Mayo candidate asks who'll be held to account over €20m. squandered on referendum
Mayo Aontú representative Paul Lawless has raised the question in regard to who in government will be held to account over the €20 million squandered on the failed referendum at the weekend.
He stated: “I very much welcome the overwhelming No No results.
"The people of Mayo voted overwhelmingly to reject the amendments to both the family referendum (76%) and the Care Referendum (78%).
"These results demonstrate a disconnect between the people and the political/NGO bubble surrounding Leinster House.
"The government and all opposition parties including Sinn Féin, Labour, the Social Democrats and PBP all campaigned for a yes vote.
"Aontú was the only political party who campaigned for a no no vote. We did so because we critically analysed the proposals and listened to the people.
"The definition-free family amendment was deeply flawed.
"The amendment would have created legal uncertainty and forced many people into expensive legal battles in order to vindicate their rights.
"It is clear that Minister O’Gorman received legal advice from the Attorney General that there could be no certainty on how the court's would interpret ‘durable relationships’.
"The leaked advice from the Attorney General stated that the amendment would lead to more litigation than is at present, and stated it would have wide ranging implications in many areas including immigration, childcare and social welfare.
"The minister’s statements were contrary to legal advice.
"The care referendum demonstrated an empty virtual signalling attempt.
"It would have in fact insulated the state from providing tangible support to carers and pushed responsibility back into the home.
"It would also have removed ‘mother’ from the constitution on the day before mother’s day.
"The government must now face serious questions: ’Who is going to be held accountable for wasting €20 million euros of taxpayers money? Why was there no pre legislative scrutiny? Why did the government mislead the public in relation to the Attorney General's advice?"