Lisbon II may be won by the side that tells the most plausible lies

SO here we go again. Mark off October 2 in your diary because that’s when you get to vote again on the Lisbon Treaty. Up until that date you are going to hear lots of the same arguments again, lots of the same voices and feel lots of the same weariness. You may even vote the same way again.

Of course, if the same people vote as who voted the last time, and vote the same way, then the referendum will be defeated again. The losing side’s hope is that it can get more of the non-voters from the last day out to vote its way, that it can persuade No voters to switch sides or, if that’s not possible, that they won’t vote at all this time. There is a big gap to overturn, given that a sizeable majority – 53% to 47% – voted No the last time. In more practical terms, the majority for the No side was more than 100,000 votes, which is sizeable.

Indeed, some people who voted Yes the last time may be very tempted to switch sides in protest at being asked to vote again. There is considerable anger that the democratic wishes of the people, as expressed in a free and fair vote, have been disregarded by the establishment because it did not like the outcome.

The Yes side is pointing out that there is nothing wrong with having a vote again and that it has happened previously on many constitutional issues. For example, the first referendum on divorce rejected its introduction but that didn’t mean we could never vote on the idea again. We did and divorce was introduced.

Admittedly, there was a 10-year gap between referenda, and Ireland’s social mores changed significantly in the interim, but it is an example of how the public mood can change and how the constitution can be varied to accommodate that. The issue now is how much the public mood has changed in little more than a year.

Another point is that the wording of the second divorce referendum was framed somewhat differently to the first. That is not happening with the second Lisbon referendum. We are being asked to vote on exactly the same thing again.

Admittedly, the Government has secured clarifications from the EU on points it believes were the subject of some debate and confusion a year ago, based on the findings of market research it commissioned after the last outcome. The No side denies that these guarantees have any legal standing and are worthless therefore. This is going to be one of the central issues of the new debate.

We have been here before when the Nice Treaty referendum was rejected the first time but endorsed on a rerun. That will give the Yes side some confidence about winning this time. So will the absence of Declan Ganley and his well-funded Libertas campaign from the fray. While others on the No side, particularly from the parties of the left, decried some media descriptions of Ganley as de facto leader of the No campaign – on the grounds that they disliked his core politics almost as much as those on the Yes side – the reality is that he was central to the rejection.

Ganley appealed to those who would not otherwise have wanted to side with Sinn Féin and the Socialist Party and gave them an excuse to do so. Now that he is gone a significant and articulate voice is lost to the No side and most of those left to carry the fight will be depicted as “hard” left.

That could be crucial, especially as many of the issues that excite it – such as neutrality – may not appeal to some of those whom Ganley reached.

The No side seems a little fearful that it cannot maintain its momentum, although it denies that. In theory, it should be confident about a rerun on exactly the same wording as appeared the last time.

But so much has changed in the meantime – particularly the extent and speed of the economic collapse – there is a sizeable chance some people will switch sides and, if opinion polls are correct, a sufficient number to overturn the previous majority.

The No campaign is also likely to face a much more determined and unified Yes campaign this time around, one that might be prepared to fight dirty too. The Yes side believes No campaigners deliberately misinformed and even lied last time around and is determined to confront them this time.

But fighting lies can be difficult once they become well established. The temptation for the Yes side, if it avoids attacking personalities on the No side, might be to tell its own lies to win public support. I’m sorry for any cynicism, but victory might come down to the side that tells its own lies most convincingly or which scares the voters more.

Lies aside, the winning may come down to whichever side is able to better argue that our economic position will be improved more – or damaged less – by voting their way. The Yes side would appear to have the advantage here. Even though the treaty itself may have no bearing on the economy, the support of the European Central Bank is central to our economic survival and we could lose it if the treaty is rejected again.

Another major issue for the Yes side is the unpopularity of the Government. Endorsing a position taken by it will be difficult for many. The hope on the Yes side is that the electorate has taken its revenge in the European and local elections and that it will be mature enough to differentiate between issues. If the electorate believes that protecting our position in the EU is important to us, then it will vote on the issue at hand and not on anything else. Considerations such as the scale of future cuts to government expenditure will be put to one side in such circumstances and dealt with in other ways. Expecting people to make such distinctions may be difficult, however, especially when some may be inclined to go against whatever it is the Government wants, almost irrespective of whether it is right or not.

This puts Brian Cowen in a very difficult position. The Taoiseach was criticised heavily for his lacklustre campaign a year ago. He was unconvincing in his arguments and left them too late. He had some political capital then because he had just stepped into the job and the scale of the economic crisis was not fully apparent, but the risk now is that putting him at the centre of the Yes campaign could be counter-productive, no matter how hard he tries or how much better he communicates.

COWEN also has to resist the temptation to try to use the campaign to re-establish his own political credentials. If he loses, then his political career is over but he can’t be seen to try to win for his own sake. He needs the help of the main opposition parties – who, with the exception of Sinn Féin, are all on the Yes side – but he has to be seen to co-operate with them. For their part, Fine Gael and Labour are going to have to resist the temptation to kick Cowen too much about other things between now and October, although it is in their narrower political interests to continue undermining him.

It is also going to be hard to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cowen if they are attacking him simultaneously about the establishment of Nama and the introduction of spending cuts. Cowen also has to try to get the trade union movement to back the Yes campaign, and the farmers too. Their support last time around was late and lukewarm. Persuading the unions to play ball when social partnership effectively has come to an end won’t be easy. Establishing and holding a unified Yes campaign – and persuading people that their best interests will be served by voting Yes – is going to be a difficult job.

The Last Word with Matt Cooper is broadcast on 100-102 Today FM, Monday to Friday, 4.30pm to 7pm.