asked the Taoiseach if he will specify the constitutional amendments he envisaged when he referred to them in his address at the White House, Washington on 17 March, 1982.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers - Constitutional Amendments.
6.
In the course of my White House speech on March 17 last to which the Deputy's question refers, I was speaking about the obstacles which need to be overcome in seeking to bring the partition of our country to an end and in this context I stated that we would make whatever constitutional arrangements might be thought to be needed.
I have spoken previously on a number of occasions, as I did on April 16 last, at a function commemorating the Bi-Centenary of Grattan's Parliament, of a new constitution for the whole island under which we might see a legislative assembly which spoke for the whole nation.
As I said on that occasion, our aim should be a political structure for the whole island which would banish exclusion, discrimination, bias and even condescension from Ireland forever; a political structure in which all traditions would find their representation as of right.
Which question is the Taoiseach answering?
I am answering Question No. 6.
Seeing the seeming willingness on the part of the Taoiseach now to engage in constitutional reform, would he not think it worthwhile to begin to implement some policies of constitutional reform at this stage, rather than wait for some unspecified events to happen?
No. The Deputy should be well aware of my position in that regard, which I have stated on a number of occasions. It would be a futile exercise to start making changes in our Constitution in order to accommodate different traditions without having the participation of the representatives of those traditions in the process.
That reply by the Taoiseach is at variance with his willingness to discuss with me the question of constitutional review, as stated in the Dáil some weeks ago. I hope that the Taoiseach has not changed his mind on the question of constitutional review.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I understand the Taoiseach's position to be that he, as most of us, would like to have an input from the people of Northern Ireland into what way we should frame a new Constitution.
That would be essential.
It is essential. In what way does the Taoiseach hope to reach that objective?
As the Deputy knows, I would like to see a major input into that situation from the London Government. I hope that this process can be pursued constructively through the Anglo-Irish process.
A final supplementary question from Deputy Harte.
My question arises from the Taoiseach answering a different question. I have asked the Taoiseach in what way he plans to or believes he can obtain an opinion from all the people of Northern Ireland. He has answered that he seeks an opinion from the London Government. In what way does the Taoiseach hope to obtain an opinion from the Northern people, as outlined in his political thinking, to which I subscribe?
I look forward, ideally, to a situation where we will be all sitting around a table discussing this very matter, discussing new political structures and possibly a new Constitution for the island as a whole.
As the Taoiseach has a commitment to have a referendum in the future on certain constitutional issues, surely he must consider it worthwhile to include other items which are unacceptable to the Northern Ireland community which will need changing in Southern Ireland?
I have already dealt with that matter.
Finally, if success is as lacking in the next 50 years as it was in the last 50, must we wait 50 years for the objectives at which the Taoiseach aims?
No. It means that we rededicate ourselves to working towards that objective and trying to bring about the sort of situation which I have envisaged.
Does the Taoiseach mean that we have not tried to do that in the past? People have tried and have not been successful. If success is as lacking in the future as it was in the past, must we wait 50 or 100 years to have a Constitution in this part of Ireland to which the Taoiseach aspires and with which we all agree?
The Deputy knows that in these matters the thing to do is to devise a constructive, forward-looking policy and work to try to make this succeed. If it does not succeed, then we shall have to consider alternatives.
Is it not just a question of saying what we would like to see in our Constitution?
In view of the statements which the Taoiseach has just made, in the event that the President refers the private rents legislation again to the Supreme Court, would the Taoiseach consider the possibility of joining to the pro-life question a constitutional amendment in relation to clarifying the balance between the rights of private property and the common good?
That is a separate matter. As I have already indicated, my electoral commitment is to bring this forward as a separate constitutional amendment and I intend to do that.
Deputy Kelly, please.
Could I just clarify one point and than I shall desist? Does that statement mean that the Taoiseach is ruling out any other constitutional issue?
No.
The Taoiseach is not ruling them out?
No.
I thought I heard the Taoiseach say that his object was to bring the parties to the Irish question around a table. Would he please identify for the House one single act which can be attributed to his Government during the time he has been Taoiseach which has been likely to make that day come any sooner? One single act.
I would have to take some considerable time to outline all that I have done in that context.
I am asking for only one, just one act.
Is the Taoiseach not going to answer that question?
I said that I would have to take a very considerable length of time to enumerate all the things I have done.
Just one.
Deputies
One.
In fact, I have done far more practical and important things than the previous Government did.
Deputies
One.
I am asking for just one.
In the national interests, would the Taoiseach reply?
Most of Deputy Kelly's contribution to this situation has been totally divisive.
Just one.
He cannot give one. He knows that he cannot.
Just one?
Snookered?
I could enumerate a considerable number of things which I have done and, if the Deputy will put down a question, I will give him the answer.
We have a large number of questions to deal with.
What are the Taoiseach's intentions with regard to the committee set up by the previous Attorney General whose charge it was to look at, among other things, the Constitution with a view to bringing the day of which the Taoiseach speaks closer? Does he intend to continue the existence of that committee?
I do not know of the existence of any such committee or the setting up of any such committee by the previous Government. As far as I am aware, a committee with that particular objective was not set up by the previous Government.
But the Taoiseach has already answered questions about this committee to which I have referred.
The committee to which Deputy Kelly refers was not set up by the previous Government.
The committee was set up to bring forward meaningful changes in the Constitution, among which would be ones which would help to bring that day of which the Taoiseach speaks nearer.
As far as I am aware, that was not one of the objectives of the committee.
This should be by the way of a question.
If the Deputy wishes to put down a question on the matter, I will answer it.
Would the Taoiseach please answer Question No. 7?