Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to contribute to the debate and to offer my support for the Bill. I acknowledge the significant work Deputy Madigan has put in, as she brings forward a timely reform, which in many ways is overdue. I doubt many of us in 1994 thought that this provision would not have been amended within a shorter period.

The history of divorce in Ireland makes interesting reading. As Deputy O'Callaghan said, divorce was legal throughout most of our history. It was legal under Brehon and Celtic law and under the Act of Union when we were part of the UK. Although divorce was uncommon, it happened and Charles Stewart Parnell is an example of somebody who married a divorcee. It was only in the 1920s, unfortunately under a Cumann na nGaedheal Government, that the decision was take to prohibit divorce and that was copperfastened in the 1937 Constitution, which was a pity. I am slightly at cross purposes to Deputy Coppinger earlier. Once something is inserted in the Constitution, it is then very hard to amend it. It would have been better if the 1937 provision had not been put in the Constitution. Had it not, some provision would have been made for divorce and the right to remarry, perhaps in the 1970s or 1980s.

That did not happen and a referendum led by the great constitutional crusader, Garret FitzGerald, was defeated in the 1980s. I have a vague recollection of that campaign as a child and of the scaremongering that caused the amendment to be defeated. Nothing happened until the 1990s until another member of my party, former Minister, Alan Shatter, brought forward Private Members' judicial separation legislation similar to the recent civil partnership legislation to "almost" allow for divorce. That was a major step forward. In 1994, the rainbow Government of Fine Gael, the Labour Party and Democratic Left brought forward the provision and put it to a referendum again. I recall that campaign well because it was the first in which I took part as a young person interested in politics. I dropped leaflets with Young Fine Gael at the time.

We framed the campaign for the right to remarry to give people a second chance. That was one of the strong arguments in its favour. However, I was surprised at the time because I then began to attend for the first time other Fine Gael branch meetings and was struck by the large number of people within the party who were opposed to divorce and who did not agree at all with the provision. I recall the scaremongering at the time about the impact of property rights and people losing the family farm, for example. Much of our law, particularly when it comes to personal relationships, derives from property rights and not Christian religion. A big fear was losing the family business or the family farm. There were stories about how family life in Ireland would break down and it would turn into a scene from "Home and Away" where virtually nobody would live with their married parents anymore. The referendum passed and, of course, and none of those scare stories turned out to be true.

Ireland remains a country in which divorce is uncommon. I detected from Deputy Smith's contribution that perhaps she regretted that and that she thought the divorce rate should be higher. I am not sure that is what she meant but that is certainly what she implied and I do not share that view. It is good that, culturally, in Ireland people tend to marry late and when they marry, they tend to stay married, although on some occasions, marriages do not work and people divorce and remarry. I recall the count following the 1994 campaign a little differently from Deputy Smith. The largest "Yes" votes in that referendum were in the south Dublin constituencies. Dublin South, Dublin South East and Dún Laoghaire had massive "Yes" votes and there was also a good "Yes" vote in west Dublin. However, we were very much a divided society, much more so than was the case with the recent marriage equality referendum. The divorce referendum only passed in Dublin, Limerick East, Cork South Central, Louth and perhaps one of the Kildare constituencies or Wicklow. The vast majority of constituencies voted "No", which was much different from the voting pattern in the marriage equality referendum with only one constituency narrowly voting "No". Were it not for the fact that the rainbow Government wrote reassurances and safeguards and protections into the Constitution, that referendum would not have passed. It might not have been the right thing to do but it was probably the politically necessary thing to do because the divorce referendum only passed by 50.28% to 49.72%. There were only 10,000 votes approximately in it, which is extraordinarily close. The safeguards and reassurances written into the Constitution were crucial to its passage.

I agree with other Deputies that it would have been better if the amendment had never been inserted in the Constitution in the first place. It may well be the case that it will be necessary to replace it with a new amendment or we may face a referendum simply on repeal being defeated again and the issue being set aside for the best part of a generation. Of course, that is a different issue.

The legislation relates to the divorce and the right to remarry. I have an open mind as to whether the period should be one or two years and as to whether there should be a waiting period if two people amicably want to dissolve their marriage. It is a good idea to have some provision preventing it from being too easy to get divorced but if there is no dispute, perhaps that should be a matter between the two individuals concerned. I welcome the legislation. A queue of constitutional amendments is building up, which I jotted down the other day. There is a likelihood of a referendum on the eighth amendment next year. There is also a need to have referenda on issues such as blasphemy, the place of women in the home, the patent court and several other matters, including the extension of voting rights in presidential elections to citizens living abroad.

See this speech in context