Blind bureaucracy that condemns a fishing community to death, writes Maurice Neligan
AS SOMEBODY who voted Yes in the recent referendum, it is becoming increasingly clear to me why so many voted No. It is not so obvious, however, as to why the establishment failed to foresee the outcome.
When Robert Kennedy was US Attorney General, he wrote, "one-fifth of the people are against everything all the time".
The proportion here may be even higher. Broad brush strokes would place Sinn Féin, the extreme left and right, unhappy Greens and various flat earthers longing for a return to a mythical past into this grouping.
Every red herring from God's will to neutrality was expounded zealously by them. Logic and reasoned argument are not going to reach this group - ideologies are not susceptible to such persuasion. These people and their disparate causes did not win the referendum although they claim the credit.
Rather the varied concerns of very many people, uncommitted and indifferent, even hostile, to these groupings were the main reasons for the No vote.
Simplistically, I would divide such voters into two main groups. Firstly, those who had specific and very real apprehension and anger about aspects of European policy dictated, as they saw it, from Brussels without local consultation and heedless of the ensuing economic and human consequences.
Foremost among these were the fishermen and farmers - the spine of rural Ireland.
The second and probably larger group voiced their discontent with particular aspects of Government policy, such as health and education.
Such unease was compounded by rising inflation, the growth of negative equity for many homeowners, increasing job losses and the seemingly inexorable expansion of bureaucracy and regulation.
That the referendum was not the appropriate vehicle to carry their resentment was beside the point. When you're out to vent frustration, you seize the first means to hand.
The European and local elections might have provided the proper antidote for the malaise. Many, however, chose to protest immediately. This is worrying because in spite of the blandishments of the main political parties they responded with "a plague on all your houses, you're not listening".
Such plagues tend to leave vacuums in their train readily filled by the charlatans, rather than the thinkers.
The concerns of such people cannot be singly ignored. They are interrelated, and failure to understand the depth of feeling in the community only aggravates a bad situation.
There is a widespread sense that we are not being listened to or looked after. As an illustration of this, let me tell you a little story. A few miles down the coast from me is the fishing village of Cromane, a half parish and collection of townlands. It is a community based on its draft-net fishermen and its famous mussel beds which have been harvested since the 1700s.
The provision of a pier in the village to facilitate the fishermen has, like the Shannon drainage, figured in every election over the past 100 years. It's still not there. On May 12th this year, the draft fishermen received their licences and fished happily for just two days.
These licences were then revoked by Ministerial order and the boats were grounded. The fishermen took their case to the High Court, won and are now back at sea. Needless to say, this cost money and their future remains uncertain.
A nearby commercial fishery has apparently a quota for 8,000 salmon and remains operative. In a good year, these men would possibly net 2,000 fish; and their livelihood is to be withdrawn? Where's the justice in that? Please remember, we are talking about controlled estuarine draft netting, not the destructive drift netting at sea.
Worse was to happen. The mussel fishermen were told that the mussel seed fishery in Castlemaine harbour was to close to comply with the habitats and birds directive of the EU.
I do not wish to involve you all with the sex life of the mussel, suffice it to say that if the fishery cannot dredge, transplant seed (spat) and cultivate the crop, the fishery will fail.
The fishermen and birds have co-existed for years with no evidence of ornithological disaster. The birds would be among the losers if the fishery closes, as the fishermen control the predators which act contrary to the interests of both.
Blind and insensitive stupidity condemns this community to death. Injustice and further isolation will seep though the area. What are the chances that these folk and similarly disadvantaged fishing communities will vote Yes next time?
Maurice Neligan is a cardiac surgeon