Today, we saw at last welcome progress on the long-promised gender equality referendum and announcement by the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, and the Taoiseach of the wording proposed by the Government to change the Constitution. As the former Chairperson of the Committee on Gender Equality, I very much welcome that we will see progress. It is a year since our committee presented a report to Government with a cross-party framing of wording to create a more expansive definition of family beyond the family based on marriage and I very much welcome that similar language is being used in the Government proposal.

We also proposed a particular text around the new provision to replace the current sexist language around women and mothers with a gender neutral provision recognising and supporting care, but we had proposed, as the citizens' assembly did, that this would recognise care both in the home and in the wider community. It is fair to express disappointment on my own behalf that the definition of care presented by the Government in its own proposed wording is more restrictive. Can the Taoiseach say why the Government did not follow the gender equality committee and the citizens' assembly recommendations on this?

It is something we gave careful consideration to. The first thing we are proposing is to delete the archaic sexist language in the Constitution with regard to women's duties in the home and to replace it with a new article which gives constitutional protection and recognition to care within the family. It does not necessarily have to be within the home but it does have to be family care. We took the view that family care is different. It is different to care provided in nursing homes or by commercial home care providers, for example. We took the view in the round that while it made sense to give constitutional protection and status within the family, extending that protection to commercial operations in the main, such as nursing homes and home care providers, would not have been the right thing to do.