Jim Walsh's opposition to the same-sex civil partnership Bill has met with little support in FF, writes Noel Whelan
MANY READERS will not have heard of Senator Jim Walsh before recent weeks. Reared as I was in Wexford Fianna Fáil circles, I have known Jim for almost 20 years. After a long and distinguished career in local government, with high-profile positions in local authority members associations, he was elected to the Seanad in 1997.
Like many Senators who don't or no longer have Dáil ambitions, he has been content to maintain a low profile, nursing the select group of councillors who ensure his re-election.
Now, however, he has decided to put himself front of house on no less sensitive a subject than that of civil partnership for same-sex couples. Although his opposition to the proposal, and that of the other Senators and deputies supporting his motion, only became public this week it has been in the offing for several months.
Last February a weekly newspaper available in the porch of Catholic churches carried a front-page story detailing how opposition to the Government's civil partnership proposal was growing within the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party. The paper claimed that a number of, then unnamed, Senators were leading the opposition. Informed speculation within Fianna Fáil centred on Senators John Hanafin and Jim Walsh but, at that stage at least, it seems they did not wish to be identified even in the publications aimed at readers most likely to share their reservations.
It is curious that this group of Senators and TDs did not go public with their opposition to the Government proposal before now. Nothing was heard from them, at least publicly, when Michael McDowell set up the Colley Group to explore options, nor indeed when the group published its options paper in late 2006. Nothing was heard from them before or during last year's general election campaign, when the Fianna Fáil manifesto included an express promise to legislate for civil partnership.
Walsh and his colleagues had an even better opportunity to reject plans for legislation on civil partnership when the programme for government negotiated between Fianna Fáil and the Green Party was put to the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party in May 2007.
That programme included an even stronger commitment to introduce the legislation and was approved unanimously by the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, of which Walsh was a member. No opposition was voiced to these proposals then either.
Some understanding of why this late manoeuvre has emerged can be gleaned from the Seanad record itself. Researching the debates this week, I found just one previous contribution from Walsh on the issue of civil partnership legislation.
That contribution ran to four words. On April 17th last a number of Senators asked Leader of the House Donie Cassidy when the promised legislation for civil partnership would be forthcoming. Cassidy confirmed that the heads of the relevant Bill were at an advanced stage, that the legislation was "being given serious consideration", and that "one section remains to be agreed by Cabinet".
The next intervention from Walsh simply states "there is no rush".
Walsh and others in the parliamentary party who oppose civil partnership for same-sex couples were clearly relying on the traditional strategy of those who oppose reform - delay.
The pace of events has now forced their hand because the Government has published detailed heads for the proposed legislation.
A number of politicians deserve credit for maintaining the momentum for this legislative reform since the election. Labour's Brendan Howlin and his party deserve some of the credit. By repeatedly tabling their own Bill, they put pressure on the Government to act more quickly. The Green Party has also exerted pressure within Government.
Former justice minister Brian Lenihan deserves credit for getting the Department of Justice to prioritise the legislation. When Dermot Ahern became Minister for Justice, some sought to caricature him on the issue and speculated that he would press the brake on this legislative initiative. To his credit the publication of the detailed heads of the Bill has instead been one of his first steps as Minister.
Listening to Walsh speak about his motion on local and national radio this week I found his arguments to be vague, uninformed and ungenerous.
His attitude is in stark contrast to that of Tallaght-based Fianna Fáil backbencher Charlie O'Connor, who made two interesting contributions to the Dáil debate on Labour's Bill in February 2007 and again in November 2007.
O'Connor, in his own inimitable way, spoke sensitively and passionately about the entitlement of same-sex couples to a legal structure and status for their relationships as a human right.
O'Connor expressed himself to be uncomfortable voting down the Labour proposal, but he was confident that the Government would come forward with more comprehensive and workable legislation.
His speeches acted as important catalysts for change within the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party.
More than one Fianna Fáil deputy has been reported as saying: "If Charlie can wear it, so can I."
Thankfully, a large majority within the parliamentary party now seem to adopt the O'Connor rather than the Walsh approach.