Sir, – I can’t help but marvel at the hard neck of many of our Opposition parties as they struggle desperately to disassociate themselves from the Government over the referendum debacle. Anyone unfamiliar with the lead-up to the referendums could be forgiven for assuming that all the Opposition parties, with the exception of Aontú, had campaigned vociferously against the wording of both.
But this pleading of innocence will not go down well with the general public who understood only too well that these referendums were ill-judged, poorly thought out and worded so vaguely as to be open to all sorts of interpretations.
Opposition parties can usually give the Government a good kicking when they get it wrong; but not this time. They were just as guilty as the Government and the electorate will not forget. – Yours, etc,
TREVOR TROY,
Your top stories on Friday: Warnings issued as Storm Bert set to batter Ireland; the false election promises being made to under-40s
Johnny Watterson: Conor Niland’s The Racket is a seminal book in the sports genre
Ballsbridge mews formerly home to Irish musician for €1.95m
‘I could have gone to California. At this rate, I probably would have raised about half a billion dollars’
Baile Átha Buí,
Co na Mí.
Sir, – A referendum cannot be won on vague notions or romantic ideas; the fine detail is important. People clamouring for a border poll need to take note. – Yours, etc,
AIDAN McGRATH,
Waterford.
Sir, – One of the more curious reactions to the referendum results has been the suggestion that they are somehow a vindication of the so-called “citizens’ assembly”. For example, Una Mullally accuses the Government of committing the “arrogant” and “unforgiveable” offence of choosing a referendum wording which differed from the wording suggested by the citizens’ assembly (Opinion & Analysis, March 11th).
Imagine, a democratically elected Government choosing not to accept a course of action dictated to it by a tiny group of unelected people – the cheek!
In reality, the difference between the citizens’ assembly and Government wordings of the care amendment (between “taking reasonable measures” to support care and “striving” to do so), while significant in legal terms, was not particularly significant as a matter of plain English. Given the sheer scale of the defeat of the referendum, it seems very unlikely that this subtle distinction would have been enough to prevent the landslide rejection of the amendment.
The real failure by the Government was not in bypassing the citizens’ assembly – as it is perfectly entitled to do – but in bypassing the democratically elected Houses of the Oireachtas and preventing any kind of parliamentary scrutiny of the wordings, ramming them through both the Dáil and Seanad over the course of just five sitting days. There was no real debate, no scrutiny, and no amendments were accepted. Pre-legislative scrutiny – itself a farcical process – would have at least led to some rudimentary analysis of the wordings if it had been allowed to proceed.
When Fine Gael was elected to government in 2011 its manifesto lamented that the “all-powerful Executive has turned the Dáil into an observer of the political process rather than a central player”, declaring: “This has got to change”.
It is a sad reflection on the party’s 13 years in office that parliamentary scrutiny has become markedly worse in that time, culminating as it has in the humiliating fiasco of the recent referendums. – Yours, etc,
BARRY WALSH,
Clontarf,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – If governments feared No votes in referendums, then they would only hold them if they were certain to win. We would have no debate, no change, and no progress, and our little democracy would be the worse for it. – Yours, etc,
JOHN FAGAN,
Crookedwood,
Co Westmeath.
Sir, – The recent referendums revealed not only a gulf between Government and country, they also showed that south Dublin’s coastline is the heartland of Irish extremism. Out of 39 constituencies, the only one to vote for any of the proposals was Dún Laoghaire. In neighbouring Rathdown, the result was also very close.
These embattled townlands, awash with far-left misinformation and misled populist demagogues, deserve not our scorn but our sympathy. What can be done to prevent further self-radicalisation of these vulnerable communities? – Yours, etc,
AIDAN HARTE,
Naas,
Co Kildare.
Sir, – I shall strive to drag myself to the polling station to cast my vote in the European and local elections in June. I shall endeavour to endure the subsequent democratic results. – Yours, etc,
PATRICK O’BYRNE,
Phibsborough,
Dublin 7.
Sir, – Few politicians campaigned from house to house, where they might have been able to clear the confusion felt by many of the electorate. The promise to provide everyone with an explanatory booklet did not materialise, mainly because not enough time was left for delivery.
What a waste of money!
The lethargic attitude of the Government left no chance of success. – Yours, etc,
MARGARET BUTLER,
Booterstown,
Co Dublin.
A chara, – Far from being disappointed, embarrassed or shocked by the results of the recent referendums, I would like to counter that the Government should be delighted by the fact that having run such an incoherent and confusing campaign, almost a third of the electorate still voted for the proposed amendments.
Given how bad it could have been, this should be seen as a positive when they complete a postmortem on the results. – Is mise,
ALAN BUCKLEY,
Kells,
Co Kilkenny.
Sir, – Some, on the Yes side, argued that people were confused by the wording of the proposed amendments.
For many No voters, there was no confusion about the significance of the word “mother”.
They perfectly well understood the implication of the proposal to delete it from Article 41.2.2 and roundly rejected its proposed deletion. – Yours, etc,
MÁIRE WHITE,
Kinlough,
Co Leitrim.
Sir, – In Jennifer Bray’s list of Yes side excuses (“Five reasons why the Yes side failed and the No campaign won the day”, Analysis, March 9th), I would look at number five, the editing of Leo Varadkar’s comments on social media. From my own experience and the experience of others dealing with health service and other bureaucrats, the full piece would have made me even more convinced to vote No. Why? Because Mr Varadkar has form here.
Where controversy arises over a subject, he is often the first to say that some concession or compromise would be a good idea or something will be done in the future and then leaves it to someone else to explain that no compromise, concession, or promise is possible.
A relatively trivial case is the D Hotel in Drogheda. Mr Varadkar said that a “hybrid” solution with some part for tourists might be possible and left it to the hotel owners and Roderic O’Gorman a few days later to say that it isn’t going to happen.
And when we consider the horror for the victims that is the supposed redress scheme for defective blocks here in Donegal, is it any surprise that the people of Donegal were the most sceptical of anything said by him or his Government?
My criticism of Mr Varadkar is above my name. Too often Government attacks on opponents are statements spoon-fed to the media by unnamed Government officials or sources. – Yours, etc,
LIAM MULLIGAN,
Letterkenny,
Co Donegal.
Sir, – I am an Irish citizen who has lived in the US for about 15 years. Since I’ve lived here, it’s become a truism that the mainstream media and political system lost touch with decisive segments of the electorate, and that this was one of the factors that led to the election of Donald Trump to the presidency.
I remember how utterly blindsided most of the media, as well as the leadership of both political parties, were by that event.
During the same period of time, populist outsiders have irreversibly (and often quite suddenly) changed the course of politics in the UK, France, Poland, Brazil, India, and many other countries.
It’s interesting to speculate why Ireland has, so far, escaped this populist wave.
Regardless of the reasons, however, Irish people should not assume the trend will continue forever.
In this context, the profound division between Irish political elites and their electorate demonstrated in the recent referendums is striking.
It’s a dangerous thing for the political system to become so clearly unmoored from the will of the people. – Yours, etc,
COLM P KELLEHER,
Cambridge,
Massachusetts, US.