Belfast's Marie Stopes clinic -- the last thing vulnerable women need is a culture war over abortion

Dawn Purvis at the Marie Stopes clinic in Belfast

At the very start of October, I became one of the official diaspora. I have a new job (in the glamorous world of TV production) in a new city (Manchester) and generally couldn’t be more chuffed.

What I am decidedly unchuffed about though is news from the city I left behind: Belfast. It seems that the unholy (and I use that term advisedly) forces of anti-choice zealotry are to descend upon Great Victoria Street this week to protest a Marie Stopes clinic that is opening there and eventually try to shut it down. Those opposing the clinic such as politician Jim Allister, a man who has found himself back in the 1950’s without a DeLorean, and Precious Life spokeswoman Bernadette Smyth claim that there is no need or want for such a clinic in Northern Ireland. Riiiight...

1,007 women went to England and Wales from Northern Ireland last year for an abortion. Expressed as a percentage of the whole population that accounts for 0.056% of the population; a twentieth of a percent. Bernadette Smyth suggests herself the amount of women traveling for abortions has reduced by a third over the last 15 years.  So why then, given the NI public’s supposed attitudes to abortion and the statistically miniscule amount of women from there who’ve availed of them, does a Marie Stopes clinic constitute such a moral menace? You’d think if that was the case they’d just let them set up, see tumbleweed go through their premises, lose money and pack up again. But no, logic never was one of the hallmarks of the Every Sperm Is Sacred Patrol.

Read more: Major security for Northern Ireland’s first abortion clinic in Belfast

Alas, the abortion debate lies uneasily at the intersection between compassionate pragmatism and pupil-dilating absolutism. The Marie Stopes clinic will provide a range of sexual health services, one of which will be providing a pill for women up to nine weeks pregnant to take if they, for only the most serious health reasons, no longer wish to be pregnant. Even though Northern Ireland’s abortion laws are literally an era behind the rest of the UK (abortion has been legal since 1967 in England, Wales and Scotland), this much is currently legal. And yet, as is the case in the South, hardline anti-choicers want to take something that isn’t legal (and isn’t even under threat of becoming legal any time soon) and make it super duper illegal.

One thing pro and anti choice people do agree on though is that the ideal number of abortions a year would be zero. But, living as we do in a far from ideal world, there has to be some facility for those thousand or so women who desperately need help. If it were only one woman in the whole province in need of that help, the Marie Stopes clinic’s presence would still be justified.

But try telling that to those who proclaim to be pro-life but never say a word about a child’s welfare post-womb, picket services for vulnerable women and throw words like “murder” around while they’re doing it. It never fails to amaze that for people who seem to care so deeply about the life of the unborn, they can be so callous in their treatment of actual human beings.

Ireland Government's women trouble - why we badly need new gender quota

Irish female politicians past and present

Last week while browsing this website I came across an op-ed from our esteemed political analyst, Patrick Roberts, about his displeasure that gender quotas will be introduced in the next election. And I could not have disagreed with him more.

In theory, I get why quotas might be discomforting, even to avowed feminists. There’s a danger it codifies rather than breaks down the glass ceiling, merely giving women in politics a slightly larger cordon than they already have.

But a 30% quota shouldn’t be seen as the solution, but as the introduction of a bare minimum of standards. At the minute, there is a pathetic dearth of women in the Dáil, and an even more pathetic dearth of candidates. Only three constituencies had five women candidates running (none had more than that) and some constituencies had no women running in them at all. Unless you think women are physiologically less able to run for and hold elected office (i.e. insane), that means the current system is failing them badly.

There are all sorts of reasons why there haven’t been enough women in politics over the years, fundamental to them all though was a default patriarchy, a patriarchy that thanks to the 1937 Constitution has been both followed in the breach and the observance. But past practice and policy is no justification to perpetuate it, and in modern times it’s simply not acceptable to call for anyone to call for a fair race when you have a head start of miles.

The thing is, people can say they’re all for equality until their hair turns blue but it requires people to do something about it to actually achieve it. As it stands, political parties are not doing enough to shake off their just-for-the-lads mentality and seek out women candidates, women who are put off by the system as it stands and have taken their much-needed skills elsewhere. And even the ones that are in the political system are in a pitiful minority in the top jobs: three out of fifteen full cabinet ministers and four out of fifteen is a risible number in 2012.

But it’s not just a case of upping the numbers for the sake of it, we badly need the views and expertise of a wide range of people at government level and we only do ourselves a disservice by not listening to them. It’s absolute lunacy that half the voting public don’t even account for a quarter of the representation.

Not that the drive for equality should end with women, it’s just as vital that people of different cultures and creeds and classes participate in the political process and shape it to wider benefit. That requires a level of diversity and outreach that some may find unsettling or PC gone mad or what have you, but if the political system shook itself out of its’ monolithic torpor in the first place the question of quotas wouldn’t need to be broached at all.

In the landmark British sitcom Yes Prime Minister, when an idea very similar to this was proposed at a civil service meeting, all the (male) heads of department wholeheartedly agreed with the idea but one by one suggested problems implementing it. The Foreign Office couldn’t appoint women ambassadors to Arab countries, the Home Office wasn’t suitable because women couldn’t run prisons, Employment was a no-go because of the difficult to manage, burly trade unionists and Defence was out because a woman wasn’t really suitable to run security or rough it with Admirals. As sure as art imitates life, hegemony will always put up a fight, but they’re on the wrong side of this one.

Having traipsed up and down the country as a youth worker, I’ve done projects with a great many fantastic young women, young women who if they were so inclined could go right to the top of the political ladder. A lot of them come from constituencies where women were all but non-existent on the ballot paper, and so the question we have to ask ourself is, will we stand for another generation of talented young woman having obstacle and stymie thrown their way? Quotas aren’t perfect and they aren’t a solution, but we need political parties finding these young women, and we need them too. Our future depends on them. 

Michael D poised for victory in long presidential race for The Aras

Michael D Higgins

As I write this on Friday lunchtime, Irish time, it is looking likely that Michael D Higgins will be the ninth President of Ireland.

Although official counts will not be announced for a few hours yet, early tallies are suggesting Michael D surging ahead, with erstwhile poll favorite Sean Gallagher in a distant second and Martin McGuinness in third. According to a Red C telephone poll carried out on behalf of RTÉ, the last week of the campaign has been the difference between a two horse race and a near assured victory for Higgins, with over half of the 28% of people who switched their vote in the last few days drifting away from Gallagher. 

Given the scope and function of the Presidency, such campaigns always seem unusually hard-hitting and dramatic. In 1990 there was Brian Lenihan’s “mature recollection” and Pee Flynn’s outrageous comments about Mary Robinson’s new found interest in her family. In 1997 there was Adi Roche and allegations of bullying, and Mary McAleese being a tribal time bonb. And this year, perhaps because of the volume of candidates, the mud flew higher and faster. There was Norris and his letters, Davis and her state boards, Higgins and his age, McGuinness and his IRA past, Mitchell and his general disagreeability, Dana and her family feud, and the fact her husband and brother drove on a puncture.

-------------------
READ MORE:
More stories on the Irish presidential race and the results 

Live minute-by-minute coverage of Ireland's presidential election results


Cliffs of Moher seeks new ‘Seven Wonders of the World’ status - POLL
-------------------

And then there was Sean Gallagher. As with Lenihan, it wasn’t so much the charges that were thrown at him so much as the way he reacted that precipitated a turn away in support. His responses to McGuinness’ accusations on The Frontline, accusations about Fianna Fail and fundraising he really should have prepared for, were all over the place. In the ensuing melee, he gifted phrases like “no recollection”, “envelope” and “bagman for Fianna Fáil”. His reaction to Frontline audience questioner Glenna Lynch, the objectivity of whom he tried to question, was disastrous. 

But at the end of the day, Gallagher’s connections to Fianna Fáil, or the apparently “money resting in my account” state of his finances, weren’t in and of themselves reasons to vote against him. The fact he was a stunningly uninspiring candidate who, to quote the template for Presidents everywhere, Jed Bartlet, “made being unengaged into a Zen-like thing” should have been enough. And yet, it took a coven full of Galway Races Tent incantations to finally put people off him. 

The Presidency isn’t the only vote going down today of course, with a by-election and two referenda also being counted. While Labour look good in Dublin West, the referenda are likely to go 1-1, with the Judges Pay referendum passing and the Oireachtas Inquiry referendum getting defeated quite decisively. In other words, today has been a complete cataclysm for Fine Gael. Failing to get a second TD in Dublin West is one thing, but failing to pass a key piece of legislative reform is a big dent for them. And Gay Mitchell potentially finishing this election on single figures is wading in to condiments poured on cuts territory.

There’s many hours to go before we know for sure and certain what’s going on, but at this stage there can be little doubt that Michael D Higgins is set to take up residence in Aras An Uachtarain. There’s less doubt still that he’ll do a terrific job when that declaration is made official.

The EU and Ireland - the importance of being close to Boston and Brussels

During the tremulous time following the 1992 general election, the embattled Taoiseach Albert Reynolds was handed a lifeline. With his grasp on power hanging in the balance, Reynolds went to an EU summit in Edinburgh at the end of that year and secured £8billion in European structural funds. Even his most optimistic supporters were expecting something closer to six. Emboldened, Reynolds told his press secretary, “Now watch me put a government together”.

That money was not only was an instrumental element in keeping Reynolds in power, it also became a vital element of policy. In the years since 1992, all manner of capital projects have the EU’s starry prints all over it. From the Luas and the M50 to research facilities and local enterprise boards, and whether it’s widely known or accepted or not, the EU’s structural funds helped build an entire national infrastructure.

Small wonder then that the EU’s Open Days event, run by the Directorate General for Regional Policy, is such a big draw. It’s the single biggest event the EU hosts every year, with thousands of interested parties coming from every townland in Europe. This year, I was one of them. 

A couple of things struck me from the start. First, structural funds may not be the silver bullet they once were, both because of relative year-on-year improvements and the banking cataclysm, but they’re still vital as a means of realising key investments. The second thing I found striking was how clear the focus was on what those key investments would be: emerging business and research. It may have been roads in the past, but from here on in, it’s SME and R&D.

There were other talking points and debates that ran through the week. “Macroeconomic conditionality” became the unlikely catchphrase of the whole event, with a strenuous debate revolving round whether sanctioning regions or countries that don’t use their funds properly would disproportionately affect the poorest countries who needed the money most. Then there was the issue of credit. For once in a European context, we weren’t referring to the debt kind.

Often, money distributed to the respective government departments of Europe is appropriated as such. Since any structural fund money has to be matched by national governments, the European influence can often be underplayed or lost altogether. In a time when passive Euroscepticism is becoming more and more fashionable, the way the EU asserts itself in this regard is becoming more and more important. 

Plenary sessions and debates aside there were also a host of seminars where people could showcase the ways they used their funding. One particularly interesting session involved Holland and its approach to tackling youth unemployment, the scope of which puts our own much-maligned Job Bridge to shame.

Over the next weeks I’ll be considering the finer points of some of the issues brought up in Brussels, and with the announcement in the last week of The Gathering in 2013, it’s important to balance the relationship with our friends within and without Europe. Being close to Boston doesn’t mean we have to ignore Berlin.