Referendums on secondary issues are a pointless waste in the midst of austerity

“A person’s faith is derided as quickly, and as poisonously, as another’s sexuality is demeaned.”

Your editorial appraisal (February 3) prompts query as to why we are having a costly referendum at this juncture in our austerity programme?

People can barely afford to pay their bills, let alone worry about nuances of language and the age of a would-be presidential candidate.

Do the May referendum questions really matter?

Are they not more imbued with the government parties’ ‘achievement roll-call’ than with the burning issues of society at large?

The ‘upgrading’ of civil-partnership to ‘marriage’ status is needless. It is not a priority issue.

Some gay people are against the proposal, while others, in favour, cannot articulate one precise, practical advantage bestowed by such a change.

That enacting it would be ‘fantastic’, ‘great’, ‘wonderful’, etc, hardly warrants a costly referendum.

Using the referendums for selfish party interests does the political process and the proposals few favours.

That all other parties seem to be acquiescing is even more debilitating.

‘Neverendums’ might be more appropriate.

Jim Cosgrove

Chapel Street

Lismore

Co. Waterford