Today saw the publication of the Chief Justice's judgment on the competence of the Government in its handling of the children's referendum, particularly with regard to the booklet, website and advertisement published by the Government. The Chief Justice said that all three failed the test of being fair, equal and impartial. They failed to be neutral, failed to hold the scales equally between both sides and favoured one side over the other. The Chief Justice also drew a contrast between how the Government approached the material and how the Referendum Commission dealt with it, in terms of the neutral manner in which the commission pursued its work. The Constitution belongs to the people and no Government has the right to allocate to itself either funding or the capacity to take the decision away from the people and into its own hands.

This is not Question Time.

I know that, but this is a serious issue-----

I know that too. I appreciate that, Deputy.

-----that goes to the very heart of our Constitution. It is the question of who decides how to change or amend the Constitution. It is a serious judgment, and I ask the Taoiseach, in line with commitments in the programme for Government, to provide special time, early in the new Dáil session, for a full debate on this judgment. I ask that the Minister concerned come before the House to answer questions on it and that the role of the Attorney General be fully clarified. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Fitzgerald, and the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Sport, Deputy Varadkar, both blamed the Attorney General at the time. They said the Attorney General had scrutinised the material, but if one reads the judgment, it seems that a very amateur-----

Deputy, we cannot deal with this on the Order of Business.

-----and incompetent approach was adopted by the Government, in which it broke every rule in the book in terms of the material it published.

All of these matters can be discussed when the issue is debated in the House.

We have been fobbed off before. When the initial judgment came out we had no debate. In the Seanad they had a special notice question immediately on the publication of the first judgment. There has been no meaningful discussion in the aftermath of the referendum about what was a serious breach by the Government-----

Thank you, Deputy Martin.

-----regarding the holding of the referendum and the material it published.

I am conscious of the fact-----

Taoiseach, the Deputy has made a request for time. That is all it is. It would be better if this was done through the Whips.

There is nothing done through the Whips.

The normal procedure is that if a Deputy wants a debate, he or she asks for it at the Whips' meeting.

It does not happen. The Chief Whip-----

That is the normal procedure. However, the Taoiseach wishes to respond.

I should remind the House that there will be a court case about this matter in January.

The Government is carefully studying the Supreme Court judgment which clarifies how it can make information available to the electorate during a referendum. The judgment in the McKenna cases stated the Government had a duty to provide information for the electorate and clarify issues that might arise during the course of a campaign without advocating a particular position. The Government welcomes the fact that the Supreme Court has for the first time since the judgment in 1995 provided guidelines on the application of this important principle.

Get off the stage.

The court has unanimously acknowledged that the principle enunciated in the McKenna judgment stands as firm as ever, but that the methods by which information is conveyed are very different from those which applied in 1995. It has found that the Government, in attempting to fulfil its duty to inform the people, strayed beyond the boundary of providing information for the electorate. It has also found that the Government at all times acted in a bona fide manner and that all the publications were issued with a view to informing the electorate about the referendum. The Government is committed to working within the parameters of the judgment delivered today in the context of future referendums and will carefully study the conclusions of the court.

In respect of the stability treaty - the Lisbon treaty - when Deputy Micheál Martin was Minister for Foreign Affairs he sent his own document which indicated that it had been produced by the Department of Foreign Affairs and set out what the stability treaty involved in a situation where there was no court judgment. It was much more obvious in terms of information.

Was it really?

Stop the spin.

What he sent on the Lisbon treaty in 2009-----

We cannot restate documents in the House.

The Government issued its materials after the writ was moved.

It was done in the same way on the advice of the then Attorney General.

I call Deputy Gerry Adams.

A disgraceful performance.

Do not come out with that one.

The Taoiseach is not at the Ballinasloe horse fair.

He changes the story all the time.

Please allow Deputy Gerry Adams to make his point on the Order of Business.

The Taoiseach should acknowledge that he was wrong.

Admit it.

It is like Deputy Micheál Martin's property tax leaflet.