RENEWING THE REPUBLIC: OPINION: We don't need constitutional reform – we need a whole new constitution, written substantially by the people and ratified as the nation marks the 100th anniversary of the 1916 Rising
CONFRONTED BY the second great economic crisis in a generation, and by the ongoing scandals about the abuse of children, the confidence of the Irish people in our institutions has been shaken to the core.
As this series of articles on these pages has testified, there are many who believe that this must be a defining moment in our history – when we make a decisive shift from the failures of the past.
In a speech to the MacGill summer school last July, I put forward the idea that we should see this crisis as a moment similar to 1958, when, as a country, we open up a new phase in our development – what I called a New Republic. It is clear that we urgently need a change of government. It is also clear that we need to take a long hard look at our institutions, at how we are governed, and at how we can do better in the future.
We need to ensure that this crisis never happens again, but we also need a forward looking examination of the rules and norms by which we govern ourselves.
A central element of this process must be a thorough review of our Constitution.
A constitution is more than a set of rules and regulations, it is the basic statement by a people about who they are and how they want to live with each other – and indeed with the rest of the world.
That means two things.
The first is that the crafting of a constitution should emerge out of as broad a debate as it is possible to organise. And, notwithstanding the many fine contributions on these pages, it is clear that we have yet to achieve a consensus on what the underlying deficiencies are, nor what the solutions should be.
The second is that even the most perfect constitution cannot remain frozen in time.
Bunreacht na hÉireann was first adopted in 1937 but much of its wording is taken from the 1922 Free State constitution. A clear priority for those who drafted both documents was the need to give expression to our national independence. Elements of our constitution are, therefore, more concerned with defining who we are not, as opposed to affirming who we are.
The first two amendments, in 1939 and 1941, were adopted by the Oireachtas under a special inaugural provision. All 26 subsequent amendments were decided by referendum. The fact that 18 of those have been tabled within the last 20 years suggests that our debate with ourselves about who we are and under what rules we want to live is gathering pace.
The steady stream of calls from various quarters for different, and sometimes conflicting, constitutional amendments is further evidence of this.
We need to step back and first consider what this debate should include. Then we need to decide how best we might organise it.
Our Constitution does not adequately defend the rights of children. Neither does its approach to the rights of women fit with society at the beginning of the 21st century.
How might we balance the right to private property with a system for regulating the price of building land? Should we extend the right to education to include second level, and what other social rights, such as a right to shelter, should we and can we practically include in the fundamental law of the State?
There has been justifiable criticism of the political system, which many people feel has let them down. I share that frustration, particularly since Labour has been arguing for reform of the Oireachtas for years. But again, we need a clearer analysis of cause and effect in relation to the electoral system, before we rush to change it.
Moreover, some of the reform proposals being made, such as changing the length of the President’s term of office, have no connection whatever to the crisis. And reform cannot be confined to the political system, which is why Labour has constantly been arguing for a set of reforms to the private sector as well.
The key point, however, is that the demand for constitutional reform will not be addressed by a package of measures presented to the electorate by any one political party, and certainly not where it relates to reform of the political system. That must come directly from a process where the people themselves are consulted and involved intimately.
One thing that has been very evident is that the people of this country retain a sense of ownership over the Constitution. They have never had any hesitation in rejecting amendments that they consider inappropriate. It is essential, therefore, that the public be involved in any process of reviewing the Constitution.
Drawing all these strands together, we are no longer talking about simply amending our Constitution, nor even of considering a multitude of amendments in different referendums on a single day. We need a more audacious and a more comprehensive approach.
Labour’s proposal is that we should convene a 30-member constitutional convention with an open mandate.
Ten of its members would be drawn from the Oireachtas, 10 from non-governmental associations and organisations, and 10 ordinary citizens selected rather as we select jurors today. Its mandate would be to review the Constitution and draft a new one within a year.
Much of its work would be in working groups and much of that would be carried out online. The convention’s proceedings would be accessible online with the possibility for citizens to comment and make suggestions.
The convention would submit its proposed constitution for adoption by the Oireachtas, and once approved, it would then be submitted to the people in a referendum. The aim would be a referendum which would take place in conjunction with the centenary of the 1916 Rising.
A new constitution, collectively prepared, offers us the foundation on which to build a better country and a better world for ourselves and our children, to provide rights, institutions and systems to serve rather than constrain us.
It also provides a means by which we can reaffirm our unity of purpose as a nation – that we are, ultimately, one Ireland.
Eamon Gilmore is leader of the Labour Party