Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am glad to have an opportunity to contribute to the statements on the Constitutional Convention. The Government's response to the recommendations of the convention makes for sobering reading. According to Second Republic, overall, the Government has accepted 32% of the convention's recommendations for constitutional reform and 58% of its recommendations for policy reform. While this may look good on paper, when one delves a little deeper, one finds that only 11% of the convention's recommendations on constitutional reform and only 5% of its recommendations on policy reform have been implemented.

Most strikingly, according to Second Republic, key provisions such as citizen initiatives, for example, 1YI, the one year initiative, for which I have been campaigning, have been rejected or have received responses from the Government that can be described as ambiguous at best. It will be very important, as we enter the general election campaign, that candidates add citizen initiatives to their agenda. A second Constitutional Convention, as called for by Second Republic, should be established or citizens forums should be introduced, as proposed by the one year initiative.

It is vital that the Government acknowledge that its response to the reports before us is 313 days overdue. This is pathetic. It is clear the Government has not taken the Constitutional Convention and parliamentary procedures seriously given that it has not bothered to respond in the Oireachtas to two reports within the prescribed four-month timeframe. The 66 ordinary members of the Constitutional Convention gave up their time free of charge and showed incredible dedication to the convention process. They deserve more respect and recognition than has been shown to them. If that does not make one angry, what about the fact that the Government will be between 533 and 660 days late in responding to the final four reports being debated today?

I will dedicate my time to advocating that the Government or its successor address economic, social and cultural rights. Last year, the Government voted down a Bill I introduced which would have enshrined economic, social and cultural rights in the Constitution. It argued, as the Minister of State has done again today, that it would be difficult to enshrine these rights in the Constitution. That is not the case. What would be difficult for the Government would be to accept the burden of vindicating the rights of citizens in the economic, social and cultural spheres. This is the reason it resists proposals to enshrine such rights in the Constitution.

Limited provision is made for economic, social and cultural rights in Bunreacht na hÉireann. Enshrining such rights in the Constitution would bring it into line with a growing trend in many countries which have revised their constitutions to include economic, social and cultural rights. Some 26 European Union member states have made some form of constitutional provision for economic, social and cultural rights. Internationally, 106 constitutions protect he right to work and 133 provide the right to health care. This demonstrates that the idea that one can reflect such rights in the Constitution is a tangible objective.

In the ninth and final meeting of the Constitutional Convention in February 2013, 85% of its members voted in favour of strengthening these rights and the Government made a commitment to respond to its recommendations within four months of publication. In March 2014, the convention issued to the Government a recommendation that it implement these rights and the Government was due to respond by July of the same year. Almost one year later, we are still waiting for a response from the Government to proactively address the status of economic, social and cultural rights.

To counter the lingering myths presented by the Government, it is important to give an idea of what these rights would entail. Economic rights would entail the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his or her living by freely chosen or accepted work and to just and favourable conditions of work; the right of everyone to form a trade union or join a trade union of his or her choice; and the right to strike. Social rights would entail the right to social security; the right to protection and assistance of the family; the right of every person and his or her family to an adequate standard of living, including food, clothing and housing, and the continuous improvement of living conditions; the right to be free from hunger; the right of everyone to the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health; and the right of everyone to education. Cultural rights would entail the right of everyone to take part in cultural life, enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he or she is the author.

The Constitution should provide for these rights. It would be difficult for the Government to do so because vindicating these rights would require a change in the culture of government, which is what this Government is afraid of.

See this speech in context