Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

If that is the case, is it merely a cosmetic exercise? If the Minister looks into his own heart, which I am sure he is doing regularly, he knows that people do not want a cosmetic exercise. The anger, the suspicions and the lack of trust are real. Senator John Crown made the point yesterday that we are not talking about any single lobby group. We are talking about the middle ground. We are not talking about extreme lefts or rights or anything else. Senator Cullinane and I know it in Tipperary as we listen.

That is why the debate on Senator Barrett's amendment is so important. We cannot argue for a constitutional referendum, but surely given the logic of what he is suggesting, even if it is only to shore up the plebiscite and subsequent legislation in a minimalist way, the Minister would have to accept what he has put forward. I do not hear much party politics at all, in this Chamber, buíochas mór le Dia, but I must say this: if the Minister had heard what we were saying on the plebiscite and admits the weakness of that plebiscite and its supporting legislation, surely he would be very pleased to go back to the Cabinet and to the drawing board and take what is being put forward. The fact that this is not the case and he is not open to doing that is worrying and adds to the lack of trust and the suspicion that is out there at the moment.

I have no doubts about the Minister's credentials. I do not know how he took on the task. The Government has an unenviable job to do. I must say that. We all want pure water. We also want to ensure the availability of that water and its conservation. We must pay for it. None of these are the issue here. The methodology that has been used from the first time that legislation came into the Dáil has been the problem. If there is one lesson I have learned from the people of Ireland, it is that they are quite astute. They listen very carefully. They took their time on protesting, but now they begin to realise that whatever is put before us now must be questioned because there is a possibility that in a very short time, even under a new Government, we will be back here debating this again. The bottom line must be that the plebiscite is minimalist at best. The constitutional situation must be looked at very clearly, but I do not at all accept that we should balk at the idea of harvesting the view and the sentiments of the public because it is difficult, or that we are not capable as legislators, with all the legal advice and help that we have.

What do we say to the people? The Minister tends to intimate that a constitutional referendum is a good idea, but that as a democratic, sovereign, independent state, we are not capable of harvesting that sentiment and that requirement. I do not believe he meant it like that, but that is how I heard it and that worries me as well. That is why we are here as legislators - to pool our expertise, our intelligence and our experience on the ground, to reflect the views of the public and to use every agency at our disposal to do what the people want. I hope the Celtic tiger has not taken that tenacity from the Irish character. I do not believe it has. I believe it is still possible to capture what the people want and enshrine it in Bunreacht na hÉireann and then to debate ends at that stage.