Speaking on most evenings at meetings around the country and canvassing in Dublin during the day, it is possible to get a feel for people's concerns about the Nice Treaty referendum, writes Garrett FitzGerald.
I have to say that one of the impressions I have been receiving is of a relatively high degree of public interest, and of commitment, on the issue, from supporters of both the Yes and No sides. The proportion of people who respond with a clear commitment one way or the other is much higher than I have been accustomed to in general elections or, I think, in previous referendums.
I would judge from this that there will be a higher turn-out in this Nice referendum than in the last one. Whatever the outcome, this provides a strong justification for holding a second referendum: democracy is best served if as large as possible a proportion of the electorate participate both in elections and also in key decisions affecting the future of our society and our economy.
There remain some doubts among a minority of the electorate about the propriety of holding a second referendum so soon after that of 18 months ago. The No campaigners, clearly fearful that a large turn-out this time may reverse the negative decision taken last year, have been describing as "undemocratic" the decision to hold a second referendum - although when voiced by Sinn Féin, the accusation of being "undemocratic" has an odd ring about it.
For my part I have difficulty with the idea that a referendum can be "undemocratic", and the accusation that voters can be "bullied" into changing their minds is frankly offensive to our electorate. Some people on the No side, who, through the incompetence and laziness of the Government and the Opposition parties last year, were allowed a free run with their campaign, seem to regard as improper and impertinent the very idea of a Yes campaign that challenges their version of the Nice Treaty.
As for the claim that it is unconstitutional to hold a referendum "once the people have spoken", this shows a remarkable ignorance of our Constitution. For Article 46 of that Constitution specifically endows Dáil Éireann with the right and the duty of initiating at its discretion amendments to the Constitution, which, when enacted by the Oireachtas as a whole, "shall be submitted by referendum to the decision of the people".
The Oireachtas that has just been freshly elected has had the duty of deciding whether the interests of the Irish people would be best served by offering them the opportunity of reviewing the decision taken by only 18 per cent of the electorate voting No 16 months ago.
Acting responsibly, in accordance with their duties as members of a deliberative assembly, the vast majority of our elected representatives in this newly elected parliament took the view that, because of what they saw as the likely negative consequences for the future of our society and economy, the electorate should be offered an opportunity to confirm or to modify the decision taken by a small minority of voters last year.
However, these newly elected TDs and Senators had listened to the debate on the last occasion, in the course of which the opponents of ratification of the treaty had expressed concern at the unfettered power of our government and Oireachtas to enter into binding common defence commitments within the EU without consultation with the electorate - a concern that they successfully communicated to many voters.
However unrealistic they might feel these fears to be, the newly elected Oireachtas decided that these concerns should be met by voluntarily relinquishing its power in relation to common defence through the incorporation of the following new provision within the wording of a new amendment to the Constitution:
"The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence. . .where that common defence would include the State".
The adoption of this by a Yes vote will mean that, unless later reversed by a new constitutional referendum, Irish involvement in European common defence, which would involve obligations of mutual military support by member-states, will be excluded. And, correspondingly, if the electorate vote No on that occasion, this safeguard will fall, and the Oireachtas will retain its right to engage Ireland in European common defence.
One might have thought that those who in the last referendum had been so loud in their demands that the Oireachtas should be deprived of its discretion in this matter would welcome this move.
Quite the contrary: the removal of this particular bone from the meal they are making of the Nice Treaty has evoked howls of protest from the No camp.
The genuineness of the concern for Irish neutrality on the part of some anti-European No campaigners may be judged from the fact that they are now calling on the electorate to reject this provision - which, if adopted by the people, will remove decisions on European defence from the authority of the Government and Oireachtas, transferring the power of decision on this issue to the electorate!
I have to say that I was amused by the response of one person whom I canvassed outside Tara Street DART station in Dublin.
When I had explained this common defence provision of the new amendment, he instantly responded: "Ah! If they felt this needed to be put in, then there must be a real threat to our neutrality - so I will vote No." Sometimes when canvassing you get to feel that you just can't win.
I get the impression from the canvass that this particular element of the amendment upon which we are to vote on this day fortnight may not yet have impinged upon the public mind, despite the fact that the Referendum Commission has been including it in the succinct account of the contents of the Nice Treaty.
The difference between this campaign and the last one is very striking. The fact that not alone are the political parties active this time but so also are non-political representatives of civil society has transformed the situation.
For, if one compares the poll taken several weeks before the last referendum with the actual turn-out when the time came to vote, it would appear that some 65 per cent of those intending to vote No actually did so - whereas not much more than 40 per cent of those in favour of ratifying the Nice Treaty actually voted. That differential turn-out was a crucial factor last time - and it reflected the fact that while there was an active and energetic No campaign last year, there was virtually no Yes campaign.
This time battle is fully joined between the two sides - and the recent Irish Times poll suggested that in this referendum the Yes voters are actually somewhat more committed to voting than are the No voters.
The disappearance of the differential turn-out factor that greatly favoured the No side last year may be the determining factor on October 19th.