Sir, – Stephen Collins suggests that the March 8th referendums will receive only “halfhearted support” from Government and Opposition parties (“Politicians do not have much faith the referendums will pass. Shouldn’t they be more worried?”, Opinion & Analysis, January 26th).
In truth, many of us in the Oireachtas are very passionately engaged on the amendment campaign and have worked hard to achieve the holding of this important vote. Just this week, we in Labour confirmed we will be campaigning for a “Yes, Yes” result. We were initially disappointed that the wording on both referendums did not follow that recommended by the Citizens’ Assembly or the Oireachtas Committee on Gender Equality, which I had chaired. But after a very constructive debate, we are satisfied with responses received in the Dáil and Seanad. While some humorous red herrings were raised, we recognise that the changes proposed on equality, family and care represent real and substantial progress in the necessary updating of our Constitution, a step towards achieving a more equal society. A “Yes, Yes” vote matters – to women denied workplace equality, to desperately undervalued carers and to those who need care. And it matters to families denied recognition, like that of John O’Meara. While his Supreme Court appeal succeeded this week, the judges noted that his family has no constitutional protection. His case demonstrates the practical impact of a cruelly restrictive text that urgently requires amendment. For the sake of the 150,000 cohabiting couples in Ireland and their children, and to achieve equality and support for care, we will work hard with others on the Yes side to bring about much-needed change. – Yours, etc,
IVANA BACIK TD,
Labour,
‘I want to be alone’: Greta Garbo, sure. Daniel Day-Lewis, maybe not so much after all
Pat Leahy: Trouble at the top? Relations between Simon Harris and Micheál Martin are frayed
‘I crossed the river for both my wife and my chips’: End of an era for Lennox’s chipper in Cork
TV guide: the best new shows to watch this week, beginning tonight
Leinster House,
Dublin 2.
Sir, – Following a string of strong, enthusiastic Yes votes in the last six referendums, and an unwavering No to Seanad abolition, I’m now in the unfamiliar position for the first time since registering to vote at 18 of not knowing which way to vote in the next round of referendums on March 8th.
The wording of the 2019 divorce referendum, 2018 blasphemy referendum, the referendum on repeal of the eighth amendment, age of presidential candidacy referendum, marriage equality referendum, and Court of Appeal referendum were all clear and easy to get behind. Similarly, the wording on the referendum to retain – and by implication, reform – the Seanad in 2013 was simple.
It seems though the current Government is intent on having a repeat of both the seventh (election of members of Seanad Éireann by institutions of higher education) and eighth amendments, whereby the former was so poorly worded that its drafters were lambasted by the Supreme Court last March, with the eminent Mr Justice Hogan declaring the amendment “hapless, incoherent and confused. In legal terms it was the equivalent of the attempted cleaning of an old master by a careless restoration artist who then proceeded to leave an ink-stain on a Rembrandt.”
Similarly, the eighth amendment’s poor drafting led to abortion – though extremely limited and generally inaccessible on a practical level – becoming a constitutional right, despite the amendment’s very purpose being to prevent abortion becoming legal under any circumstance, never mind a right recognised by the Constitution itself.
This Government could have simply proposed to delete the offensive and outdated Article 41.2 of the Constitution, and properly defined the forms of relationships on which the family – as a constitutionally protected institution – may be founded under Article 41.1.
By choosing the route it has on both upcoming referendums, the Government has left progressive voters like me with serious doubts about voting Yes to either or both referendums.
One thing is certain, the proposed 39th amendment and 40th amendment will go down in history, alongside the seventh amendment and eighth amendment, as some of the worst examples of constitutional amendment drafting in the history of this State. – Yours, etc,
TOMÁS HENEGHAN,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Geraldine Cregan (Letters, January 26th) makes some interesting suggestions as to how the constitutional references to the apparently outdated notion of “family” might be replaced by the so far undefined constitutional concept of “durable relationships”, in the event of the referendums passing. She presents for our consideration a Pandora’s box of durability-based relationships, ranging from durable friends, through durable carers, and durable siblings, etc. The societal implications of these changes are unknown but may have serious and, indeed, durable consequences for future generations.
Our representatives in the Houses of the Oireachtas will not be unduly concerned about any problems of legal definition if the referendums pass. They have cynically taken care to ensure that this task will fall on the broad shoulders of “our learned friends” in the Four Courts. That will only happen, of course, if the voters allow it to happen. I, for one, am not prepared to buy this pig in a poke, durable or otherwise! – Yours, etc,
PADDY BARRY,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.