Chattering classes sneer at Coveney and don’t see plenty of voters reluctant on abortion
IT must be great to know it all.
To be morally and intellectually superior.
To be able to look down your nose at the unenlightened.
To be right – all the time.
And there are plenty of those people knocking around at the moment.
Simon Coveney doesn’t appear to be one of them, but he is on the receiving end.
The Tánaiste has come in for a rare dose of opprobrium this past week over his everaltering position on the Eighth Amendment.
Over the course of two months, he has moved from being in favour of retaining the amendment, to removing it, to supporting the proposal to allow abortion up to 12 weeks.
Liberal commentators scoffed at how he was agonised over this stance.
What the all-knowing fail to recognise round their dinner-party tables is that not everyone thinks like them. There are plenty of people in the same space as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, as they are not yet clear on which way they will vote on May 25.
The chattering classes are so busy sneering at Coveney that they can’t see he offers the key to the winning of this referendum.
He’s middle-aged.
He’s male.
He’s conservative.
He’s a loving father to three daughters. He’s one of the middle ground who will decide this referendum.
As a result, both sides of the campaign should be paying close attention to his move.
What was it that made him shift to being in favour of repeal and legislation to allow for abortion on demand up to 12 weeks?
What were the assurances, the language, the sentiments that shifted him over the course of the last two months?
Crack that code and the Eighth Amendment will be repealed.
Neutralise those points and it will be retained.
Coveney ultimately arrived at this stance after holding meetings with medical experts and fellow politicians. He sought safeguards on the administration of abortion pills.
“When it comes to prescribing abortion pills early in pregnancy, I have struggled most with this issue. If we do nothing, we know pills will continue to be purchased online and taken without medical advice or supervision,” he wrote in the Irish Independent on Monday.
So he’s cautiously saying regulation of abortion pills is better than the unsafe administration over the internet.
Within the proposed legislation, there will be a pause period of up to 72 hours before a woman is given the pill after her consultation with a doctor. There is also a proposal to have scans after nine weeks, to ensure the pregnancy has not gone over the 12 weeks.
The proposal is to allow terminations in cases of fatal foetal abnormality and in cases of risk to the health and life of the mother.
The legislation will say there can be no late-term abortions, while allowing doctors the autonomy to make decisions.
The onus will be on the doctor to deliver the child, rather than to end the life.
Coveney also received assurances from clinicians about 12 weeks not being enough time to detect a disability within a baby.
Of course, all of these matters are subject to challenge by No campaigners. But it was enough to get Coveney to change his mind.
Where he overstretched was in seeking a two-thirds Dáil majority for any further liberalisation of abortion law. This is contrary to the Constitution, namely Article 15.11.1 whereby votes are “determined by a majority”.
The would-be intelligentsia mocked his lack of knowledge of the Constitution.
To be fair, he is in politics for 20 years now and the deputy leader of this country. But it’s not the first time either that a deputy leader of the country didn’t know the basics in a referendum campaign.
The salient point here is he did reflect the concerns of marginal Yes voters, who are reluctantly willing to repeal the Eighth Amendment and bring in the 12-week abortion provision – but don’t want to see the law being liberalised further in the future.
This referendum is very much all or nothing in terms of the direct say of the people on the substantive issue of abortion, rather than through their TD.
Repeal the Eighth and replace it with what remains the vital question in this campaign.
Buyer’s remorse remains an important element in the thinking of voters. If some sense they will look back on the decision with regret in five or 10 years’ time, then they are not going to cross that line.
The Government talks about strengthening the provisions around future Oireachtas actions, such as reference to committees.
But this is a mere fig leaf. In reality, this Oireachtas cannot dictate how a future legislature will act without another major change to the Constitution, for which there is no appetite.
Pro-life campaigners will unquestionably latch on to the flaw Coveney has now highlighted around what may come down the track next. It hardly helps the pro-choice side’s attempts to ease such worries when members of the Oireachtas Committee which considered the Eighth Amendment suggested the proposed regime wouldn’t go far enough.
Within Fine Gael, there is anger at Coveney’s desire to push even further than is allowed under the law.
Notably, there is less ire being directed towards a number of Fine Gael Cabinet ministers and junior ministers who have yet to state their position on the referendum question and consequent legislation.
And how quickly they forget the ructions in Fine Gael over the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act, 2013, when the party lost a
The right-on brigade are baffled by anyone who doesn’t share their outlook. These are the same people who didn’t understand why anyone would countenance voting for Brexit or Trump.
half dozen Oireachtas members and countless others had Damascene conversions on abortion – including the now Health Minister Simon Harris.
Coveney’s shifting sands fade into insignificance compared to the fallout there.
In another context, much has been made this week about the idea of reasonable doubt.
When it comes to any referendum, a reasonable doubt usually results in a No.
And having doubts on this issue doesn’t make you thick.
The supercilious response to Coveney’s change of position merely dissuades those who have legitimate questions to ask about the referendum from speaking up.
Coveney rightly expressed concern that people with valid questions about the right to life of an unborn child were “being dismissed as dinosaurs”. A similar theme came from Fianna Fáil’s Éamon Ó Cuív, who was targeted after he exercised his right as a TD to vote against the holding of a referendum.
The right-on brigade are baffled by anyone who doesn’t share their outlook.
These are the same people who didn’t understand why anyone could countenance voting for Brexit or Donald Trump.
The significant development in this campaign in the past week was a poll showing a 10-point swing in favour of retaining the Eighth Amendment.
Being patronising towards those who are endeavouring to reach an informed decision won’t persuade anyone.