I've heard a few people saying they expect a low turnout in next Saturday's referendum. Most people expect it to pass by a large majority.
Was just looking at the booklet from the Referendum Commission and wondering if this vote is really necessary...
Most of the new provisions seem to commence with "Provision shall be made by law for..." It seems strange to me to put that in our constitution. It strikes me that the new provisions seem quite prescriptive to put in the Constitution. Couldn't these things (e.g. adoption after a certain period in foster care) have been provided for by law already without a referendum under the current article 42.5?
I think most people will vote YES because these are good things to provide for in law. Most people would wish that these had already been done under the existing provisions of the Constitution. There are obviously serious issues around children that need to be tackled, such as the need for more social workers, the need for appropriate care facilities, better early education etc.
One wonders how much time and money has been spent having this referendum? Would it have been better spent actually bringing in the necessary legislation under the current Constitution and sorting out the real issues around children that exist on the ground?
If there is a low turnout next Saturday, would that be a sign that this referendum is unnecessary?