A few weeks ago I wrote that Ireland was about to hold a referendum on children's rights.
In Dublin at least the result seemed a foregone conclusion. There were posters everywhere screaming 'Yes for Children'.
I didn't see a single 'No' poster although I can understand that. 'No for Children' doesn't have quite the same ring.
Well, the referendum took place last weekend. There was a 31 per cent turnout and the vote was 51 per cent for, 49 per cent against.
Clearly, if you consider the turnout, only a minority voted 'Yes for Children'. One observer put the result in perspective when he said, "49 per cent of 31 per cent against, 51 per cent of 31 per cent for, 69 per cent couldn't give a fuck."
Yesterday, however, someone made an observation that is even funnier.
The purpose of the referendum was to change the constitution to give the state more powers to "protect" children.
The low turnout, 'Yes' supporters have apparently argued, was not because the people of Ireland don't care about children's rights but because the referendum took place on a Saturday "when people were too busy doing other things".
What, pray, would those "other things" be?
Could it be that most people were far too busy looking after children (their own and other people's) to find time to vote!
And people think Father Ted is fiction.
PS. I stole that last comment from an Irish friend. He can say it, I can't!