THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION has recommended that the broadcast moratorium should be removed from future referendums.

It also called for the design of referendum ballot papers to be reviewed before the next referendum and for a proposed amendment to be published no later than 16 weeks before voters go to the polls.

The recommendations are included in a report from the Electoral Commission on the Family and Care referendums on 8 March.

The Electoral Commission was founded last February and is tasked with, among other things, explaining the subject matter of referendums and reviewing Dáil Éireann and European Parliament constituencies, as well as local electoral area boundaries.

The broadcast moratorium means radio and television broadcasters cannot report on elections or referendums from 2pm the day before polls open until the close of polls.

This does not apply to online media or social media.

These guidelines are issued by media regulator Coimisiún na Meán, but it has said recently that it will review the moratorium following a “clear” call from stakeholders for it to be removed in recent years.

The Electoral Commission in its report called the moratorium “anomalous and open to potential exploitation”, especially when “online media and social media is so prevalent”.

It recommended that the broadcast moratorium be removed from the guidelines for radio and television broadcasters before the next electoral event.

The Electoral Commission has also recommended that the publication of a proposed amendment be no later than 16 weeks before the proposed polling day.

It said this will allow for the Referendum Information Booklets to be designed, printed, and distributed in time.

The aim is for every household to receive this booklet between two and three weeks before polling day, and the Electoral Commission said 16 weeks is the minimum time required to allow for this.

It noted that the Family and Care referendums only have 13 weeks to design and deliver the booklets, and that this period included Christmas and New Year.

Delivery for March’s referendums began on 12 February and the scheduled An Post delivery was completed on 1 March, a week out from polling.

However, a further delivery took place up to 5 March, three days before the referendums.

“This is not an optimal timeframe in which to provide independent information on proposed constitutional change,” said the Electoral Commission.

Meanwhile, it’s been recommended that the ballot papers should be redesigned as the March ballot papers were “not sufficiently clear”.

The Electoral Commission said it was “difficult for voters to differentiate between ballot papers which looked almost identical in respect of their text and layout”.

It recommended that the overall design be reviewed and that a “simple prominent heading stating the subject matter of the proposal be included”.

It also called for a minimum of 60 days’ notice of polling day – the current minimum notice is 30 days.

For the March referendums, the Polling Day Order was signed 42 days before the designated polling day.

The Electoral Commission said this meant deliveries of the referendum booklet continued up to three days before the referendum and had the Polling Day Order been signed 30 days before the designated polling day, it would not have been possible to print and distribute the booklets in time.

It was also recommended that the work of the Electoral Commission should be funded from the Central Fund, which is the main accounting fund used by the Government.

Currently, an annual estimate is introduced by the Minister for Local Government and this is subject to controls and approvals by the Minister.

Provision was made for referendum expenditure of €3.5m in the 2024 budget, approved in 2023.

However, the Government deferred a patent referendum that had been due to take place last month, and had that referendum been held, a supplementary estimate would have been required.

The Electoral Commission said this “would have determined the nature and scope of the campaign” and that a “question now arises in relation to the appropriateness of the Executive controlling the resources”.