Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have a happy memory of my late grandfather, John Hobbs, who, when in a relaxed -perhaps post-libatory - state, said to me on more than one occasion, "Mind your mother. You could have 40 fathers but you will only have one mother". Even in the early 1980s, in my early teenage years, I had an idea of what he meant. I suspect that an awful lot of people, mothers included, feel there is something particularly special about the role of a mother in our lives in the family. One only has to go to a funeral where one will hear songs such as “A Mother's Love's a Blessing” and “Pal of my Cradle Days”. Truthfully, of course, on the men's side we have the song “The Old Man” and the line, "And I miss him, the old man." Certainly I loved my father and I would have very much supported an amendment which sought to put the stress not just on mothers and their duties "in the family", because those are the constitutional words as Gaeilge, namely, "ina ndualgais sa teaghlach", but also on the important role of fathers because we need to talk about the role of fathers in these days. Instead, we get bait-and-switch politics from the Government. It holds out to people the prospect of getting rid of, apparently, a sexist reference to women only in the context of home duties. It holds out the prospect of giving long overdue recognition to carer but what did it do? It proposes to give us a watery clause on care that means nothing and to get rid of any reference to mothers and the privileging of their duties in whatever way. Whether they are full-time or part-time in the home, any privileging of their duties is no longer facilitated and, of course, there is no reference to fathers. What are we really getting? The removal of the word "mother", woman, from the Constitution and the relegation of our understanding of what home means. These are big issues.

The Minister states he wants to include people who were excluded in the constitutional amendments but in fact being excluded are fathers, mothers and the importance of their duties in home life. In a way we can see the agenda of the ideological left operating here because the left prefers to see the State as the parent rather than the father and the mother. This is why, I am sorry to say, that people will suspect that this amendment has come from a particular wing within the Green Party, that is, shall we say, the watermelon dimension of the Green Party, green on the outside and red on the inside. The Government could have added the word "father" instead of excising the word "mother". Mothers, by their nature, play a significant role in the upbringing of children and so do fathers but the Government does not want to acknowledge any of that. The Minister thinks that human nature should subject itself to his mathematical notions of equality. There is no difference between men and women acknowledged. He cannot even define women because he believes the natural division of the sexes can be ignored. I refer to those in mainstream parties, whose main worry at this stage of the electoral cycle is, admittedly, to get their mug and their name on the ballot paper with their party's support. It amazes me that otherwise sensible politicians, the mainstream people in government, are acquiescing in something deeply cynical and highly irresponsible in terms of the public good because fathers, and mothers, in the context of their home duties do matter and the Minister is getting rid of all of that.

Is it the Government's intention to excise the reference to mother and remove the word "woman" from the Constitution? Who knows, but at a time when State services, such as those provided by the HSE, seek to excise the word "woman" and men are allowed into women's refuges, and women are forced to participate against men in women's sports, and the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment discourages children from using the word "mother", one is entitled to legitimate suspicions as to what is really going on here. All the more worrying then when one sees the way this legislation has been driven at coach-and-four speed through the Oireachtas without any chance of careful scrutiny. What messy future legal uncertainty is being created here? The Minister says not to worry; his Department has looked at this closely with the Attorney General and the Bills Office and there is nothing to see here.However, what is the purpose of the Dáil and the Seanad if we are not allowed to scrutinise this carefully?

There is a lot to be concerned about the way the Minister has gone around this. It is bait-and-switch politics. The proposed amendment disses mothers and fathers and the difference between men and women in what they contribute to home life. If the best that can be done by the Government is to rake up the injustices of the past to advance this highly uncertain proposal, it is clear that it does not take its duties seriously with regard to protecting what the Constitution can do for people in seeking out the common good through policy and law.