Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Martina Devlin: What will FG tax or cut to reopen Vatican embassy?

How odd that, for some, the Rubicon was crossed by shutting our embassy to the Vatican rather than because of any other closure and cut imposed by this Government.

How odd that Fine Gael backbenchers, en masse, are up in arms about reinstating an ambassador to the Holy See rather than reinstating hospital beds or special needs assistants.

How odd that followers of any creed should work themselves into a lather about embassies, which are secular rather than the spiritual outposts -- if churches were being boarded up, they would have a point. 

But what have embassies to do with religion?

How odd that deciding against reappointing an Irish ambassador to the Holy See is construed as an attack on Catholicism and the first step in an atheist conspiracy to impose a secular society.

But having 'our man in the Vatican' seems to matter to a number of people, so let us consider the benefits.

No, can't think of any.

Not when Ireland already has an ambassador to Italy, resident in Rome and a stone's throw from the Vatican City, who could just as easily double up.

No economic, trade or foreign direct investment advantage can be cited conclusively from maintaining an embassy in the Vatican. It is not lending us money, unlike the troika. 

We are told it is a useful listening station, an unquantifiable plus. 

Still, if it is helpful, then our man in Rome can make his way into the Vatican's walled enclave occasionally and use his ears.

Ah, awkward, that. 

The credentials of our man in Rome are not recognised by the Vatican -- touchy as a minor royal about prestige, it doesn't accept two-for-the-price-of-one discount deals.

The hierarchy cannot be ignorant of Ireland's perilous finances, but rules are rules in the Catholic Church. Until it decides to jettison them, as with limbo.

For now, the regulation about no doubling up on ambassadors stands. 

Presumably, the Vatican suspects if Ireland's ambassador to Rome is allowed to fulfil both functions, other countries will stampede to follow suit. 

And the Vatican's prized diplomatic influence might be at risk of erosion.

Any ambassador is a luxury in debt-ridden Ireland, so we should assess all embassies. We are borrowing the money to pay for them and they must earn their keep.

Parallel with the decision to close the Vatican embassy, our embassy in Iran and representation in East Timor were also removed.

Ireland has a worldwide presence in 73 territories -- 56 embassies and 17 other offices such as consulates, a sizeable number for an itsy-bitsy country.

I say let's not stop at three, let's thin out some more.

The Vatican embassy is not pivotal to Ireland's interests. 

In fact, it might serve the Holy See's more than ours, acting as an endorsement of Catholic Church status.

Now, was the decision not to have a resident ambassador coloured by the Vatican's contemptuous attitude towards the Irish State, as evidenced by the Cloyne and Murphy reports? 

Possibly. 

Nevertheless, there seems to be no downside. 

Some €845,000 a year is saved, and we continue to have diplomatic relations with the Vatican. 

We simply opted out of keeping an ambassador plus staff plus a residence there.

The Holy See accepts David Cooney, secretary-general at the Department of Foreign Affairs, as our non-resident ambassador and he has travelled to the Vatican twice already to meet officials.

And before anyone complains about travel expenses, he could circumnavigate the globe and we're still quids in.

Meanwhile, Fine Gael backbenchers want the embassy reinstated, but what are they willing to sacrifice to achieve that?

Which benefit will they reduce? 

Will they accept a higher household charge? 

The money to fund it either has to be taken from a department's budget, or loaded on to some tax or bill.

I don't discount the importance of the Catholic religion. 

It has more than a billion adherents worldwide -- even Stephen Fry hasn't notched up as many followers on Twitter -- and the comfort and hope their faith brings Catholics cannot be disregarded.

Ireland can continue to define itself as a predominantly Catholic country, if it chooses. 

No holy statues have been brought crashing down. 

There is no ban on Mass attendance. 

This does not represent an assault on religion.

The fuss seems to centre on whether Eamon Gilmore exercised a bias, as an atheist, in putting up the shutters on the embassy. 

In some circles, the Foreign Affairs Minister has been vilified for being honest enough to present himself as that apparently most lethal of creatures in Ireland: an atheist.

Religious conviction is personal and private, and Mr Gilmore's unbelief does nothing to challenge another's belief.

However, the Vatican closure has been represented as a vendetta against religion by Labour. 

It would be uncharacteristically small-minded of the party to axe something of strategic value to the State simply to pursue a narrow agenda, and there is not a shred of proof to substantiate such a charge.

Instead, Mr Gilmore decided there was no real need for a resident ambassador, and our longstanding ties did not cause him to reconsider -- as might have happened with someone steeped in deference to the Catholic Church.

Compare this with the cynical exercise by the Fine Gael parliamentary party to fight a battle it thinks it might have a chance of winning, rather than challenge the Cabinet over its austerity measures, or about repaying unsecured bondholders. 

Deputies have selected their cause with care, in the hopes of waving a result at constituents before the next election.

No doubt the Vatican hierarchy's persistent policy of prioritising church above child may have contributed to Ireland deciding this was an embassy it could cull.

But we haven't burned our bridges with the Vatican. 

We have just saved some money, showed we expect to be treated with respect, and put ourselves in the position of maintaining diplomatic relations from a distance.

That distance can be from Dublin if the Vatican continues to insist on a separate ambassador. 

Or it can be from Rome if the Holy See accepts two ambassadors in the Eternal City is a burden on our small, bankrupt state.

Either way, let's not go to war about this -- more important battles lie ahead.