Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail)

I am glad this debate is taking place today. We could be tempted to look back at the success of the referendum campaign and expect that any future referenda on developments in Europe will be passed as easily, but that is not the case. On this occasion people held their breath and voted "Yes" because they felt they had to. There is much happening in the European Union currently. We have seen a proposal for eurobonds and the German version of that proposal. There have also been proposals for further fiscal and banking integration. Some of these proposals may well require a referendum here, but we will not know for sure until a treaty is put together incorporating the proposals. As normal, the Attorney General will then advise as to whether a referendum is required.

It will be necessary for a different approach to be taken with regard to a future referendum and the Taoiseach must be more engaged in the process. We cannot take anything for granted and the people want to hear the leader of their country engage on the issues. There should also be equality of media time for the opposing factions. It is only fair that both sides have equal coverage. However, it is unfair for referenda campaigns to be used as an opportunity by some parties, particularly smaller political parties, to jockey for position and advantage and for them to get inordinate media time to do that. This issue must be addressed. While it is fair that the "Yes" and "No" sides get equal coverage for a referendum, there is a case to be made that where parties get disproportionate coverage during a referendum campaign, that coverage will be examined in the overall context of coverage over the calendar year so that coverage can be balanced between parties. It is galling to see unelected MEPs getting huge coverage on television that will enhance their profiles. During the recent campaign, unelected members of Sinn Féin also got huge profile coverage on television that may be helpful in future election campaigns. It is unfair for them to get such advantages during referendum campaigns and if it happens, this should be balanced out throughout the year by the radio and television companies when they come to analyse their coverage and whether it is fair and balanced in accordance with the legislation. This issue is urgent and what I suggest might be a way of dealing with it, without diverting from the issue of fairness in a referendum campaign. It is not right for the Government to use all of its resources either to promote one side or other in a campaign. These issues must be considered and addressed urgently.

I wish to pay tribute to the Referendum Commission, which has done a good job since the second Lisbon treaty referendum. Its work has been helped by the excellence of the judges appointed to it and of its members, including the Clerks of the Dáil and Seanad. The commission has educated the public and has sometimes contradicted what the political establishment has said. It is healthy that people get such information in a democracy. However, it is not healthy that certain parties deliberately muddy the waters and contradict what is being said by the Referendum Commission. All sorts of allegations were made that the Referendum Commission was wrong and that it was issuing wrong information. A case was taken to court at the last moment, but it was not accepted because the argument was not made. However, sufficient confusion was sown as to cast doubt in the minds of certain voters. I have no doubt but that the court case had an effect. It might not have had the effect desired by Sinn Féin, but it did reduce turnout.

There are lessons to be learned. We need a major public information campaign in advance of any future referenda. We also need more engagement with opposition parties than was the case in the most recent referendum. When Minister, Deputy Micheál Martin engaged proactively with opposition parties in previous referenda. Not only do the Government parties need to engage with other parties, they also need to engage with the public so as to bring people with them. At the time of the debate on the Lisbon treaty, we had the Constitutional Convention on the Future of Europe, which included representatives from all countries and civil society which met and came up with proposals that eventually led to the acceptance of the treaty. That helped bring people along. While the Forum on Europe became unwieldy to some extent and holding its meetings in Dublin Castle was probably not the best way to engage with the public, it was a place where the representatives of the public and civil society could come together and debate Ireland's future in Europe. We need something like that urgently, because if we are to solve the euro crisis, major changes lie ahead of us.