Dáil debates

Wednesday, 18 June 2008

1:00 pm

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 62: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the role the Government played in the Lisbon treaty campaign; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23886/08]

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government strongly supported the Lisbon treaty as an agreement that would allow the European Union to work more effectively in the interests of the member states, including Ireland. In this we were joined by a number of political parties and representative groups, and we are very grateful for their support. We are deeply disappointed with the outcome of the referendum. The campaign was hard-fought and the people have made their decision, which must be respected.

The Government set out last December to provide the electorate with information on the treaty. An explanatory pamphlet was published in December and a detailed 22-page guide to the treaty was published in February. This guide was distributed to all households in the country in April. These two documents were also distributed to all public libraries, citizens advice centres and Departments. A comprehensive White Paper on the treaty was published in April containing a detailed analysis of the treaty's provisions. This too was distributed to public libraries and copies were made available to the public on request. A dedicated website, www.reformtreaty.ie, was established which contained comprehensive information about the treaty and copies of all the above publications.

The Government established the independent Referendum Commission. Under the Referendum Act 2001, the Referendum Commission is expected to prepare statements containing a general explanation of the subject matter of the referendum and to publish and distribute these statements. The Referendum Commission was provided with a budget of €5 million. This represented an increase of more than 20% over the amount provided to the commission for its work on the second Nice referendum.

My party held up to 60 meetings across the country to heighten awareness and understanding of the treaty. In addition, we participated in the meetings of the National Forum on Europe, with other political parties and in the series of public meetings organised by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs. The Deputy's question relates to the Government's role, but many political parties distributed leaflets. In the weeks before the vote, there was intensive canvassing to maximise support for the treaty at the referendum.

We now need to reflect on the way forward for Ireland and for the European Union, but this will take time. There is a need to avoid snap judgments and hasty decisions at what is a very important point in the history of Ireland's hugely successful engagement with the European Union, which has been a central pillar of our national development since 1973.

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I tabled this question before the result of the referendum became known. I would have much preferred if the result was otherwise but it is important to recognise the result. I hope my supplementary questions are taken in the context in which they are asked.

Is it difficult for the Minister to operate within the parameters of the McKenna judgment when dealing with a referendum? From the point of view of the Opposition, it is difficult. Will he agree there is something inherently wrong when in the region of 96% of elected representatives are given the same air time as 4% of elected representatives? I will give an abstract example. If a referendum were to be held on the question that the sun should shine every day, would it be necessary for the national broadcast media to provide 50% of air time to an opponent of such a concept? There is a mechanism whereby there can be abuse of the system if someone has access to that time. Has the Government any plans to look at the impact of the McKenna judgment on democratic representation? Has the Minister plans to look at how the role of the Referendum Commission might be changed, evolved or otherwise?

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One must be careful in the immediate aftermath of a referendum which produced a disappointing decision to make comments on the rules of the game, so to speak. People may be of the opinion that one was complaining on the basis that one lost and therefore wished to change the rules. On the other hand, I accept the validity of much of what the Deputy has said. If there were to be a referendum on whether the sun should shine every day there would be an obligation for an opposition to come forward and to create 50% air time for that opposing view. This may be a facetious argument but there have been other examples and the Good Friday Agreement is a good example of a referendum where the same situation applied.

The Government has no plans to change the rules and neither do I. However, a referendum is the voice of the people. The view has been expressed that certain groups may use that facility to take a particular stance on the basis of achieving a profile for subsequent election battles. There is then a danger that the modus operandi that now exists could actually incentivise people to take a particular stance or position in order to ensure they can have the 50% air time and profile which is very significant. That said, there are lessons to be learned on the substance of the debate more than the rules of the game.

Given the complexity of the proposition put to the people, we need to reflect on how it was presented to them. The media soundbite means that one will hear five minutes of one person saying something is black which is counter-argued by five minutes of another person saying it is white, with the punters trying to arbitrate between the two. A far more considered treatment in public sector broadcasting terms of such a complex treaty could have been better handled by us. I do not mean this to be a criticism but it is something which we should consider.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A brief supplementary question from Deputy Timmins.

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The forum on Europe presented a very good information booklet which I acknowledge. Does the Minister envisage a change in the legislation dealing with the Referendum Commission? Will the commission continue and should it begin its work earlier in a campaign? In fairness to the commission, the subject was complex and there are time constraints. We need to consider changing the legislation, which ultimately would facilitate the public in the receipt of information.

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The independent Referendum Commission did a good job but the expectations are too high within the timeframe constraints. I thought the booklet, which was issued to every household, was straightforward and simple. People may have different views on the advertisements but everyone has views on every type of advertisement. People argue about sports and everything else, and such analysis is subjective.

I made a comment on my canvassing experience which might have been misinterpreted. I was busily talking about the Council of Ministers and the European Commission and I could see the glazed expression of the person. As Deputy Jackie Healy-Rae might say, I put the tin hat on it by saying that the independent Referendum Commission said such and such. I could see the person did not recognise any of the institutions I had referred to. This is the challenge we face. To expect the commission to establish itself and, within the space of two months, become known to everyone is unrealistic.