We need spirit of suffragettes in 8th debate
LEO Varadkar is a skilled communicator, but his latest dispatch on abortion is a dog’s dinner of mixed messages. It leaves the Taoiseach sounding like someone with a bad case of cold feet.
Clear leadership is needed on the abortion referendum, too sensitive a matter for muddled messages. But Mr Varadkar’s remark – that a proposed 12-week period of unrestricted access may be “a step too far” for the majority of people – suggests he may have reservations himself.
There is now an air of confusion and hesitation emanating from government circles. Perhaps he’s seeking a compromise. Maybe he’s treading warily because he fears it could destabilise his coalition. Whatever his reasons, the uncertain note he struck is a blunder.
Besides, how does he know what the people think until they speak by referendum? It sounds closer to a step too far for some members of his cabinet.
We will only know the public’s viewpoint after votes are counted. Otherwise, it’s guesswork, or the opinions of lobby groups, or the result of polling – which can get things spectacularly wrong.
The 12-week timeframe was recommended by an Oireachtas cross-party committee, reporting last month following intensive consultation. While some people were surprised about the 12 weeks – the committee cited the difficulties of legislating for abortion in cases of incest or rape – its solution was to propose the period “with no restriction as to reason”.
Its recommendations are not binding, however, and the Government decides on referendum wording. At least the Taoiseach has repeated his intention to hold one this summer.
As a private individual, he is free to vote as he pleases. As head of government, he should express confidence in the group chaired by Senator Catherine Noone.
Otherwise, why bother delegating the heavy lifting to senators and TDs? His response was disrespectful to a hardworking and diligent committee.
It is unclear whether he was speaking in his capacity as a citizen, a medical doctor, the leader of Fine Gael or the Taoiseach of the State. Haziness is exactly what’s not needed right now.
Furthermore, I’ve had enough of being told the Irish public thinks this about abortion, or isn’t prepared to accept that. I’m well past ready to learn the date for the plebiscite, and use my vote on polling day.
That’s not to suggest I’m closing my ears to other perspectives. For example, I took some time to reflect on Jim O’Callaghan of Fianna Fáil’s point that legislating will lead to more pregnancies involving Down Syndrome and disabilities being aborted. He is correct to raise it for discussion. We need to bear such considerations in mind.
But here’s another equally valid perspective. Don’t couples expecting babies in those categories have a right to decide if they are able for the exceptional level of lifelong commitment required of them?
I’m also attentive to which politicians are pro or anti repealing the Eighth Amendment, the Constitutional ban on abortion. A word of warning: the politicians we remember will not be the fencesitters.
I don’t have a problem with people taking an opposing view for good reason, such as Mr O’Callaghan. Lucinda Creighton ought never to have been forced out of Fine Gael on a question of conscience. But I’ve had enough of seeing women infantilised by politicians of both genders, and denied autonomy over their own bodies.
Incidentally, I don’t believe that autonomy is absolute in pregnancy. To my mind, the Eighth Amendment and limitless abortion are equally indefensible.
Let me pause here to salute Charlie Flanagan. He has shown real leadership – he was quick to state publicly that he doesn’t believe the Eighth Amendment should be in the Constitution. He called it a “women’s health issue”, and said he supports repeal.
Other ministers are still mulling it over, and talking about consulting with their constituents. That’s shorthand for ‘I need to check whether I’ll get re-elected if I support or oppose this referendum’.
Of course, most of us aren’t obliged to say how we will vote, unlike politicians. They have to put up their hands and be counted because people have a right to know where their representatives stand on public policy.
NO fence-sitting from Catholic Primate of AllIreland Eamon Martin, defender to the hilt of the Eighth Amendment. The archbishop’s is an absolutist position. I suspect he is out of step even with churchgoers, never mind the electorate in general. People want a compassionate solution, not a diktat.
Equal right to life between an unborn child and a woman is impossible. Her rights must always trump her baby’s.
Savita Halappanavar’s death was avoidable – the Eighth Amendment killed her five years ago. That realisation sent thousands of women across the generations onto the streets demanding politicians legislate for choice.
Rather alarmingly, Archbishop Martin urges church-goers to get involved in lobbying – suggesting they speak out to their “relatives, friends, colleagues and public representatives”. That sounds like the basis for a series of fractious encounters in workplace and social settings. Really, the sooner this referendum happens the better.
Elsewhere, I am troubled by Amnesty Ireland’s decision to keep a €137,000 donation from billionaire George Soros’s US Open Society Foundations, intended to fund Amnesty’s ‘My Body My Rights’ campaign. The latter seeks to have the Eighth Amendment repealed.
Amnesty has been told to return the money by the Standards in Public Office Commission because it breaches Irish law against foreign donations to political campaigns.
Amnesty calls it “an indefensible law” and is challenging the ethics watchdog’s right to make the order. In the past, Amnesty has raised concerns about countries forbidding foreign funding for referendums and general elections.
However, the Amnesty leadership would do well to reconsider its position. This law serves democracy: it prevents outside forces from influencing a sovereign nation’s direction. Whether or not Amnesty believes the law to be wrong, it must comply; meanwhile it is free to lobby for change. But by flouting Irish law, the human rights organisation may lose the moral authority on which it trades.
Finally, abortion is an option, not an obligation. Nobody will be forced to have one. Changing the law gives women choices currently withheld from them.
How apt that the referendum should be held in 2018, the centenary of women’s right to vote. It was not easily won. Women had to mobilise, and fight long and hard for decades.
That direct action spirit of the suffrage movement will be needed again in the months ahead.
I’ve had enough of seeing women being infantilised and denied autonomy over their own bodies