It seemed Leo didn’t give a monkey’s if it passed or not
Taoiseach’s lacklustre approach to these votes exposed an elitist presumption – and the Coalition’s chronic political weakness
AFTER doing an interview with the Supreme Court judge who was the new chair of the Electoral Commission, I walked across the Dublin Castle cobblestones with a suspicion that the referendums would not be passed.
It was not because I’d heard any arguments on the substantive issues – for Judge Marie Baker is eminently neutral – but it was because of the chronic Government weaknesses she had exposed.
We have a rather unhealthy referendum compulsion in Ireland, so I’ve covered quite a few. And if you look back at the referendums that have passed, there are general conditions that will see them succeed.
The first condition for success is a focused, razor-sharp, passionate campaign by the Government proposing the amendments.
Judge Baker put the boot into two Cabinet ministers
Another thing that helps is if there is broad sentiment in favour of that amendment that needs only clear, intelligent arguments from interested parties to push it over the line. Another condition can be a dire political or legal requirement.
Yet when I interviewed Judge Baker, she proactively, in reasoned language, put the boot into two Cabinet ministers, both of whom happened to be Green.
The Coalition is already citing disinformation as part of the reason for its losing of the referendums. (Judge Baker also let me know that the Electoral Commission has stopped the confusing practice of using the word referenda.) Yet it was striking that the example of disinformation that Ms Baker wanted to concentrate on was a statement by Media Minister Catherine Martin.
Ms Martin posted comments on X just as I sat down to interview Judge Baker at the Electoral Commission’s new headquarters in Dublin Castle.
Advocating for a Yes/Yes vote on the family and care referendums, Ms Martin wrote: ‘It’s not reflective of today’s society for our Constitution to say that a woman’s place is in the home.
‘Diverse families deserve equal recognition in our Constitution. A Yes/Yes vote in both referendums will help create a more equal and inclusive society in Ireland.’
But Judge Baker said the minister – who was then and is now even moreso mired in the RTÉ crisis – was ‘simply wrong’.
The chair of the new disinformation watchdog said bluntly: ‘She’s wrong. It [the Constitution] says something much more positive than that. It says something that is that is a more positive statement of values. It says the work that women do in the home provides an important support to the common good.’
Judge Baker accused politicians of engaging in ‘political rhetoric’.
She added: ‘You don’t have to blow it up into big language about disinformation or misinforma
tion. We can say that’s not what the Constitution says. The Constitution doesn’t say women’s place is in the home.’
I also put it to Judge Baker that Green Minister Roderic O’Gorman had described the language in the Constitution that had required these referendums as ‘archaic’.
Judge Baker said, equally bluntly, just because language is archaic it does not mean it is ‘inaccurate’.
The interview was conducted on St Valentine’s Day, more than three weeks before polling day, and on that day of passion, from the observations of this dispassionate judge, it was clear that the Coalition’s passion for the referendum was absent. It was a very bad start to
the campaign proper.
If a Government fervently believes in a change to our nation’s foundation document, the Constitution, it does not allow its ministers to engage in ill-disciplined, illthought-out rhetoric.
Rather than apologise, Ms Martin doubled down, saying the provision ‘is often referred to (as) “the women in the home” provision’.
She believed it is not important what the Constitution says but what people think it says.
It was clear that not only was there apathy among voters but apathy among Coalition ministers. And this attitude will guarantee you defeat every time.
The greatest political pragmatist
of them all, President Lyndon B Johnson, was famed for concentrating on the numbers.
Yet, he would often say, if you did everything to win, absolutely everything, ‘you would win’. The Coalition did everything to lose.
A winning mentality must come from the top.
In a way the Green members of this Coalition are a law unto themselves. They are the opposite
of pragmatic.
This writer has given Ms Martin consistently low marks since the RTÉ crisis, and said a Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael minister would have been sacked long ago for such a performance in this scandal.
Similarly, a Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael minister would have been sacked if there was any suspicion over their leaking of the Attorney General’s advice, as Mr O’Gorman is accused of.
The Greens can’t be sacked, for the Government would fall. Therefore they can say and do anything they like, but the contagion spreads and the political damage will be suffered most by those at the top.
We will discuss the minutiae of
‘The Greens are a law unto themselves’
where the Coalition got this campaign wrong elsewhere, but here we must look at what it exposes in the top man, Leo Varadkar.
Whereas Lyndon Johnson focused on winning and numbers Leo appears apathetic about both. Referendums and their loss aren’t usually politically lethal – for starters they’re rarely held in the run-up to a general election.
The only one I can recall is a minor abortion referendum – which was lost – in March 2002. Two months later Bertie Ahern still won an incredible victory. Yet, this loss shows that our current Taoiseach is just not a true winner, and he has perhaps one last chance to turn that around. Fine Gael is likely to suffer seat losses relative to Sinn Féin in June, increasing the less than overwhelming electoral record of the Taoiseach, following bad results in the local/Europeans in 2019 and the general election of 2020. These referendums also illustrate a worrying trend in the liberal establishment that runs our Government. The leading figures, particularly the Fine Gael ministers, like Leo, Paschal Donohoe and Simon Coveney, think that if they believe in something strongly then the masses should too. Indeed, so influential is this self-belief that grubby behaviour like indulging in a savage political fight isn’t deemed necessary.
Fine Gael hung its whole 2020 general election campaign on its government’s Brexit achievements, hoping the electorate would ignore its catastrophic failures in health and housing.
But exit polls showed health and housing remained by far the most influential issues in the electorate’s voting. Brexit influenced 2%.
Fine Gael – encouraged by the elites of Fianna Fáil and the Greens – believed a change to the Constitution was important so they pushed it out – probably six months before an election – without even explaining their rationale properly or passionately campaigning for it.
This referendum reeked of elitist presumption, and unfortunately it is Mr Varadkar who will be most closely associated with this kind of attitude.
Yes, the campaign was full of mistakes, but these came mostly from Government ill-discipline.
There are now dark claims from the top of Government about the malign influence of TikTok – one minister told me last night that they believe it should be blocked for the general election.
However, none of this would have been a factor if the Coalition had believed in or cared enough about these constitutional amendments to try and secure them. If it appeared to the electorate, as it did to me, that the Coalition – and not least its leader, the Taoiseach – didn’t give a monkey’s whether these changes passed or not, why then should they? His decision to travel to Romania this week has left cabinet colleagues ‘aghast’. The acute ramifications of this Coalition defeat may be shortlived. But if the same strategies and listlessness are repeated by key members of the Government parties in the general election, then Ireland could be in for far greater change than many people realise.