Unintended Consequences…Just Get it Right

This week, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste spoke proudly about the moves made within the Dáil and Seanad to approve the setting up of a Constitutional Convention. A unique initiative in Ireland, the aim is purportedly to endow our Constitution with a form appropriate for the 21st Century.

Despite the odd platitude or two expressed in their Irish Times opinion piece and their audacity to claim that many people “believe that a disconnection has arisen between politics and wider society” rather than acknowledging the fact that citizens perceive that disconnection and suffer from it on a daily basis, the upcoming Constitutional Convention is sufficiently important to quickly navigate and ignore the first few paragraphs.

Also important is the fact that the Taoiseach and Tánaiste profess their awareness of the responsibility the Government bears to ensure that any proposal made by the convention can be achieved without leading to any unintended consequences. So trying to get things right from the very beginning would be a good start, wouldn’t it? And that’s the exact opposite of what they’re suggesting.

The first task assigned to the convention is to consider reducing the presidential terms of office (to five years) and reducing the voting age to 17. Firstly, I fail to see how marginally reducing the presidential term limit is of such importance as to have found itself so high up the list of priorities for the convention, particularly when the wider electoral system is so desperately in need of reform. More importantly and with regard to reducing the voting age to 17, how can we allow 16 year olds to legally leave school, secure full time employment, begin paying tax, suffer detention and assume many other responsibilities and duties but not afford them the right to have a say in how their country is run?

A bad start can be forgiven however, just so long as the other areas being considered by the convention are of significant relevance to Irish society, treated with due respect and given robust examination…

Which is why it is disappointing to see that making provision for same-sex marriage is a highlight of the Taoiseach and Tánaiste’s agenda. Not that the convention shouldn’t investigate and outline steps to realise such a fundamental right in our Constitution but rather that there is no suggestion that the related (and complicated) issue of adoption by same-sex couples will be addressed or account taken of the inevitable impact that such a situation will have on the rights of the child. If the Constitutional Convention is to really be such a unique opportunity, then there is no justification for taking half measures or leaving difficult choices for a different generation. Such matters must be addressed holistically and in full now.

Similarly, it is hard to feel overly confident that the Government will genuinely run with any strong proposal to increase the participation of women in politics – another area they highlighted as being in need of 21st Century reform. If such ambition actually existed within the present Government, then there would have been no need for the National Women’s Council of Ireland to petition Minister Phil Hogan and demand that the Electoral amendment (political funding) Bill 2011 also enforced candidate gender targets for local elections, rather than just General Elections. As local elections are widely seen as a platform for a career in national politics, the Bill had failed to address the issue of women’s participation in politics in full. Again a half measure, and again a source of doubt about how the Government may engage with the Constitutional Convention.

Saying that, the upcoming process is not inherently flawed and there certainly are positive elements, particularly with regard to transparency and accountability. In addition, the convention will be made up of a cross section of Irish society and include parliamentarians from our kinsfolk in the Northern Irish Assembly. The problem is that despite the “profound importance” of this process, the recent rhetoric from the Taoiseach and Tánaiste fails to instil confidence or arouse trust that the mission being undertaken on behalf of the Irish people will be successful in improving the lives of the people of this island. And surely that is the only intended consequence that should matter.