“Irish Referendum Information: Trust Erosion?”

When voters exited the voting booths last March following the governmental constitutional amendment proposals’ resounding rejection, about 3,000 were surveyed on behalf of the Electoral Commission, the entity responsible for the integrity of elections and fighting disinformation. Upon asking whether they felt that a clandestine, select group of individuals was accountable for global politics’ key decisions, more than half appeared open to considering the idea. In such conditions, it would be appropriate for governments to evaluate how they disseminate information. It was revealed this week that there was a certain degree of ambiguity leading up to the referendum about the proposed amendment’s potential impact on expanding the family’s definition.

Throughout the campaign, the Government insisted that amending wouldn’t impact tax laws, inheritance or family law. However, views from Revenue officials before the vote suggested the claim was not aligned with theirs. They believed the decision regarding non-marital families’ definition – likely set by the courts – would be the deciding factor.

This week, the Government responded by affirming their stance was based on advice from the Attorney General. Using advice from the Attorney General as a cover is not a new tactic for governments, nor will it be the last, as if it’s on par with a Supreme Court ruling.

The Attorney General, typically an exceptionally competent lawyer, serves the government. This is a political appointment tasked with providing impartial legal advice. While governments have every right, if not obligation, to rely on such advice, it doesn’t necessarily validate their decisions. It only suggests that they analysed the issues brought up by Revenue and arrived at a different conclusion.

However, such subtleties often get drowned amidst the clamour, leaving the electorate with the impression of being duped by the government. In the existing political climate, this can further diminish public trust. Ahead of future referendums, it would be beneficial for governments to keep this in mind.

Condividi