asked the Taoiseach if he will establish a commission to consider the ways in which the laws or the Constitution could be altered to facilitate discussions on an eventual agreed solution to the problem of the partition of Ireland.
5.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Amendment of Constitution.
4.
asked the Taoiseach, in view of the request by minority religious groups and others, and the anomalies which arise from the dissolution of marriage through the annulment process of the Catholic Church, if he will initiate the necessary steps to amend the Constitution to provide for divorce.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 5 together.
The Deputy will no doubt be aware of the work on these and related subjects done by the Committee on the Constitution which reported in December 1967, the Inter-Party Committee on the Implications of Irish Unity which operated between May 1972 and February 1973, and the All-Party Committee on Irish Relations which last met in June 1975.
(Interruptions.)
Order.
Could we hear the Taoiseach's reply? Would he repeat it?
The Deputy will no doubt be aware of the work on these and related subjects done by the Committee on the Constitution which reported in December 1967, the Inter-Party Committee on the Implications of Irish Unity which operated between May 1972 and February 1973, and the All-Party Committee on Irish Relations which last met in June 1975.
The Government have no plans at present to establish a further committee or commission for the purposes mentioned by the Deputy or to promote legislation to amend the Constitution so as to remove the prohibition on the grant of a dissolution of marriage. The Deputy will also be aware that I indicated in my address to the Fianna Fáil Ard Fheis that we would consider it our responsibility in any discussion which might be embarked on or any settlement which might be proposed to ensure that the position of Irish people of all traditions was safeguarded in the Ireland of the future. Agreement would have to be reached on the constitutional measures necessary to ensure this.
Did the Taoiseach reply to Questions Nos. 4 and 5 at the same time?
Yes.
Why did he do so?
The questions are related and it is normal parliamentary procedure.
Is it not a fact that the 1967 Inter-Party Committee chaired by Deputy Colley, of which Deputy Seán Lemass was a member, found that there was constitutional discrimination against the Protestant minority in respect of divorce and even in respect of Catholics in certain circumstances? Could the Taoiseach say why there has been no amendment to the Constitution since 1967? Secondly, is it not a fact that in respect of matters of private morality there are a number of issues such as divorce, contraception and probably most importantly the primacy of the Roman Catholic religion in the courts under the ne temere decree? Does the Taoiseach propose to do nothing about those guarantees? Finally, does he not agree that as long as the southern Government continue to make these guarantees to the Roman Catholic Church to establish and maintain its primacy in the courts and in the Constitution and discriminate against the Protestant minority, the British Government will inevitably continue their constitutional guarantees to the Northern Protestants?
I can only say that I do not agree at all with Deputy Browne's analysis of the situation.
Am I right in assuming from the Taoiseach's reply that both he and his Government are firmly of the opinion that there is no legal or humanitarian need for any change in the constitutional position in relation to civil divorce?
I have not said that. I said we have no plans at present to attempt to change the Constitution to remove the prohibition on the grant of a dissolution of marriage.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that there is a need to take action on this matter and that if he does not take it now it will have to be taken later by somebody else?
How can the Taoiseach seriously pretend even to an Ard Fheis that he proposes to do something about the Northern problem and fail to give some undertaking in this matter?
Question No. 6. We cannot have argument.
I have already pointed out in this House that I do not think Deputy Browne correctly interprets the wishes of either the minority or the majority in Northern Ireland.
Is it not a fact that the 1937 Constitution purports to apply to the six north eastern counties? In such circumstances are we not proposing to extend these disabilities to the Northern Protestants? How in heaven's name could they welcome it? Why does not the Taoiseach face up to these realities instead of flamboyantly pirouetting around Europe?
Before the Ard-Fheis I was accused of doing nothing and now I am accused of pirouetting and being flamboyant. I wish the Labour Party would make up their minds about where they stand in this matter.
(Interruptions).
The Taoiseach was accused of doing nothing before the Ard-Fheis and now he has proved he is doing nothing.
In the hope of lowering the temperature of the discussion, will the Taoiseach not accept without prejudice to particular issues that there is much merit in seeing whether there could be common ground between the parties with a view to making changes in our society which would demonstrate our intentions with regard to a united Ireland firmly based on pluralist principles and that this should not be left until something happens in the future, though it might happen unless action is taken to encourage it?
If there is any view in the Opposition parties, in the Fine Gael Party, that the time is now ripe for another look at these matters or if any serious proposals along these lines is put forward by the Fine Gael Party, we will consider it favourably.