INQUIRIES VOTE:CRITICISM OF the chair of the Referendum Commission, Dr Bryan McMahon, by Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan Howlin has been strongly rejected by the Opposition and the commission itself.
Fianna Fáil spokesman on public expenditure and reform Seán Fleming TD said the criticism by Mr Howlin was “a disgrace”. He called on the Taoiseach to state publicly if he supported Mr Howlin. The chief whip of the technical group in the Dáil, Catherine Murphy, also rejected Mr Howlin’s remarks.
The Minister told the Sunday Timesthat Dr McMahon had "caused confusion" among voters on the so-called "Abbeylara amendment" by suggesting the courts might not have any oversight role in parliamentary inquiries.
He quoted Dr McMahon as saying it was not possible to state definitively what role, “if any”, the courts would have in reviewing procedures adopted by Oireachtas inquiries. “The chairman of the Referendum Commission used, as far as I was concerned, the two words which caused confusion,” the Minister said.
He believed Dr McMahon “did certainly, I think, cause people to hesitate”, thereby contributing to the amendment’s defeat. “Any advice we had from the Attorney General and the law officers of the State said that of course it’s reviewable [by the courts]”, said Mr Howlin.
The comment attributed by the Minister to Dr McMahon in fact appears in an explanation of the amendment by the commission on its website, referendum2011.ie.
Mr Fleming last night: “It’s a disgrace that any Government Minister would attack an independent commission whose function is to inform the public on this matter . . . The Minister would not have been so critical had the amendment been passed, so there is an element of ‘sore loser’ here.”
He said the reason for the Government’s failure to convince the public was the “arrogant approach Alan Shatter and Brendan Howlin took to the entire process, dismissing valid concerns and attacking those who raised them”.
Ms Murphy said: “The Government got this wrong. The people decided, based on, I believe, very solid and impartial information from the Referendum Commission. The commission is made up of people with strong reputations – they are hardly revolutionaries . . . They went to great lengths to ensure that the amendment was fully understood by the citizens.”
Independent Senator Ronan Mullen, a leading opponent of the amendment, said: “This is bad form on the part of the Minister, who is himself to blame for coming up with a flawed and ambiguous referendum proposal . . . It is a further example of the arrogant and condescending approach which the Government took to this particular referendum.”
The Referendum Commission said it was “satisfied that it carried out its duty with the independence and neutrality required by law.”
