‘I am their leader. I must follow them’

The Cabinet yesterday signed off on the indicative time frame for seven referendums to be held within the next two years, but only one will so consume the energies of the political system that it will likely block out all other issues.

The lead up to referendum on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution will dominate political discourse until next spring or summer, but yesterday we were told Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has yet to decide what stance he will take on this most sensitive of subjects.

The Taoiseach will wait until the wording of the referendum emerges before deciding what outcome he will campaign for. Our lead story on it is here.

While Varadkar’s office says “his personal views should not determine the final referendum”, it is inconceivable the Taoiseach of the day would not take a position on a referendum.

Taoiseach undecided on stance in abortion campaign

---

No constitutional change on property rights planned, Varadkar says

---

Miriam Lord: Fossil fuel gets whole new meaning as Senators meet

---

State to purchase a number of items from Yeats Family Collection

---

Varadkar has previously said the Eighth Amendment is too restrictive and should be replaced with something else, but he has also indicated he does not personally favour complete liberalisation of abortion laws.

The Taoiseach will, of course, eventually take a position, although Fine Gael, as a party, has given its TDs a free vote. Perhaps Varadkar’s ambiguity is an effort to manage what will be a contentious debate.

In recent years, public figures - from Noirín O’Sullivan to Enda Kenny - have used now-cliched management speak to explain how they have been “on a journey”.

O’Sullivan said she was on a journey of reform in An Garda Síochána, and Kenny used it to describe how his views on same-sex marriage had changed.

Perhaps Varadkar, while not reaching for that phrase, is reserving his position to reflect what will be an emotive debate, with opinions likely to develop over the coming months.

The case for a presidential election

From the studied ambiguity of one of our leaders to the calculated ambiguity of the other.

Since Michael D Higgins’s vague statement last week that he will wait until August 2018 to announce whether he will run for a second term, there has been an almost unanimous view among the commentariat that the President should face an election if he wants a second term.

In our editorial this morning, The Irish Times adds its voice to that view.

It rightly points out the strength of the mandate received by Higgins in 2011 - he received more than a million votes - gave the President cover to stray, at times, beyond the normal strictures of his office.

Despite the calls for an election, the political system is still largely indifferent, and the senior ranks of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil would be quite happy to allow Michael D a second term without the bother of going to the polls.

The task is for others seeking the office to secure their own nomination.

Now that TDs and senators are back in Leinster House - the Seanad sat for the first time since the summer recess yesterday - aspiring First Citizen Senator Gerard Craughwell can busy himself with acquiring the required 20 Oireachtas signatures to get on the ballot paper.