First published in the Western People on Tuesday.
The last thing a sensible person should go looking for in
life is trouble. Why would you go looking for something that is more than
willing to come looking for you?
When Enda Kenny was elected Taoiseach two years ago, trouble
was the one thing in the country that was not in short supply. The country was
broke, nobody could go for a bag of chips without checking with first with
Berlin if they could have both salt and vinegar, and it wasn’t so much a
question of hoping the 80s wouldn’t return as praying to the living God that we
wouldn’t be pitched all the way back to the 50s, or worse.
In those stormiest of days, Enda kept a steady hand on the
tiller. He held his nerve in Europe and has reaped rewards. The bailout will
soon be over. The man should be hailed a hero.
But that’s not what’s happening. For reasons best known to
himself, when he should be basking in the warm glow of clear and visible
success, the Taoiseach and his government have got themselves mired in two
crises from which the rewards if successful are slim, and the punishments if
unsuccessful and many and painful.
On abortion, the Government’s handling of the hottest of
Irish political potatoes for the past thirty years has been anything but sure,
and the outcome of current moves to legislate for the X-Case is anything but
certain. The battle is very far from over.
All this was trouble that the Government didn’t need with
the economy in such dire straits – and don’t forget, even though the Government
has done great work, the country is very, very far from saved yet. As such,
with the huge issue of the economy looming over the state like the iceberg over
the Titanic, and the abortion nightmare rearing its head again, the very last
thing the Government needed to do was to hold a referendum that isn’t wanted by
the people, that is unpopular among their own parties, that is badly thought
out, difficult to explain and can only lead to heartache and woe down the line.
And yet, for reasons best known to themselves, that is exactly what the
Government has chosen to do.
The first Seanad was founded under two noble auspices. It
was set up as part of the 1922 Free State Constitution with a view to protecting
the Protestant minority in the Free
State, a protection that minority badly needed – their treatment in the
triumphalist early years of the State should be a cause of burning shame to
every Irish citizen.
When Eamon DeValera introduced his own constitution in 1937,
he retained the second chamber but built it around the idea of vocationalism.
Vocationalism was the idea that there was a Christian (ie, Catholic) social
order, where everyone had a place and there was a place for everyone, a
doctrine that was worked out in papal encyclicals from Leo XIII and Pius XI.
This is where the idea of the panels in the Seanad come
from, that each social order would be reflected in the various panels. The
Seanad recognises five vocations in Irish life, and categorises them as
Agriculture, Labour, Administration, Cultural and Educational, and Industrial
and Commercial. Farmers, manual workers, civil servants, teachers and
shopkeepers to you and me.
And this is where it gets tricky. How relevant vocationalism
is in the 21st Century would be more a matter for Father Hoban over the way but
Leo XIII reigned at the end of the 19th Century and Pius XI until the start of
the Second World War and neither of those may be considered today or yesterday.
There are big changes in the world since.
And even if it were relevant, if vocationalism were a magic
bullet of social organisation and cohesion, exactly how much of a role does it
play in deciding whom is elected to which panel? What qualifications must you
hold to get on the Agricultural Panel, or the Industrial and Commercial Panel?
How come you’re on one and not the other?
And what of the baroque inside-out method of filling those
Seanad seats? We enjoy elections in Ireland – why don’t we hear more about the
inside and outside panel seats, who’s been nominated by what body, what
difference .874 votes can make on the 13th count? Isn’t all the world’s drama
there? Or does the fact that the Seanad currently does as much work as a
child’s rocking horse pulling a plough take something of the bloom from the
rose?
This is another problem with this referendum. Both sides are
as one in saying that the current Seanad is a crock. The Government says wreck
it, the Opposition says reform it.
But if the referendum is lost, will the Seanad ever be
reformed? Or will it just tick on like it does, filling inside and outside
seats in panels of Administrators, Educators, Labourers, Industrialists and
Farmers who do not themselves administer, educate, labour, indust [sic] or
farm? Is there any way the people can win in this, or do they end up with the
worst possible option, yet again?
It’s early days in the campaign yet, but it’s interesting to
note that the Government has not gone bald-headed in an attack on the Seanad.
To win the election, they should portray the Seanad as a rabid dog that must be
shot on sight for the safety of the village. Instead, they’re portraying the
second chamber as Old Shep, who has to be taken back the land by his weeping master,
holding his shotgun in one hand and his spade in the other. Who wants to pull
that trigger?
Of course, politicians can’t go bald-headed and attack the
Seanad for doing nothing because it’s they themselves that are inside in it,
doing that same nothing. Hasn’t anybody thought this out beforehand? With
everything that that needs doing in the country, with everything the Government
have on their plate, why would they bother with the Seanad? Why are they
looking for trouble?
