INSIDE POLITICS:If the Government forfeits public trust by not naming the Lisbon poll date soon, it will only fuel the sense of suspicion the No side is counting on, writes Stephen Collins
THE RELUCTANCE of the Government to name the date for the Lisbon Treaty referendum is foolish and politically dangerous. It is perfectly designed to generate frustration among Fianna Fáil's allies on the Yes side and fuel paranoia on the No side about the implications of the treaty. Uncommitted voters may well begin to feel that something sinister is afoot and respond by voting No.
Its not as if there is any mystery about when the referendum will take place. The Taoiseach and his senior Ministers have given repeated hints that it will be in the last week in May or the first week in June. Bertie Ahern has even given a commitment that it would be held in or around 90 days after the establishment of the Referendum Commission.
Given that the commission was formally called into being on Thursday, the most likely date for the referendum would appear to be Thursday, June 5th, precisely 91 days later, but a week or so either side of that date would be compatible with the commitment.
The Taoiseach's decision to play ducks and drakes about the precise referendum date has all the hallmarks of his approach to the naming of the date for last year's general election. Again there was no great mystery about the broad timing of the election, but Ahern dragged out the naming of the date and eventually sprang a surprise of sorts with an early Sunday morning trip to Áras an Uachtaráin to ask President Mary McAleese for a dissolution.
Nobody, not even those close to him, knew what the Taoiseach was playing at but, given that he ended up winning the election, who is to say he made a mistake? "It's not for nothing that Bertie Ahern is where he is and we are where we are, so there is no point trying to figure out what he is up to on the referendum," said one colleague.
Of course, there are some obvious cute political advantages in not naming the day. If the No campaign is left guessing for some time about the exact date, it may find it hard to decide on the precise shape of its campaign and make such decisions as booking advertising hoarding space.
The absence of a date also leaves the Government free to follow legal advice that the prohibition on the spending of taxpayers' money on the Yes campaign, arising from the McKenna judgement, does not kick in until the date is formally set. More importantly, the refusal to be pinned down leaves the Government free to respond to some unexpected event that might make a delay a political imperative.
However, the downside of not naming the date would appear to be much more significant than any likely political gain. All things being equal, everybody knows that it will be held around the beginning of June so the No side can plan for that date with a high degree of confidence.
On the issue of the McKenna judgment, the Government has given a commitment that it will respect the spirit of the decision and will not use taxpayers' money to promote the Yes vote, even though it could do so legally. The information leaflet published last December and likely to be distributed to homes around the country is a case in point.
Whatever the No side may claim, the leaflet is a reasonably fair and accurate summary of what is in the Lisbon Treaty and indicates that the Government does not intend to abuse either the spirit or the letter of the McKenna judgement. However, that only reinforces the point that there is nothing to be gained from creating the impression that it has some devious plan to do so up its sleeve.
On a more fundamental level, a constitutional referendum is a very different animal to a general election and different rules apply. The electorate may have a high tolerance level for political chicanery when the politicians are trying to outmanoeuvre each other in the chase for power. Voters are capable of responding very differently if they come to the conclusion that an attempt is being made to pull the wool over their eyes.
While Bertie Ahern has shown himself to be the master of winning elections, he has lost two important referendums, one on an EU treaty and the other on the issue of abortion. The devious political skills that make him so formidable in elections clearly do not have the same resonance in referendums. It is something that is beginning to worry many of those on the same side as him in the referendum campaign.
Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny articulated that concern yesterday, remarking that the failure to name the referendum date was "damaging the prospects of a positive result as it adds to public confusion about the treaty and it prevents the many groups and organisations that wish to support its ratification from finalising their campaign plans". The essential ingredient for anybody trying to win a referendum is generating public trust. The treaty is, by definition, a highly technical and difficult document which the vast majority of people, including those campaigning on both sides, may not fully understand.
There is nothing out of the ordinary about this. Most Bills passed by the Dáil are written in a complex legal language that most people cannot be expected to understand. The point about having Dáil debates is that the difficult points can be thrashed out, in the language of the lay person, with amendments being devised by the legal experts if required.
The point about the referendum is that the people will have to take the arguments of both sides on trust. If the Government begins to forfeit trust by being too clever by half, it will be the biggest boost the No campaign could hope for. The sooner the referendum day is named, so that the real campaigning can begin, the better.