But hold it alongside European elections, and the vote might become an afterthought, sneaking through with a yes vote because of a lack of debate, rather than because of a thorough debate.
Laws, ideally, should encourage good behaviour and restraint.
“Nobody cares about that referendum”, my interlocutor tells me.
If the Irish people are to have a Presidency whose role it is to speak up for them against their own Government, then where is that President when he is needed?
If this is their understanding of economics, and the constitution, they should be turfed out of office at the first available opportunity.
The best argument for removing this stuff from the constitution is that it’s a promise the state never intended to keep, and has not even tried to keep.
It was Saul Alinsky, I think, who wrote in the book “rules for radicals” that the enemy should always be accused first of that which you are considering yourself.
“Non-binary”
Isn’t his prediction de facto an admission that Irish Climate measures are a complete waste of time?
This is the thing about rights. Courts, ultimately, decide how far, or how little, they range.
Expect this report to be “carefully considered” until, with any luck, you’ve forgotten all about it.
Michael D is who we want to be. The Government is who we are.