asked the Taoiseach if he will outline all the proposals for the amendment of the Constitution which will be brought before the Dáil in this session.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Amendment of Constitution.
2.
The Government have requested the Attorney General to undertake a review of the Constitution. It is envisaged that this review will involve consideration, Article by Article, of the provisions of the Constitution as it stands. It will indicate areas where inadequacies in the Constitution are perceived. In such areas options will be presented to the Government as to the approach which might be most desirable. Such options might include necessary amendments to the existing Constitution or indeed the need for an entirely new Constitution. The Attorney General has not been fettered in advance of the commencement of the review as to the approach which he might take to it, but he will be inspired by the concept that our Constitution should as far as possible contain the kind of provisions that the Constitution of a United Ireland might at this stage have contained, had the political division of Ireland not been made, rather than reflecting the impact on our island, and specifically on this part of it, of this division.
In connection with this review, I would like to draw the attention of this House in particular to that part of my speech in the other House in which I drew attention to the position of previous leaders of the Fianna Fáil Party on this matter. As I pointed out in that speech, both Mr. de Valera and his colleague, Mr. MacEntee, subsequently explained why Mr. de Valera, clearly against his own instincts, had felt constrained for tactical reasons to introduce into the Constitution provisions reflecting the majority ethos in the State at that time. His successor, Mr. Seán Lemass, later described the Constitution as "a strait jacket" adding that changes were necessary in it and that it should be changed every 25 years. In turn, Mr. Lemass's successor, Mr. Jack Lynch, referring to the existing context rather than to any hypothetical bargaining table, said in 1970 and repeated at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis in 1971:
In so far as there are constitutional difficulties which are legitimately seen by people to be infringements of their civil rights, then their views are worthy of intensive examination and we should try to accommodate them in our Constitution and in our laws.
It is in the spirit of the approach and attitude of these previous leaders of the Fianna Fáil Party, a spirit which I and those of us in this side of the House share, that I propose this review and I appeal to the present leader of that party and his colleagues in the national interest to adhere to the open approach of his predecessors to this matter.
Would the Taoiseach reply specifically to my question, which is whether or not there will be any amendments to the Constitution brought before the Dáil in this session?
The time scale of this review is something which has not been determined and, in fact, perhaps cannot be precisely determined. In view of the magnitude and importance of the task, it would certainly take a period of six months or thereabouts, at a minimum. That is, I believe, the view of the Attorney General. It will be then a matter for the Government to consider the report of the Attorney General and consider what action should be taken on it. On that time scale, it would seem difficult to bring provisions for amendment before the Dáil during this session. I am simply speculating as best I can in advance of something about which the time scale is necessarily somewhat in doubt.
The Taoiseach is indulging in a great deal of speculation these days. However, does he recall very specific assurances he gave to members of the Pro-Life Amendment Campaign to introduce, as soon as possible, an amendment to the Constitution, or rather legislation which would enable the Constitution to be amended, to prevent the legalisation of abortion? Does he intend to honour the commitment made by him before and since the election?
That matter is under consideration by the Attorney General at present.
I take it that the Taoiseach does not intend that there will be any such legislation in this session.
The Attorney General is considering the matter. We will not take any decision on this until we hear from him.
The Taoiseach gave a specific assurance to these people before and subsequent to the election that there would be no delay whatever in the introduction of such an amendment. Is he now reneging on that assurance?
I am not reneging on any assurance. The question of how such a provision should be formulated is of some complexity and the question of whether it and any other changes in legislation should be undertaken separately or together is something which the Government will have to consider.
The Taoiseach will recall that there was no question in the assurance which he gave to the members of the Pro-Life Amendment Campaign about any other matter. The assurance was specific in regards to this particular change in the Constitution. In view of that, am I to take it that he will not proceed, as he promised these people, with legislation in this session?
We will be proceeding on that matter. As to when and in what terms the amendment will be formulated, that is something the Government will have to decide in the light of what will be submitted to them by the Attorney General.
The Taoiseach will recall that, among other things, he told members of the pro-life campaign that he did not even have to consult his party about this. In view of the reply he has now given that in the general context there will not be any proposals coming before the Dáil in this session for constitutional amendment, will he now bring the divisive party political campaign on which he embarked to an end and so enable both the Dáil and the Seanad, and all of us engaged in the political process, to concentrate on the very real economic and social problems which confront us and to which the policies of this Government are contributing in no uncertain measure?
(Interruptions.)
I am convinced that a public debate on these issues at the present time is not only helpful but essential if all of us, politicians and electorate alike, are to face up to the challenge and the possibilities that now exist in the context of the higher plane to which my predecessor raised the whole issue of Northern Ireland by the initiation of Anglo-Irish talks. It would be unforgivable if we were not to prepare ourselves to play our part in whatever constructive moves may emerge from these discussions.
Will the Taoiseach clear up, for the benefit of the House and the general public the particular purpose to which this party's political divisive campaign is directed because on separate occasions he has given three different reasons for indulging in this campaign? On the day he first mentioned it — in the famous or infamous Radio Telefís Éireann interview — he indicated that we should make these changes to make ourselves more pleasing to Northern Unionists. Subsequently he indicated that these changes should be made because of their inherent merits. On another occasion he indicated that these changes should be made as something we could throw into a bargaining situation with the British Government. On which of these reasons does he now base his campaign?
I have made clear in my initial statement my deep commitment to the whole question of relations between North and South. The fundamental consideration in raising this issue was because of the conviction I have held for a very long time that unless we, in this part of Ireland, are prepared to play our part and show some generosity and imagination in respect of the preoccupations and concerns of the majority in Northern Ireland, we shall never get anybody from Northern Ireland to any serious negotiating table. It was because of that motivation that I raised the matter. I should have thought that would have been clear to Deputies opposite and to anybody else who heard me speak on that occasion or who heard or read my speech in the Seanad.
Would the Taoiseach not be prepared to admit at this stage that this campaign was launched by him purely as a device to divert the attention of the general public from the disastrous economic situation——
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Haughey, please.
When I hear the claque coming into operation I know I am succeeding in my questioning.
(Interruptions.)
In the first place, I would like to reject that suggestion flatly and to stress the hope that no one on the benches opposite or in the country would be in any doubt as to the depth of my personal commitment on this matter or the determination of our Government to make all possible preparations for this State to play its part in any future developments in North/South relations that may become possible in the period ahead. I have already paid tribute to my predecessor's work in preparing the way and I propose to follow in the path he set.
No action of mine in this or any other area could throw a smokescreen over the economic situation which now faces us after four years of Government by the party at present in Opposition. The gravity of the situation left to us has been emphasised recently by the preliminary conclusions of the IMF team which commented on the failure of our economy to adjust to a steep fall in the terms of trade which took place in 1979 and which threatens to undermine seriously the prospects for expansion in output and employment over the medium-term. The House may recall that they went on to say that foreign borrowing of the present magnitude — the levels the previous Government set — cannot in their view be sustained for long and if the present build up of foreign debt as undertaken by the previous Government was continued unabated, Ireland's credit rating overseas might be downgraded and we might then have to restrain domestic activity abruptly in a way which would have important repercussions on employment. As Deputies will be aware, and in answer to Deputy Haughey's question——
Sabotaging the economy.
(Interruptions.)
The House will also be aware of the EEC Commission's draft annual economic report which states that a reversal of the trend to increase deficits, especially those on account of current items, is overdue and that the corrective package introduced in July by the incoming Government after only one month in office, to prevent a further deterioration in the 1981 situation is an important step in this direction which should be reinforced in 1982. I trust that answers fully the Deputy's question.
This cannot develop into a debate. I am calling Question No. 3.
I wish to ask a supplementary question.
I am sorry, Deputy Andrews, I am calling Question No. 3.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Andrews, you are being disorderly. I am calling Question No. 3.