YOLO, Swiss pensioners

This week: two referendums and some dodgy criminal reforms. We're talking about Swiss voters' decision to treat themselves to bigger pensions, and Slovakia's battle to stop cronyism under populist prime minister Robert Fico. And ahead of Ireland's vote on International Women's Day, the historian Caitríona Beaumont joins us to ask: why, according to the Irish constitution, is a woman's place still in the home?

You can follow Cait on Twitter here and read her article for The Conversation about the 'woman in the home' clause here.

This week's Inspiration Station offerings: this Swiss study on the power of live music; Dominic on tour, and the studio cast recording of 'Two Strangers (Carry A Cake Across New York)'.

Thanks for listening! If you enjoy our podcast, we'd love it if you'd consider chipping in a few bucks a month at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/europeanspodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (many currencies are available). You can also help new listeners find the show by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠leaving us a review⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or giving us five stars on Spotify.

Other resources for this episode:

Cultural Deal for Europe: An Open Letter Ahead of the EP Elections https://culturalfoundation.eu/stories/cultural-deal-for-europe-open-letter-ep-elections/ 'Nederland Europees kampioen zitten': TNO https://www.tno.nl/nl/newsroom/2024/02/nederland-europees-kampioen-zitten/
Eurobarometer's 2022 report on physical activity across Europe: https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2668IMPACT newsletter https://lesglorieuses.fr/les-newsletters/impact-eng/ Abortion in Europe - Deutsche Welle documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSB6oCza2k8

00:22 Are you sitting comfortably?

03:33 Bad Week: Robert Fico

12:38 Good Week: Swiss pensioners

21:40 Interview: Caitríona Beaumont on Ireland's sexist constitution

38:35 The Inspiration Station: live music and the 'Two Strangers' cast recording

42:19 Happy Ending: Tiny but very very loud

Producers: Katy Lee and Wojciech Oleksiak

Mixing and mastering: Wojciech Oleksiak

Music: Jim Barne and Mariska Martina

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Threads⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠Mastodon⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠hello@europeanspodcast.com

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

INTRO - 00’22”

KATY: Hello listeners, I hope you're sitting comfortably. And in fact, if you’re listening to this from the Netherlands, there's a strong chance that you *are* listening to this sitting down, because the Netherlands are the European champions of sitting down, according to a fact sheet that was published by the Dutch research body TNO this week. Congratulations, Dutch people!

DOMINIC: Not something I'm totally proud of, living in this country of the Netherlands, but at least I've been bucking the trend.

K: Have you?

D: My life lately has involved very little sitting down. I'm quite relieved to be sitting down to make this podcast, actually, because I've been crawling and bouncing around the stage almost every day for the last two weeks.

K: Crawling. What are you playing at the moment? 

D: Oh, loadsof crawling.

K: Are you a baby? 

D: Well. Who knows, Katy? What am I? It's abstract art. 

K: Oh.

D: Has your life in France involved lots of standing up or sitting down or lying down? 

K: Mostly sitting, to be honest. I actually love sitting down. I don't think it's shameful at all to be champions of sitting down in Europe. But actually, I did a bit of digging, and it turns out that this accolade, the Dutch being the European champions of sitting down, it actually comes from a Eurobarometer survey of physical activity across Europe a couple of years ago. And it does indeed turn out that more Dutch people spend eight and a half hours of their day sitting down than anywhere else in Europe. But if you’re listening to this in Hungary, congratulations, you are the least likely to be sitting down for most of the day. 

D: Wow. Well done, Hungarians, I'm actually quite surprised about this statistic, because I thought the Netherlands was the place where people had the shortest working weeks as well of almost anywhere in Europe.

K: Maybe it counts cycling as sitting down.

D: Maybe, which I think isn't fair, if that's the case. 

K: We need to take a closer look at the data. But anyway, whether people are listening to this sitting or walking or standing at the bus stop, what can they look forward to in this week's podcast?

D: Yes, no judgement, at least from my end, if you happen to be listening to this sitting down. Especially if you're a woman, because this week, it's International Women's Day. And yeah, so take a seat. Enjoy it, women.

K: Thank you.

D: Is that a bit of a weird thing…? Or stand up and jump around if that's how you'd like to celebrate, because this Friday, the eighth of March, is International Women's Day. And in Ireland on this day, there is a very important referendum taking place, that if it passes, will change the Irish constitution. The proposed change is to article 41.2, a clause that has been controversial for a very long time because it essentially equates womanhood with motherhood. It is known as the ‘woman in the home’ clause. I found it pretty extraordinary to discover that this clause still exists in 2024. But its days may be numbered if the voters of Ireland agree this week. So later on in the show, the women of this podcast, Katy and producer Katz, will be speaking to Caitríona Beaumont, professor of social history at London Southbank University, about this referendum and about the history of this controversial article in the Irish constitution. That's coming up later on the show. But first, as always, it's time for…

BAD WEEK - 3’33”

D: Who has had a bad week, Katy?

K: Yeah, I've been wanting to talk about Slovakia for weeks now. So I'm glad to be finally doing that. This week I'm gonna give bad week to Robert Fico, who has been thwarted in his attempt to make some really quite dodgy reforms, at least temporarily. Fico has been back in office for his fourth stint as prime minister of Slovakia since October. And because he's been prime minister four times now, you may well have heard us talk about him on this podcast before, but not for a good while, I think. So I'll just recap quickly so that everyone can remember, ‘Oh, yeah, he's that guy.’ So Robert Fico, he's often mentioned in the same breath as his neighbour to the south, Viktor Orbán, in that he is a pro-Russian, anti-migrant populist leader. Although confusingly, his party SMER is sort of a left-wing party. Officially, it's a social democratic party. And in terms of its policies, it's certainly known for its emphasis on generous social welfare. But in terms of its values, it's really different from most European left-wing parties today in what it stands for. It's opposed to gay marriage and Fico has said some virulently homophobic things over the years. He also tried to appoint a climate denier as his environment minister a few months ago.

D: Yeesh.

K: And as mentioned, he has a history of saying horrible things about migrants and Muslims. But yeah, he comes originally from the political left and often still gets described as a left-wing populist, even if a lot of left-wingers wouldn't recognise his positions.

D: So the last time he was prime minister, he had to resign because of the murder of the investigative journalist Jan Kuciak, right? 

K: Yeah, so that was back in 2018. This young investigative journalist, Jan Kuciak, and his fiancee Martina Kušnírová, they had been shot dead a few weeks earlier. And this double murder sent shockwaves through Slovakia. Jan had been investigating corruption among businessmen with close links to top politicians. And their assassinations, they cast a light on the incredibly murky way in which Slovakia was being run under Fico, with this little clique of extremely powerful politicians and businessmen, some of them with links to organised crime, basically doing whatever they wanted and operating with complete impunity. So there were these huge protests and Fico was forced to resign, and a new government came to power promising to fight the kind of corruption that had become so endemic under Fico. But this new government, they governed pretty chaotically during Covid, so that by the time new elections came around last September, Fico could come along and present himself as the stable candidate and the reassuring choice. Which is kind of ironic, but here we are. Fico campaigned heavily on the cost of living crisis and how expensive people's mortgages have become. He also campaigned heavily on a promise to stop sending weapons to Ukraine, and the prospect of him coming back to power and providing this kind of second pro-Russian voice within the EU, along with Viktor Orbán in Hungary, that got a lot of people worried ahead of those elections back in September.

D: And he wasn't actually expected to win those elections, right. 

K: Yeah. I mean, a lot of Slovaks literally went to bed on election night expecting to wake up and have a government run by Progressive Slovakia, who were a fairly new, liberal pro-Western party. But they ended up coming in a close second, and Fico ended up making the latest of his many, many political comebacks at the head of a very weird coalition government, made up of his own party SMER, along with a left-wing party and a far-right party.

D: Strange bedfellows. 

K: Strange bedfellows, indeed.

D: And what kind of things have this weird government done since taking office?

K: Well, the first thing that everyone was watching for was an immediate shift from Slovakia previously being a really staunch ally of Ukraine, to having a really strong pro-Russian position. I mean, we have to remember Fico is someone who has previously repeated Putin's line about Ukraine being run by Nazis. He is someone who has said that Ukraine should just give up some of its territory to Russia as the price of peace. And he had said during the campaign that if he won, his government wouldn't send so much as another bullet to Ukraine. And that actually ended up being a fairly popular policy, at least amongst a segment of voters that voted for Fico. Slovakia is a country where there is a fairly strong tradition of pro-Russian sentiment, although not among everyone. And indeed, one of the first things he did after getting into office in October was to announce that he was ending Slovakia's military aid to Ukraine. Having said that, as is often the case with Fico, his actions haven't been quite as strong as the rhetoric, and his government has since passed legislation that allows both private and public weapons exports to Ukraine. And he also went to Ukraine in January and had what sounded like a pretty positive meeting with the prime minister. So to whatever extent there were fears about a really strong pivot towards Moscow, that hasn't really happened yet. However, and I am now finally getting to Bad Week, one of the first things that Fico has tried to do since coming back to power is to overhaul the criminal code in a bunch of worrying ways, notably in ways that would reduce the criminal penalties for corruption.

D: And let me guess, is the accusation that some of these reforms are going to help Fico and his friends?

K: That is absolutely the complaint that has been made by the opposition. Fico himself has been previously personally implicated in several corruption scandals. There are people linked to the party that would literally be freed from prison because of the changes that his government is trying to push through. So just to give you an example, there is a key party backer called Norbert Bodor; he is currently facing 12 years in prison, he's been accused of money laundering. Under the changes, he might not face any time behind bars, which is nice and convenient. I mean, the gall of what his government has been trying to do here is quite breathtaking. Like, you're kicked out of office because you have presided over mass corruption, and then one of the first things that you do after you come back is try to change the law to make it easier for people to get away with the same kind of shit that was pulled for years under your rule. So very worrying, and the government also used a shortened legal procedure to try and get this legislation pushed through the parliament before legal experts would have time to take a proper look at it. 

D: As you say, this sounds really galling that he would like propose this bill. How is he defending himself, like is he just being completely shameless about it?

K: Well, he made this argument that the criminal code needed changing because sentencing in Slovakia is quite harsh compared to some other European countries. And it's true that there have been some quite long prison sentences handed out for corruption convictions for former members of the political elite in recent years, 19 years in at least one case that I read about. But Fico’s main justification for these changes is that the current system is biased against him and his party, so it needs changing. But it's fair to say that his opponents have rejected these arguments entirely. And the public also hasn't accepted these arguments. There were huge protests across Slovakia last month, tens of thousands of people gathering in Bratislava in particular. And the EU also suspended some funding from Fico’s government, they were really worried about this attempt to make it easier to get away with corruption. And politically, the opposition has been doing everything it can to stop these changes going ahead. The president, Zuzana Čaputová, she was one of the co-founders of Progressive Slovakia, and she was super against these legal changes. And now I'm finally getting to why Fico has had a bad week. thank you for your patience. Because Čaputová made a complaint against the changes at the Constitutional Court. And in a victory for the design of institutions in a way that stops bad leaders doing bad things, the court last week suspended most of those changes. 

D: Okay, but ‘suspended’ – so this is just a temporary thing?

K: It is just temporary. So what's happening is the reforms are being suspended while the Constitutional Court looks at the changes and eventually rules on whether they're constitutional or not. So they could come back and say that what Fico is trying to do is absolutely fine. We don't know yet. They also didn't suspend all of the changes. And one key thing that Fico wanted to do was abolish the Special Prosecutor's Office, which specialises in corruption cases, and was handling these cases connected to his party. That Special Prosecutor's Office is still being abolished, even though various EU bodies have expressed serious worries over what it means for the fight against corruption in Slovakia. But I still think it's a really big relief to see a court doing its job of providing a check on the people with power, especially in a region where, as discussed many times in this podcast, populist governments in Hungary and Poland have previously managed to reshape institutions to suit their own interests with horrible effects. So this story isn't over, we still have to see what Slovakia's Constitutional Court actually rules on this. But for now, I think we can chalk this up as a very good week for institutions doing their job of helping to keep democracy safe, and a very bad week for Robert Fico.

D: Okay, I'm convinced.

GOOD WEEK - 12’38”

K: Thank you. Who has had a good week? 

D: It's been a very good week for Swiss pensioners, after the Swiss public voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to increase the Swiss pension with an extra month’s payment each year, essentially a bonus 13th month of pension. 

K: Woohoo! Go Swiss pensioners!

D: Lucky things. The government were against this proposal, they advised voters to reject it saying that it would be too expensive. But 60% of the public supported this increase in pension, which brings the pension system into line with the Swiss salary system where employees also get an extra month of payment each November.

K: Yeah, that's quite common in a few different countries. Certainly in France, it's quite common to get a 13 month's pay. 

D: Yeah, also here in the Netherlands. I remember the first time it happened, I was like, ‘What is this? What happened?!’ 

K: Extra money? How nice! So this was voted through by referendum. And Switzerland is quite famous for this, right? They love their direct democracy.

D: They love their referenda, or referendums, I still haven't worked out which is right. As we've discussed before on the show, Switzerland holds a lot of them. Any constitutional change requires a referendum, any bill that is passed by Parliament can lead to a referendum if 50,000 signatures are collected against the law. And on top of that, with 100,000 signatures, you can launch a popular initiative, which is a change to the constitution. And this bonus pension referendum was a popular initiative launched by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions.

K: It's very strange, isn't it, that if you ask voters if they would like more money, they will actually vote yes to more money. 

D: Yes, it does maybe sound like an unsurprising result. But on the other hand, in the past, Swiss voters have often listened to government concerns about so-called expensive initiatives. For example, an initiative to give everyone a basic income was voted down in 2016, as was an initiative to enshrine the right to six weeks’ paid holiday for all employees, which… I can't quite believe that that was voted down. And actually a proposal to increase the pension payments by 10% was also voted down as recently as 2016.

K: Oh, interesting. It sounds like there's been quite a big shift in public opinion then since 2016.

D: Yeah, it would seem so. But some people are saying also that the success of this referendum could be down to the fact that it was constructed as a 13 month payment as opposed to a percentage rise. So it was just like, more convincing, it seems more reasonable. But the vote was also presumably influenced by the cost of living crisis that has grown enormously in Switzerland and across large swathes of the world, since the Swiss public last voted on a possible pension increase. What is certain is that this debate caught the attention of the Swiss public. This pensions debate, according to a study from the University of Zurich, led to the publishing of more articles in the Swiss press than any previous popular initiative that went to referendum.

K: Really! 

D: Yeah. And the public focus around this issue was also reflected in turnout. These referenda that take place every few months in Switzerland rarely get a turnout above 50%. But this vote got an unusually high turnout with more than 58% of people coming out to vote. Swiss political scientists are trying to pick apart how an initiative from the left ended up having such widespread support, including from traditionally conservative voters. And one argument that was used during the campaign that seems to resonate with more traditionally right-wing voters was along the lines of, if we're able to spend all those millions of euros on welcoming refugees into Switzerland, shouldn't we also treat our pensioners properly? 

K: I don't know quite what to make of that argument. How much is the monthly Swiss state pension at the moment?

D: The Swiss pension currently sits at the Swiss franc equivalent of 2,550 euros per month. 

K: What! That's so much money!

D: Well, you say that, but many experts say it's not enough to live on in Switzerland, especially in the cities. Switzerland, don't forget, is a country that according to many rankings has the highest cost of living of all the countries on this planet Earth.

K: It is very expensive. I once paid 40 euros for a pizza on a work trip, and it wasn't even very nice.

D: I think that's totally normal, which is completely barmy. The trade unions who are behind this popular initiative argued that an extra month of pension payment is no luxury, but something that is absolutely necessary. Many Swiss pensioners have been struggling, for example, to pay their health insurance premiums, which have exploded lately. There are also more and more reports of Swiss people having to continue working into their seventies, not because they want to, but because they have to, in order to make ends meet. And this wasn't the only question about pensions on this ballot, there was also a proposal to increase the pension age from 66 to 67. And in a further defeat to the government, the Swiss public also went against the government on that one. The result was in fact, even more convincing, with almost 75% of voters rejecting that proposal.

K: There's a part of me that's kind of like, YOLO! Good for you! And there's another part of me that's like generationally angry for this, because it feels like another example of a policy that's making life even more comfortable for baby boomers when we have, you know, huge generational inequality, and also like a pension crisis across Europe, right? Like, we've put so much public money into our pension systems to pay for these pensions at the expense of other things. What am I supposed to do with that? 

D: Yeah, I don't really know. It's also something I'm quite concerned about. I wonder whether there will be any pensions left by the time we get to retire, Katy. Yeah, it really is something that's going to have to be solved, because there are seismic demographic shifts happening gradually across Europe that are going to create many difficulties for Europe, particularly the paying out of pensions. If we move away from Switzerland for a second and into the EU, Eurostat recently suggested that the EU’s population could shrink by 6% by the end of the century, which will mean that there'll be considerably fewer workers paying into the tax system and relatively more old people taking out of the tax system. In fact, the EU is saying that by 2050 people over 65 will make up 30% of the population. They currently only make up 20% of the EU population. So it is concerning, and it's a topic I'd like to kind of dive into a bit more. So if anyone knows of a European who is thinking or talking imaginatively and brilliantly about solutions on this topic of ageing populations and pension reform, then send us an email, hello at europeans podcast.com. 

K: Well, I am looking forward to making this podcast with you, Dominic, well into our seventies to make up for our pension shortfall. But back to Switzerland for a second. This has passed, right? So the government has to find the money to make this policy work, presumably?

D: Yeah. And during the campaign, the government warned that they would have to raise taxes if this bill was passed. They said it would cost around 4 billion Swiss francs, which is about 4 billion euros. But the interior minister accepted the result with relative grace when the results came in. She said, ‘Democracy is alive and kicking in Switzerland.’ And the government will now put together a proposal for how to pay for it, and will begin the extra month’s payment in 2026. So, Good Week for Swiss pensioners.

* * *

K: Now that social media has become a weird and fragmented place, one of the places I'm finding nicest right now on social media is the Facebook group for our Patreon supporters. Because it's quite hard right now to figure out, like, where to find a sense of community on social media. So I'm very glad for this group, where people have been sharing things like tips for how to get policies changed for the better in your local area; thoughts on the recent farmer protests; and also embarrassment over offerings at this year's Sanremo Music Festival. But yeah, this Facebook group is one of the few nice corners left on the internet and we would love it if you joined us there as a supporter of this podcast.

D: Yes, if you've got any spare cash, we'd be so grateful if you’d head to patreon.com/europeanspodcast. You can find out there what we can offer you in exchange from a small monthly offering from you. 

K: Big thanks go to our latest supporters: Moriah, Alissa, Frank, Julian, Robert, Marcela, Kris, Lindy, Leslie, and to Sarah for increasing her pledge.

D: Thank you all so much.

INTERVIEW WITH CAITRÍONA BEAUMONT - 21’40”

K: We are joined for this week's interview by producer Katz. Hi, Katz!

KATZ LASZLO: Hi!

D: Hi Katz.

K: It's International Women's Day this week.

KL: It is, we've gathered the women of the team. 

K: And in Ireland, this day is being marked by two referendums, actually, on changing the constitution, Ine of them is about extending family rights to couples who aren't married. And the other is about a really interesting clause of the constitution that has been there since 1937. Can you please read us, Katz, article 41.2 of the Irish constitution?

KL: Yes, I can. Article 41.2 says, ‘In particular, the state recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the state a support without which the common good could not be achieved. The state shall therefore endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged, by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.’

K: What did you think when you read that for the first time.

KL: I was quite taken aback by how explicit it was. ‘Life within the home?’ What does it mean? Very vague and specific at the same time. What did you think? 

K: Well, I mean, there's a couple of things wrong with it. I was quite surprised when I found out a couple of weeks ago that this line is still in the constitution of Ireland in 2024. For one thing, this kind of suggestion that only women do unpaid work. And obviously, caring for people in the home, not all of that work is done by women, although a lot of it still is. And the other is this sort of implication in there that a woman's place *should* be in the home, or at least that like this is just how society is organised. So it feels a little out of date, to say the least. And I have to say, I've been thinking quite a lot lately about how powerful a constitution can be in enshrining women's rights. I'm lucky to live in a country, France, that just this week enshrined the right to abortion as a constitutional right. Which is, of course, the polar opposite of what the Irish constitution said until very recently. Until just a few years ago, of course, abortion was outlawed specifically in Ireland's constitution. But I feel really proud and grateful that I live in a country where this is an explicit right for me.

KL: Especially after the past few years, whether it's, you know, with what's going on in Poland, with Roe v. Wade, and all of the conversations around Europe that were spurred on by that. It's made it feel like women's rights, like quite basic women's rights, are sort of dependent on whoever's in charge, and like the political moment. And that's made me feel quite vulnerable. And like, we have to sort of be grateful when it is good and when we do have those rights, and not take them for granted. So it was quite emotional for me too, to see the news unfolding in France this week. 

K: Yeah, I feel kind of grateful that it's a thing that I will no longer have to be grateful for, because it's more permanent. 

KL: Exactly that. 

K: But to go back to Ireland, we were very curious about how this idea of ‘a woman's place in the home’ got into the Irish constitution in the first place, and also what Irish feminists had to say about it at the time. So we're very glad this week to speak to Cait Beaumont, a historian of Irish feminism and professor of social history at London Southbank University.

* * * 

K: Cait. thank you so much for joining us.

CAITRÍONA BEAUMONT: Thank you. Thank you for the invitation.

K: Really nice to have you here. If I sort of squint and look at this constitution very sort of charitably towards the people who wrote it, I can sort of see a grain of good intention in the way that this controversial clause was written. Like, it was kind of sort of saying, ‘Now, let's not forget what these little women are doing stuck at home. Like, that's important for society, too.’ Is that how it was sold to women at the time?

C: Yes, I think so. And I think it is fair to say that it could have been a really progressive and important acknowledgement of the often invisible work that women do within the home, particularly the care work. And that has been acknowledged by historians and by myself in my own work. And at the time of the debates that happened around this clause – mainly due to the fact that women protested against it, it caused a national debate – there were times when the Irish Prime Minister, the Taoiseach, Éamon de Valera, who was very much involved in the drafting of the Constitution. He said, ‘Look, why are you protesting? Here we are acknowledging the work that women do in the home.’ So yes, I think it's important to acknowledge that. There is a problem, however, and that is that these were just words. And there was no effort made whatsoever to actually provide any economic or social support to women doing that work. So it was an empty formula, empty words, that really, it didn't do anything for women whatsoever. 

KL: You already mentioned that women at the time gave quite a lot of pushback. Can you tell us a bit more about that? 

C: They did. So you have to think about the greater context. So, 1937. The constitution that was drafted was very much the new Irish Free State, which, it gained independence from Britain in 1922, to make its mark on the world as the independent democratic nation. However, when it comes to the role of women within that society, and it's important to remember that women played a really significant role in the national struggle, and in the War of Independence, and the civil war that led to this new Irish state. From 1922, a number of pieces of legislation were introduced which compromised the position of the rights of women as citizens. So when it came to 1937, women's organisations were already quite on standby for any further attempts to compromise women's right to equal citizenship in this democratic nation. So they were prepared, it didn't come out of the blue. So when the draft constitution was published, women's organisations, for example, the Women Graduates Association, the Irish Women's Workers Union, and the Joint Committee of Women’s Societies and Social Workers, they all immediately identified another attempt to limit women's citizenship rights, and they organised a really big national campaign. 

K: And what did they actually do? 

C: They got together, had emergency meetings, and they immediately identified a number of clauses in the constitution that set out different citizenship rights for women. The number of clauses included Article 9 and 16, which didn't have the words ‘without distinction of sex’ when it came to voting rights. That term, ‘without distinction of sex’ was in the Irish 1922 constitution. So that disappeared in these articles in 1937. And that raised immediate concerns. So they campaigned and said that we need those words put back. Éamon de Valera, the Irish Taoiseach, said, ‘Don't you – nothing to worry about here, you'll be fine. We're not trying to take away any of your rights.’ They didn't believe him. So they protested and they won that, they managed to get those words reinserted. Another, Ar.ticle 45 tried to argue that women and children had inadequate strength as citizens and therefore that they shouldn't have to do jobs that weren't suited to them. Because generally, these were the higher paid jobs, for example, industrial jobs. And like women at the time, the Irish Women's Workers’ Union said, ‘Well, what about women working in laundries? What about women doing domestic servant work? That's physically demanding work, but you're not telling women not to do that work.’ So again, you know, really clear gender bias. And that clause was also changed. So they succeeded in having that phrase, ‘the inadequate strength of women’, taken out, so they were very successful there. So two clauses that they were unable to change. Article 40.1. And that article says that citizens in Ireland have different social functions. This article was very concerning to women's organisations. 1937, you have the rise of the Nazis in Germany, you have discussions about social function and natural function of women at this time, which very much was the case in Germany. And here you have that phrase being used in the Irish constitution, immediately followed by article 41.2, which is, of course, the article that's been voted on on Friday, the 8th of March. The follow-on clause, 41.2, then says that women are naturally best placed in the home and that if they do work outside the home, it's to the neglect of their duties in the home. So again, these are intelligent women, they can see the connection between social function, that women have different social functions to men. And then they see that women are being told their primary social function is to be a wife and mother and to stay at home. And that's what they campaigned against. But they were unsuccessful, as we know, in getting changes to either of those clauses.

KL: The church was obviously a really powerful force in Irish society at the time that this constitutional clause was written. How much did they have to do with this making it into the final draft? 

C: No, I think it's no surprise to anyone to know that Ireland and really up until the present time is very much dominated by Catholic social teaching. And indeed, a considerable majority of the population are practising Catholics. So you know, in the 1930s, there would have been about 90% plus of the population. But I think the tension here, and what becomes complicated here, is that the Irish constitution was a constitution for a secular nation, it should have been, and however, the Catholic Church had a very special status within the Constitution. And there are other aspects of the Constitution that go beyond article 41.2, which would lead to the banning of divorce, birth control, and abortion. The wording of article 41.2 is taken nearly word from word from Catholic social teaching. So the wording about women's natural function, women having duties in the home, the fact that women should stay close to the home – all of that wording was very well known, and was accepted Catholic teaching at this time. 

KL: Moving our focus to now. Unfortunately, women still do a lot of the housework and the caregiving, which isn't paid work. And I'm wondering, is there any effort within this push to update the Constitution now, for the state to start financially recognising homekeeping as labour, even while they're removing the idea that it's women's work?

C: Yeah, unfortunately, not that I can see evidence of. And I think this has led to an unfortunate division around the campaign of whether to vote yes or no for this change in the Constitution. And that's because any government, I think – I live here in London, I think the British government and the Irish government are very cautious about being seen to promise proper, adequate financial and societal support for carers. Because the cost is just so huge, you know. We are heading towards not only a climate crisis, we're heading towards an ageing crisis where Western societies, industrialised societies, we're all living longer and the costs of care are ever increasing. So I think all governments, all political parties, are very cautious about what they promise. I would still advocate a vote ‘yes, yes’ – that's yes to changing the concept of the family, and yes to taking out article 41.2. It's inadequate. It's an uncomfortable, inadequate wording, I think no one can deny this. However, it is a stepping stone for the electorate to turn to political parties and demand legislation, legislation that will provide adequate support for people who are carers and those who receive care and to improve and enhance the quality of their lives.

KL: If this led to that it will be absolutely revolutionary. Through this referendum, a lot of Irish people must be learning for the first time quite how explicit and formalised female oppression was. And I'm wondering if you think that increased awareness about how formalised sexism has been can teach us something about how to advance gender equality now? 

C: Yes, I absolutely do. I think knowledge and education is so important. And it's really beholden on me as a social historian, as a feminist historian, and others to make known the experiences and the experiences of inequality that women in particular had to live through in Irish society. There's been a huge and really brilliant 10-year decade of centenaries, which has been marking the 10 years of revolution, and the pathway towards Irish independence. And there's been some really amazing work done there, and people revisiting uncomfortable, difficult histories, you know, kind of contested histories and talking about difficult things, for example, gender violence against women. That has been really important in opening up those debates about what women's lives were really like. And I think it is happening, that the debate and discussion around this referendum on the 8th of March is doing something similar. People don't know, and I tend my own daughters – my daughters in their twenties, and my nieces, nephews – and I'm constantly sending stuff, to the point they're going, ‘Please stop.’ But I'm always trying to encourage them to know about this, because they need to know the fight that has been fought on their behalf. And here we are in 2024, 87 years later. It's kind of unbelievable. And we still have this clause in our constitution, for a progressive state that Ireland is supposed to be. Those women would be rolling in their graves, they wouldn't be able to believe that it's still in the Constitution. And if it remains in the Constitution after Friday… I sort of despair, somewhat. But the only other thing is that you can't give up. Because these women never gave up. And that's why I study them. And I've spent my whole career studying women activists, because their just unbelievable energy and commitment and willingness to keep going, despite the endless setbacks, is an inspiration.

K: This referendum comes six years after Ireland voted to overturn its constitutional ban on abortion. At the time, the prime minister, Leo Varadkar, he said there was a quiet revolution taking place in Ireland towards being a modern society. Do you agree with that assessment of the social changes that we've seen in Ireland in recent years?

C: Yes, I think for someone who's an Irish citizen – I left Ireland in 1991 to study in the UK, and didn't return. But I, as a teenager, I grew up in the 1980s Ireland, which was a really pretty bleak place to be. You had a ban on divorce, you had a ban on abortion, you had a ban on access to birth control. I can remember the ridiculous situation, I was a student in University College Dublin, where the students’ union would put up a dispensing machine for condoms, and it would get taken down, and they would put it up, and it would get taken down, and they just – you know, it was laughable. But on a more serious note, we now know of the sex abuse scandals going on in the Catholic schools. We know about the Magdalene Laundries, where women were incarcerated sometimes for their whole lives for acting in a way that was deemed not in line with Catholic social teaching, or kind of Irish values. What's happened since I've left Ireland has been quite transformative. The dismantling of the power of the Catholic Church and Catholic influence in Ireland has been a quiet revolution. And I think that Ireland now is a progressive nation. You know, it has equal marriage rights. I have to say it's quite difficult to access abortion. But legally, it is there. I think a quiet revolution has happened. But then of course, that doesn't mean that Ireland is perfect. And I think that this whole debate around care, and who pays for care, I think that that should be the next revolution. It may not be quiet, it might need to be noisier. But it certainly needs to be done.

* * *

KL: It's not particularly hopeful, but I do think it's just so astonishing, like how long and how much effort it takes for just really basic things like not having it written into the constitution that we should be saying at home.

K: Mm hmm. 

KL: Eighty-seven years. It's just so much work that could have been spent on other things. 

K: Yeah, it's both frustrating. And also kind of inspiring. 

KL: Yeah. 

K: As Cait said, people just kept chipping away at this.

KL: And continue to.

K: And continue to. And that's what it takes to make change happen. Thank you so much to Cait, for joining us. 

KL: Yes, it was really great.

K: I first heard about this referendum via Impact, which is a newsletter about gender and politics around the world. It's available in English and in French, and it is great. So thanks for drawing this to our attention, Team Impact. You'll find a link to that newsletter in the show notes.

THE INSPIRATION STATION - 38’35”

K: Time to head to the Inspiration Station. What have you been enjoying this week, Dominic?

D: Well, I'm in an incredibly busy period of performing life again, with multiple rehearsal processes and tours overlapping in different European countries.

K: Crawling on the floor a lot. 

D: Yes. I haven't had so much time to enjoy the diversely wonderful culture of Europe apart from at work. So instead, I'm going to encourage everyone to go out there and enjoy some live music, because producer Katz Laszlo flagged up a study to me earlier in the week from Switzerland, where a team of scientists have scientifically proven that there are psychological benefits of listening to music that is being performed specifically live. The study claims that the emotional reaction to music is more intense when it is live than when you are listening to a recording. 

K: That's definitely true. Like, I definitely am more likely to cry at a live performance than something on Spotify. 

D: Yeah, although I also think I do sometimes really get moved just like sitting at home listening to something.

K: Sitting down. Typical Dutch resident.

D: True! I liked Katz's summary that she posted on our Slack channel. She said, ‘Hurray, there's a reason to still fund live performances, and live music does more to us, even though it's less perfect.’

K: Yay! 

D: Oh, and a small sidebar. If you're in the Netherlands, you could actually come and see me perform live in a piece of post-apocalyptic music theatre in fact, I'll put a link to the tour dates of this trippy show that I'm crawling around in a lot right now in the show notes. 

K: Amazing. 

D: As you're probably aware, funding for the arts isn't like top of the political agenda right now in most of Europe. It's being chipped away at in many places. In fact, it's being more than chipped away at, it's been like axed to smithereens in many parts of Europe. And our friends at the European Cultural Foundation are one of the lead organisations behind a campaign called Cultural Deal EU that they are running in the run-up to the European Parliamentary elections, which are in June this year. I'll post a link to that open letter directed at European politicians. It ends with a sentence that I found quite moving: ‘Without culture, the very future of Europe is under threat.’ And with that in mind, what have you been enjoying Katy that's protecting the future of Europe?

K: Well, I've got some non-live music to recommend. Because you might have heard at the beginning of this year, the exciting news that our friend Jim Barne, the composer of the theme music for this very podcast, Jim has a musical comedy coming out in London's legendary western theatre district in April, along with his co writer Kit Buchan. The show is called ‘Two Strangers Carry A Cake Across New York’, and it is a delightful show, I was very lucky to catch it when it was showing at a smaller theatre in London over Christmas. But it has now made the big time, because it received such amazing reviews. And it's now going to be showing at the much bigger Criterion Theatre from April. Which is great news for people who live in London. But I'm very happy to report that if you don't live in the UK, you can now enjoy eight of the wonderful songs from Jim’s show, because there's a studio recording and it's on Spotify. The songs obviously make more sense if you know the show. But even if you don't, there's some very beautiful, funny and sad songs in there about relationships with parents, and also just trying to figure out who you are and figure out how to be happy.

[SOUND CLIP]

K: Strongly recommended listening.

D: I can't wait to see this show when I'm back in London in the spring.

K: But for now, you can sit down and enjoy it on Spotify.

HAPPY ENDING - 42’19”

D: My happy ending this week comes from Berlin, where some researchers at Carite University have discovered that a teeny tiny fish, the 11-millimetre-long Danionella cerebrum, makes noises as loud as 140 decibels.

K: Tiny but loud. A lot like my son. 

D: Yes, just like your baby. Actually, much louder than your baby, because 140 decibels is as loud as a gunshot.

K: Wow! 

D: These are apparently the loudest sounds discovered yet from such a small fish.

K: That's amazing. I mean, do we know why these tiny little fish are making such a racket?

D: The scientists suspect that it might be to do with communication. The fish evolved in murky waters in Myanmar. So maybe they made the noise because they couldn't see each other very clearly.

K: I'm here!

D: The Danionella fish is already a fave of scientists because it's translucent, meaning that you can see how its insides are working without too much complicated equipment. The discovery of these incredibly loud noises from the little fishes was actually somewhat accidental. The lead author told the BBC people were just walking past the fish tanks and they could hear the sounds and we're wondering where they were coming from. And it turned out they were coming from the fish themselves. It's extraordinary, because they're so tiny and so loud. 

K: That's amazing. I mean, how do we know how something that small is even making such a loud sound? 

D: Yeah, so apparently they use their muscles to pull on a rib, which they then release onto their swim bladder, using it as a kind of very loud tiny drum.

K: Wow.

D: Imagine if we could use our rib bones as a drum against our bladder. We could start a band using only bodily sounds.

K: We have enough side projects to be getting on with, I think. Can we hear the little fish? 

D: Yes.

[SOUND CLIP]

* * *

K: Happy voting to our Irish friends voting in tomorrow's referendum. We can post the results, Dominic, on the numerous social media platforms where we are continuing to lurk. So come and find us on Instagram, Twitter, Mastodon and Threads. Just type in The Europeans podcast.

D: Otherwise listen out for our ribs drumming against our bladders and you’ll hear us. 

K: That's not very nice. We wwere produced by me and Wojciech Oleksiak.

D: And thanks to Katz Laszlo for joining us for the interview this week. We'll be back next week as usual in your feeds on Thursday. In the meantime, tell some friends about us, I’m feeling needy again. 

K: Have a good week, everyone!

D: Uf Widerluege! 

K: Ahoj!