

Congratulations and best of luck

Splatterly

solice wrote: »

The bill is published and that gives you the 95% of what the new legislation will be. Just so you know how slow this country can be...about three years ago if not more, the new defamation bill was published. This might be familiar more recently because of proposed amendments to it i.e. the new blasphemy law. So despite the fact that the bill was published three years ago, it has not been passed into legislation yet. The oireachtas has not voted on it yet!

More than likely the Civil Partnership Bill will be in law by the end of the year and there will not be any amendments to the bill as you see it. If I were you, I would set your date for any time in 2010. I suggest a spring wedding.

Congratulations and best of luck

Thanks for that. I appreciate it

LegacyUser

The bill affects co-habiting couples as well. The government wants to distract attention from the economic situation and drum up support wherever it can. That makes this bill useful. I suspect it will be passed within a year.

LegacyUser

This is of course the offending part of the Constitution:

Article 41 P3,1* wrote:

3. 1° The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

Basically it means that any Homosexual Marriage would need a referendum to change the paragraph. Personally I would like to see it put to the electorate, we need open and frank discussion on the possibility of Gay Marriage.

mobius42

IANAL, but does that passage really prevent gay marriage? Unless the Constitution defines what "the institution of marriage" is and in this case defines it as between a man and a woman, technically that article does not.

The_Minister

mobius42 wrote: »

IANAL, but does that passage really prevent gay marriage? Unless the Constitution defines what "the institution of marriage" is and in this case defines it as between a man and a woman, technically that article does not.

There are several ways of interpreting the Constitution (ask in Legal Discussion for more info).

Basically, it is generally thought that the spirit of the Constituion matters more than just the specific wording. (The literal interpratation says that the actual words must be used).

While it doesn't actually say marriage = man + female, it's pretty obvious that gay marriage is not included in the "institution of marriage".


I'm knackered and I'm not explaining this right (early starts suck ), but basically - it does if the Supreme Court says it does.

LegacyUser

Can anybody tell me how getting "commited" will go....will it be in the likes of a registry office or will it be popping into the post office to buy one

I of course would be hoping for something official like a registry office type thing so that my friends and family could celebrate in the same way as we did for my brother to his wife but I just don't trust this government and suspect it might be brushed under the carpet and got in a dull office down some back alley

Thanks

LegacyUser

I am in an opposite-sex partnership for the last two years and we have a child of 1 year, I am 22 and he is 30, our home is his house, mortgage, car loans etc everything in his name, so I see how this bill might help if we were to seperate, but my question is would we be better off just going and getting married? Is this bill the same as marraige without the big day? Im really confused as to how you could about doing all this and what it really means

common_parlance

Goodshape wrote: »

Quick question -- if I were to 'register a civil partnership' with my Brazilian boyfriend, would he be given the same rights to Irish citizenship as if we were to marry?

I did a bit of sniffing around and found this from the Irish Immigration Council on the treatment of married couples in applications for citizenship for one spouse:

"The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (as amended) provides in Section 15A(1) that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may, in his or her absolute discretion, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation to the non-national spouse of an Irish citizen if that applicant

(a) is of full age,
(b) is of good character,
(c) is married to that citizen for a period of not less than 3 years,
(d) is in a marriage recognised under the laws of the State as subsisting
(e) and that citizen are living together as husband and wife and that citizen submits to the Minister an affidavit in the prescribed form to that effect,
(f) had immediately before the date of the application a period of one year’s continuous residence in the island of Ireland,
(g) had, during the 4 years immediately preceding that period, a total residence in the island of Ireland amounting to 2 years,
(h) intends in good faith to continue to reside in the island of Ireland after naturalisation, and
(i) has made, either before a judge of the District Court in open court or in such manner as the Minister, for special reasons, allows, a declaration in the prescribed manner, of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State."

Of course, the peppering of those requirements with the terms "marriage" and "husband and wife" mean that a gay partnership won't count. There will be no amendment to this arising from the Civil Partnership Bill. Thus, your Brazilian boyfriend would be treated as any immigrant without a family connection. That means that he would have to have been resident in the State for a total of 5 out of the previous 9 years, and as such would experience a 2-year delay in being able to access citizenship.

So, inequality abound. And incidentally, even if civil partnerships are altered so that we are treated as married couples, we are still at the Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern's, absolute discretion, doh!

Arathorn

common_parlance wrote: »

I did a bit of sniffing around and found this from the Irish Immigration Council on the treatment of married couples in applications for citizenship for one spouse:

Of course, the peppering of those requirements with the terms "marriage" and "husband and wife" mean that a gay partnership won't count. There will be no amendment to this arising from the Civil Partnership Bill. Thus, your Brazilian boyfriend would be treated as any immigrant without a family connection. That means that he would have to have been resident in the State for a total of 5 out of the previous 9 years, and as such would experience a 2-year delay in being able to access citizenship.

So, inequality abound. And incidentally, even if civil partnerships are altered so that we are treated as married couples, we are still at the Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern's, absolute discretion, doh!

Thats interesting, yet another example of in-equality

common_parlance

OK, so I've been looking into the difference between marriage and civil partnerships. Between rights that are yet to be dealt with (i.e. where there are 'promises' for 'equivalent' - but not necessarily equal - treatment to married couples), and other rights that are not even mentioned, I have come up with the following:

• no joint assessment for income tax
• no capital gains and capital acquisitions tax exemptions (e.g. partner's inheritance)
• no stamp duty benefits as in married couples
• no social welfare benefits
• no equality of access to citizenship for foreign civil partners (as per previous post)
• no provision for custody of partner's children
• no provision for maintenance payments for partner's children
• no next of kin rights (e.g. emergency hospital situations) for gay co-parents (i.e. civilly partnered 'step-parents')
• no adoption rights (single people (gay or straight) and married couples may currently adopt; however, gay couples are only allowed to foster, not to adopt)
• no constitutional protection of gay people's families
• and as a final slap, easier dissolution of civil partnerships compared to divorce

Now, I may be wrong on some of these and would be open to correction. But if some, most or all of the above are the case, what on earth DO we get out of civil partnerships!?

Annasopra

common_parlance wrote: »

OK, so I've been looking into the difference between marriage and civil partnerships. Between rights that are yet to be dealt with (i.e. where there are 'promises' for 'equivalent' - but not necessarily equal - treatment to married couples), and other rights that are not even mentioned, I have come up with the following:

[*]no joint assessment for income tax
[*]no capital gains and capital acquisitions tax exemptions (e.g. partner's inheritance)
[*]no stamp duty benefits as in married couples
[*]no social welfare benefits
[*]no equality of access to citizenship for foreign civil partners (as per previous post)
[*]no provision for custody of partner's children
[*]no provision for maintenance payments for partner's children
[*]no next of kin rights (e.g. emergency hospital situations) for gay co-parents (i.e. civilly partnered 'step-parents')
[*]no adoption rights (single people (gay or straight) and married couples may currently adopt; however, gay couples are only allowed to foster, not to adopt)
[*]no constitutional protection of gay people's families
[*]and as a final slap, easier dissolution of civil partnerships compared to divorce

Now, I may be wrong on some of these and would be open to correction. But if some, most or all of the above are the case, what on earth DO we get out of civil partnerships!?

We cannot say for definite what the tax or social welfare implications will be because they are actually going to be dealt with in separate legislation so the parts that I have highlighted in Bold are not correct and we cannot say until we see the Finance and Social Welfare Bills what effect there will be

Annasopra

Splatterly wrote: »

I'm not as knowledgable on the creation of laws and legislation that I'd like to be. My question is this:
What more does this legislation have to go through before it comes law?

I did read through the bill (not in depth) and the only reference I could see to a date was something about from the date the Minister decrees

As my partner and I are waiting to be "committed" (well, if I said married, I could get lynched!), I would really appreciate it if someone could explain the process of this becoming a law

The timeframe is unknown but several times government TDs have said it will be law before 2010

The next stages are the Bill will be discussed by the Oireachtas committee on Justice, Equality etc

After the committee has discussed - it goes back before the Dail and TDs can suggest amendments

There will then be a debate on the Bill after all the amendments have been made

It then gets referred to the Seanad for more debate and amendments

Once the Seanad and Dail have passed it - it will then become law once it is signed by the President

Bren1609

Out of interest does anyone know approx how many same sex couples intend on getting "married" when the law is eventually passed?

Iwasfrozen

Bren1609 wrote: »

Out of interest does anyone know approx how many same sex couples intend on getting "married" when the law is eventually passed?

Well it's not really "married" brcause that would be illegal, but I suspect thousandes will be Partnered.

Daisy D

Bren1609 wrote: »

Out of interest does anyone know approx how many same sex couples intend on getting "married" when the law is eventually passed?

I'd also like to point out, it's not just for the gays...plenty of family siblings, parents and their adult children, co-habiting couples, etc can benefit from it.

And does it matter how many get partnered?-it's about equality, not about getting just as many SUV's and white picketed fences as the other suburban nirvana hetrosexual married couples.