Referendum outcome tainted

“Somehow politicians have become convinced that negative campaigning pays off in elections.” – George McGovern (1922 – 2012)

LAST week I praised the Government lavishly for their efforts in bringing an opportunity to the people of Ireland to enshrine the rights of children in the Irish Constitution. This week, with the referendum safely passed, albeit by a smaller margin than might have been expected, we are faced with failure on the part of the Government.

 

The Supreme Court ruling with regard to the spending of public money “wrongfully” on the campaign, tarnishes the whole process and raises a number of very serious questions. The obvious one is why the government parties would be so stupid. I do not use that word lightly, as to use public money in the way they did in the aftermath of the McKenna judgement.

The second is why the opposition was asleep at the wheel. In particular I address this question to Sinn Féin and, to a lesser extent, the fragmented grouping which call themselves the United Left Alliance. In the past, these groups have been extremely astute in pointing out weaknesses in Government positions with regard to matters of this sort. This time around, when they share common ground with the Government, they have failed to carry out any examination it would seem. What it illustrates is the practice of politics as usual and the turning of a blind eye to what they might otherwise have leapt on.

Despite the fact I passionately disagree with Mark McCrystal’s position on the referendum, he must be lauded for his willingness to take the case that he did. The personal implications if he had lost the case would have been significant and he has stated on the record that he received no financial assistance in taking the case, so he deserves respect for his efforts. What his case exposed was a shoddy approach on the part of the Government to this extremely important referendum. They were aided in their failure by the seeming indifference or blindness on the part of the Opposition because they were on the same side. There are implications in this for Irish politics. Consensus has become a necessary and regular part of the game in recent years but if it leads to an abdication of duty on the part of the Opposition, then it needs to be questioned.

There is no doubt in most people’s minds that the financial situation the nation finds itself in demands serious attention and that parties put aside petty differences for the greater good of the country. This is not licence for the opposition to save time, effort and resources in carrying out its function simply because it agrees with the coalition on a particular issue. Agreeing in principle with the insertion of children’s rights into the constitution is right and proper as a position but there remains an additional responsibility to ensure that nothing happens in the campaign that might jeopardise the safe passing of the referendum. This did not happen in the most recent case.

The discrepancy in turnout between referenda and general elections is worth noting. The national turnout was again less than 35% and as Deputy Joe Carey noted in a news release “We have now had six referendums in the recent decades with a turnout lower than 35%.” This again begs the question why the parties can mobilise the troops to get their candidates through the doors of Leinster House but not to vote on the major issues referenda address by their very nature.

The McKenna Principles have once again been reasserted by the Supreme Court ruling on the McCrystal case and this in itself is heartening. It has been reported that the Government used over €1 million to fund the information campaign, which breached the McKenna ruling. Given that this was a reasonably straightforward proposition why did the Government need to fund anything that was essentially supplemental or a slant on the straight facts being produced by the Referendum Commission? This entity exists to provide the voters with the exact facts of what they will be voting on, so what more was needed is a question which is worth examining.

I am more than aware that certain elements on the ‘No’ side engaged in some scaremongering around the vote but the answer to such tactics is to beat them not to join them. If the Government and the Opposition had simply stated that the straight facts of the matter would be issued by the Referendum Commission and then deployed spokespeople to address the ‘No’ side on television and radio then they could have stood above the fray and perhaps saved the taxpayers a good deal of money.

Despite the genuine import of this recent campaign the Government have been embarrassed and the Opposition have been found wanting. There is no denying that it passed and, in my opinion, the right outcome was achieved, but the manner in which it has been achieved is bordering on the ridiculous.

The failure to engage the population to the point where they will actually vote, the breaching of the McKenna Principles and the failure of the Opposition to pick the Government up on their failures amount to little more than a disgrace.

Politics is a profession for those who engage in it. For those who are subject to it, it amounts to a life structuring entity. To realise that those who create this structure are not entirely engaged with making the best structures is a shattering and deeply unsettling realisation. The kinds of policies and legislation which are concomitant with engaged political representatives doing their jobs in the best interests of those they represent have not been evident in Ireland for some time now and this referendum has illustrated this fact.

The political game being played by elected representatives, engaged in fractious faction fights to save their own skins seems, yet again, to have taken precedence over the good of the people for whose best interests they are supposed to be fighting.