Sir, – We can see from places as diverse as France and Queensland what can happen when recognition of same-gender couples is not given constitutional protection. France has allowed such citizens access to civil marriage since 2013 but Nicolas Sarkozy has pledged to repeal that should he be elected to power. Meanwhile, in Queensland, self-styled Christian groups have succeeded in chipping away at the limited rights granted under that state’s civil partnership laws.
They would have us believe otherwise now but several leaders of the No campaign vociferously opposed civil partnership when it was passed by the Oireachtas and there is no doubt in my mind that a No vote in the referendum on May 22nd would embolden them to further their attacks on recognition of same-gender couples.
What’s granted by a vote in the Oireachtas can be revoked by a vote in the Oireachtas and the recognition that same-gender couples have should not be left hostage to well-funded lobby groups and the vagaries of the political system. Civil marriage is the only relationship accorded constitutional protection in Ireland and same-gender couples deserve nothing less. – Yours, etc,
CIARÁN
Ó RAGHALLAIGH,
Cavan.
Sir, – Fr Adrian Egan (April 30th) supports a Yes vote in the marriage referendum, wanting affirmation for all deep non-blood or non-kin relationships between two people. Why just two? Why not be more inclusive? He says these relationships should be "acknowledged, celebrated and solemnised". I'd suggest that this is already happening – for heterosexual couples through marriage, for gay couples through civil partnerships. The situations have some things in common (love, commitment, etc) but they are also clearly and obviously different (only one of these relationships can of itself produce new life). Treating different situations differently makes sense and is no offence to equality. Finally I thought it was more than a little presumptuous for Fr Adrian to assume that God is on his side. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN O’REGAN,
Arklow,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – It is a core strength of the Irish public service that its members be seen to be impartial in all matters of public and political controversy. This principle is intended to ensure that citizens can have confidence that in accessing public services they will be treated equally, irrespective of their political, religious or philosophical views.
This governing principle has, by and large, worked well throughout our history. It is worrying, therefore, that in a wide-ranging interview on Irish industrial policy, Martin Shanahan, the chief executive of IDA Ireland, should digress to advocate a Yes vote in the marriage referendum. ("IDA boss says Yes vote in State's economic interest", May 1st).
Mr Shanahan argues that a Yes vote would be good for business: “businesses want to attract all of that talent that’s available to them”. He adduces no evidence in support of his contention that the unavailability of same sex marriage would hinder the ability of multinationals to attract and retain highly skilled workers. On the contrary he points to the IDA’s enormous success in recent years in the creation of jobs in the foreign direct investment sector. If indeed the unavailability of same-sex marriage is such a barrier to recruitment one wonders how IDA can report that “the year 2014 was a record one for FDI with total employment at IDA client companies standing at 174,888 people, the highest level in the history of IDA Ireland”.
Mr Shanahan is entitled to his opinion. Whether he was speaking in a personal capacity or as spokesperson for the board of IDA Ireland it is unacceptable that the chief executive of a taxpayer-funded State body should take one side in an important national debate. As a citizen I object to this improper use of State resources in the context of a referendum. – Yours etc,
PADDY BARRY,
Killiney, Co Dublin.