Major reforms in the operation of the Referendum Commission have been recommended by the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution.
The commission should distribute money equally to the Yes and No campaigns, rather than trying to explain both sides of the argument itself, the committee recommended. The political needs of a referendum cannot be met by the commission's current "even-handed" style which leads to "leaden rather than lively presentation", said the all-party committee.
Backing State funding, the TDs and Senators argued:
"The people, when they are deciding on a constitutional amendment, are in the position of a judge hearing a case.
"The quality of their judgment will depend on the clarity with which the facts underpinning the proposal are placed before them and the cogency of the arguments made to them by both sides.
"The standing of those making the arguments affects the weight many give to abstract reasoning in areas where they themselves may have little knowledge or experience."
Though many on the committee believed money should be shared "equitably, but not equally", they finally agreed that the McKenna judgment meant that it had to be divided in half.
Interest groups would have to prove their bona fides, by offering the list of their membership, for example, before they would qualify for support from the commission.
It should also have the right to decide that no money should be given for some referendums, particularly those that deal with merely technical issues, the report said.
Following the vote, the commission should be able to audit accounts.
In addition, limits should be placed on the size of donations that can be made.
The launch of the report was overshadowed by a bitter Dβil row over the Government refusal to debate the committee stage of the abortion referendum before the full Dβil.
Despite the series of bad-tempered votes, the Government insisted that the Dβil committee on health and children would deal with committee stage today.
Fine Gael TD, Mr Jim O'Keeffe, the vice-chair of the committee, said the Government's action had "broken the spirit" of the committee's work "even before the ink is dry".
