Irish Lisbon referendum: How the "Yes" was won (News Feature)

By Fiona Smith Oct 3, 2009, 14:12 GMT

Dublin - Fear was the keynote of the Lisbon referendum campaign and many would argue that it was fear that drove the Irish people to vote 'Yes' for the EU's Lisbon Treaty Friday, which it rejected just 16 months ago.

The campaign run by the 'Yes' side had put fear into voters and had a huge effect, said North Kerry Sinn Fein Member of Parliament Martin Ferris.

Sinn Fein was the only parliamentary party to campaign for a 'No' vote on the Lisbon Treaty which was defeated in June 2008.

Sinn Fein MEP Mary Lou MacDonald a key figure in the 'No' campaign said that people felt vulnerable and had received the message to vote 'Yes' if you felt fearful about your future or your job.

'This was a dishonourable message,' she said.

'We are told that if we vote 'no' we will lose investment, jobs and support from our EU counterparts,' Caoimhghin O Caolain, Sinn Fein leader in parliament said in advance of the vote.

Patricia McKenna of the anti-Lisbon People's Movement said 'Today's result was inevitable. People voted not for the Lisbon Treaty but for economic recovery, jobs and EU membership.'

Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan had warned that a second 'No' vote in the Lisbon Treaty referendum would 'shatter' international confidence in Ireland and lead to a rise in the cost of borrowing for the state.

A 'No' vote would signal to the rest of the world that Ireland had 'retreated into economic isolation,' he said.

Senior government politicians repeatedly reminded the electorate that endorsing the treaty was important in generating goodwill for Ireland.

The Lisbon Treaty, among other reforms, aims to streamline decision-making in the bloc, which has expanded rapidly from 15 to 27 members in recent years.

It would create a 'president' and de facto foreign minister for the bloc, as well as ending national vetoes on voting on many issues.

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso's warnings also served as effective scare tactics.

There 'were some doubts now about the future situation of Ireland,' Barroso said on a two-day visit to Ireland on September 20.

'Some people have asked me: Is Ireland going to leave the EU? For investor confidence, it is important that there is certainty about the future of Ireland in the EU.'

These worries combined with fears that the government's recent gamble of spending 47 billion euros (68.8 billion dollars) on setting up a bad bank, the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA), could backfire spectacularly meant that some naysayers felt that it was their patriotic duty to vote yes.

'I'm furious at the current banking situation, but I'm holding my nose and putting on my jersey for Ireland,' said Independent Dublin North-Central member Finian McGrath, who voted 'No' in the last referendum.

This feeling was strengthened by the fact that the European Central Bank had effectively bailed Ireland out.

Big business's entry into the fray added to the jitters for many.

Computer processor manufacturer Intel published a full page advertisement in the Irish Times calling for a 'Yes' vote to Lisbon.

Intel's claim that their campaign is motivated by a sense of 'corporate social responsibility' was strongly disputed by the 'No' side.

Anti-Lisbon campaigners suspect it had more to do with Intel's appeal against the EU's recent anti-trust ruling against the company.

Yet the argument from Intel boss Jim O'Hara that a 'No' vote would send out the wrong message to multinationals considering investment in Ireland proved irresistible to many.

The fact that the notoriously anti-Union, no-frills airline Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary also come down heavily in favour of Lisbon did nothing to allay the fears of those anxious about the erosion of workers' rights.

But O'Leary's repeated mantra that the rights of those without jobs mattered most struck a chord as Ireland's unemployment rates have soared since the last treaty to 12.5 per cent, up 7.8 points since December 2007.

Those on the 'No' side had their own scaremongering to do, but the fears perhaps did not take root this time as they were countered by some heavy hitters on the 'Yes' side.

Not least by the Referendum Commission which repeatedly told people that the referendum could not impact the minimum wage, neutrality or Ireland social and ethical laws.

Fears spread by the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) were dismissed by many on both sides as racist and spurious.

In fact, analysts felt that UKIP's interference only served to strengthen the 'Yes' side.

Persuasion played a role along with fear with the intervention of many respected figures on the 'Yes' side. Not least were the efforts of Nobel prizewinning Irish poet Seamus Heaney.

The poet said that if Ireland voted 'No' again, the Republic and its people would 'have lost ourselves in the modern world.'

In an interview with British Sunday newspaper The Observer on his views on Europe and the referendum on October 2, Heaney said the loss for Ireland from a 'No' vote was 'inestimable.'

'I was in Italy when the first referendum came in, and I was distressed for Ireland in Europe because of the kind of refusal of commitment after decades of benefit. It is inestimable, the loss of influence, status and trust that occurred with a 'No' vote: it is palpable and real.'

Ireland's national poet must be breathing a sigh of relief Saturday.