An unequivocal “no”.
The Irish government finds itself under fire from criticism after the large victory of the "no" vote in the double referendum on the family and the place of women organized on Friday March 8, on International Women's Day.
A scathing setback which highlights a series of failures in the government strategy for this change to the Constitution.
The first amendment expanding the concept of family to “lasting relationships” – including cohabiting couples and their children – was rejected by 68%.
The second amendment to remove the reference to women's "domestic duties" – to make all members of a family responsible for caring for each other – was rejected by nearly 74% of voters.
Ireland has voted No in the Care referendum.
The result was announced at Dublin Castle with 1,114,620 people, or 73.9%, voting No and 393,053 voting Yes.
It represents the highest ever No vote by percentage in an Irish referendum |
Follow updates: https://t.co/fqRU2JIDYi pic.twitter.com/tRcnRvfKJ5
— RTÉ News (@rtenews) March 9, 2024
Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said the time had come to put an end to “very dated, very sexist” language.
Since 1937, the first paragraph of article 41.2 stipulates that "through her life within the home, women provide the State with support without which the common good cannot be achieved".
In addition, paragraph 2 of the article explains that the State "endeavours, therefore, to ensure that mothers are not obliged by economic necessity to work to the detriment of their domestic duties ".
But during a brief electoral campaign marked by a flood of contradictory information, many voters felt overwhelmed and tired: only 44% of them went to the polls.
A government lagging behind
Lack of preparation, poor communication, lack of commitment: according to experts interviewed by France 24, the Irish government, made up of a center-right coalition bringing together Fianna Fáil (FF), Fine Gael (FG) and the Green Party (Greens), failed miserably in the management of the referendum.
“Unlike previous elections on the repeal of the 8th Amendment and same-sex marriage, where a clear and effective strategy was deployed, the 2024 campaign turned out to be very dull,” analyzes Catherine Conlon, associate professor of social policy at Trinity Dublin College.
“This double referendum was supposed to dust off a Constitution that discriminated against women. But the contempt shown by our government in the way it handled this campaign says a lot about its deafness to the aspirations of the people and the persistence of misogyny and 'an institutional patriarchy.'
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar at a polling station at Scoil Treasa Naofa in Dublin, Ireland on March 8, 2024 during the double referendum on families and women.
© Clodagh Kilcoyne, Reuters
Leo Varadkar's strategy of positioning himself on societal issues did not pay off.
On Saturday, he admitted that his government had taken “two beatings”.
One year before the next legislative elections, his coalition finds itself weakened.
“They fear the victory of Sinn Fein (main opposition force, Editor’s note), and are therefore trying to appropriate issues traditionally supported by this party, such as the rights of women, disabled people and caregivers,” explains Nathalie Sebbane, lecturer in Irish civilization at Sorbonne-Nouvelle University.
“These small symbolic changes, which did not pay off this time, are clearly acts of political communication.”
For their part, opposition parties provided mixed support for the proposals, criticizing that the two questions put to the vote differed from the wording proposed by the Citizens' Assembly.
In 2020, this body, regularly consulted in Ireland on matters of public interest, recommended removing from the Constitution the provision relating to the role of women in the home and replacing it with neutral wording.
“The government acted alone,” criticized Mary Lou McDonald, leader of the Sinn Fein party, who reluctantly supported the “yes” vote.
“Too timid” changes
While many Irish people welcomed the referendum, saying it represented great progress for women's rights, the "no" vote brought together a very wide range of voters, from both conservative and progressive ranks.
Opponents of the project feared the ambiguity of the concept of "lasting relationship" and the disappearance of mentions of women and mothers in the Constitution.
Some feminists also feared that removing sexist language from the Constitution would harm the rights of other groups.
The second modification, assigning responsibility for the care of everyone in the family, was particularly criticized by defenders of the rights of the disabled.
They accused the state of absolving itself of its responsibility towards these people.
"Instead of following the proposals of the Citizens' Assembly, the government wanted the care of children, disabled people or the elderly to remain a private matter, managed by family members", explains Seana Glennon, doctoral student at the Sutherland School of Law, University College Dublin.
“The state would try to support them, but it would not be obliged to do so.”
Posters for "no" in Dublin, March 5, 2024, before the referendum on the modernization of the Irish Constitution on women and the family.
© Paul Faith, AFP
In Ireland, traditional gender roles persist in healthcare.
In fact, 98% of full-time caregivers and 80% of paid caregivers are women.
Thus, the “no” in the referendum does not sound like a rejection of the rights of women and the family.
On the contrary, it expresses a deep aspiration of Irish voters for a more ambitious modernization of their society.
“For them, the proposed changes were too timid and lacked courage,” analyzes Nathalie Sebbane.
"The Irish believe that the government has not gone far enough. They are no longer prepared to settle for half measures after suffering from the conservative influence of the Catholic Church for decades. They are no longer easily influenced, they have realized that their future belongs to them."
In 2022, 69% of Irish people identified as Catholic compared to 94.9% in 1961, according to data from the public agency CSO (Central Statistics Office).
The country only legalized abortion in 2018 and marriage for same-sex couples in 2015, after referendums.
Read alsoIrish women reopen the debate on abortion, 10 years after the death of Savita Halappanavar
A rushed schedule
For months, the government secretly refined the text of the two referendums.
Public scrutiny in the Dáil (lower house) and Seanad (upper house) was rushed, while debate was cut short by the parliamentary guillotine procedure.
Some activists accuse the government of wanting to take advantage of International Women's Day to curry favor with Irish women.
A strategy that turned out to be counterproductive.
The campaign was heavily criticized for its lack of clarity and failure to explain the need for constitutional changes.
Catherine Conlon highlights the information vacuum of the campaign which left the field open to disinformation.
“The far right took advantage of this situation to spread alarmist and misleading messages, particularly on the redefinition of the family. Racism and anti-immigration sentiment were used to hijack the vote and serve malicious objectives.”
The organization of a new referendum is impossible before the next elections, which must be held next year.
And to avoid a new setback, the next government will have to, according to Eamon Ryan, the leader of the Green party, "analyze the campaign and the arguments which justified the negative vote in both cases".
The France 24 summary of the week
invites you to look back at the news that marked the week
I subscribe
Take international news everywhere with you!
Download the France 24 application