asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will bring forward legislation to enable married women to claim unemployment assistance as apart from the obvious loss of assistance they are also ineligible to participate in the social employment scheme.

The Social Welfare (No. 2) Act, 1985, includes provision for the removal of the existing limitations on the eligibility of married women for unemployment assistance. It has not yet been possible to bring the Act into operation because of difficulties in relation to the provision of additional staff which will be required to implement the new provisions. I assure the Deputy, however, that I am extremely anxious to have the new provisions brought into operation and I will be doing so at the earliest possible date.

Would the Minister of State not agree that this is blatant discrimination against married women? While he assures me of his anxiety to bring the Act in can he explain why his party brought in this Act when they have not yet implemented EC equality legislation? Does he feel that married women might be worse off, or are there legal or financial implications that are impeding his bringing it in? When he sees something so obviously blatantly discriminatory, is it not his duty to use every means in his power to remove this discrimination?

The Act was introduced by this Government to do away with this discrimination, something which the Deputy's Government failed to do——

Anyone can lead a horse around the parade ring.

——since 1979 when the EC issued the directive to this country. The Deputy's Government failed to eliminate this discrimination. This discrimination has now been eliminated by the Social Welfare (No. 2) Act, 1985 and the only problem in its implementation is to get over the difficulties with the union who represent the majority of civil servants who will have to operate the scheme. Every effort is being made to reach agreement there so that the Act can be brought into force.

Will the Minister of State concede that, aside from the problems which the union and his Department have in relation to the implementation of the European equality directive, the real reason why this directive has not been implemented as yet, despite the fact that it has passed through both Houses, is the political implications that would result when many families find that they are £25 to £50 less well off than they were before the directive became implementable and because his Government did not take account of that when they formally put the legislation through this House and the Seanad, despite the advice of the Members on this side of the House?

That is not correct. The fact is that all work on equal treatment has been blacked by the relevant union until staff problems have been resolved. Discussions are ongoing and every effort is being made to reach agreement so that we can at least take the first step in the implementation of it.

Will the Minister concede that families are getting a much reduced income and his Department are making little or no attempt to resolve the problem with the unions for political reasons?

That is not correct. Every attempt is being made to resolve the problem.

When the regulations are made, will the entitlement be retrospective to the date when the Act was passed or will it be operative from the date of the regulations?

I cannot answer that today. If the Deputy tables a separate question I will get him some information on the matter.

9.