Eamon Ryan concedes that Government has lost both referenda

Counting is underway in the twin referenda on proposed changes to the Constitution.

The boxes were opened at 9am after the public went to the polls on Friday to vote on whether to change the wording of the Constitution relating to the areas of family and care.

Results for both will be announced separately later on Saturday.

Early tallies show strong support for no votes, signalling an embarrassing defeat for the Government.

“It’s clear we lost,” said Mr Ryan.

When it was put to Mr Ryan that the Government did not get the result it wanted, he said: “No we didn’t.

“But you have to respect the voice of the people.

“We have to wait until the final count is done but if it is a no-no vote, we have to respect that.

“I don’t think you can respect the people’s vote by saying ‘what went wrong, the people didn’t vote the right way’.

“People are sovereign in this. They have to decide. It’s a complex issue, both were complex. I would have preferred a yes-yes.

“I don’t accept that our campaign did go wrong.”

He added: “It’s complex issues.

“There were a myriad of reasons to vote no.

“We will continue to make sure in Government that we will heed that advice from the people.

“It was never easy.

“It took a long time to come up with the wording because it’s not easy, it’s quite complicated when you try to change the Constitution in any way.

“We didn’t convince the public of the argument for a yes-yes vote.

“I think the next Government will have to come back to this and consider the campaign and what were the arguments that merited a no vote in both cases.”

Senator Michael McDowell, a former tánaiste and ex-justice minister, who campaigned for a no-no vote, said it was “unwise social experimentation” with the Constitution.

Mr McDowell, who was part of the Lawyers For No group, said: “I trust individual voters.

“They looked at what was being put before them and they said no.

“Many of them will have a slightly different perspective as to why they were voting no, but in the end we live in a republic and the sovereign power is the people and every individual vote is as good as anybody else’s vote and this is an emphatic repudiation of what I think was unwise social experimentation with the Constitution.”

The family amendment proposes extending the meaning of family beyond one defined by marriage and to include those based on “durable” relationships.

The care amendment proposes deleting references to a woman’s roles and duties in the home, and replacing it with a new article that acknowledges family carers.