They wanted changes to constitutional wording which would have widened the definition of the family and clarified the duties of women in society. They were described as a chance “to do away with very old-fashioned, very sexist language, about women”. What the Government got instead, according to Mr Varadkar, was a double “wallop”. Some of the debate floundered on expanding the definition of family founded on marriage to include “durable relationships” such as cohabiting couples and their children. That phrase “durable relationship” was felt to be lacking in definition and potentially ambiguous.

The result is a huge disappointment for some. Stephen Teap, the campaigner and father of two boys who was widowed when his wife Irene died of cervical cancer in 2017, said he was sad for his “children, for myself, for all those sole and single parents out there, for everyone that’s in a relationship outside the confines of a traditional marriage”. But he was not surprised.

The referendum, he said, should have been about equality in the home and acknowledgement that it isn’t solely the responsibility of the mother to maintain domestic duties.

Of course, in many families such duties are shared, and the majority clearly did not feel that a constitutional rewrite was either necessary or a priority, something which was underlined by the relatively low turnout of 44.4%

Among the most vocal of opponents who held the arguments up to forensic examination and found them wanting was senator Michael McDowell, who said the Government misjudged the mood of the electorate and placed before voters proposals it could not explain with consequences it could not identify. He said there had been an “emphatic repudiation of what I think was unwise social experimentation with the Constitution”. 

The other politician who has emerged from this imbroglio with enhanced credentials for wisdom was Meath West TD Peadar Tóibín, who said it was “incredible” that his party, Aontú, was the only one “that campaigned against this”. 

“The people do not trust the Government, and even the main opposition parties seem to be detached from the people and aren’t listening to them,” he said.

It is clear that these subjects are now off the agenda and it is unlikely that any future ruling party will be in a hurry to move to another referendum issue. Or, if they do, it will need to be on a subject of greater significance. With European and general elections in the wings, we have important issues upon which to concentrate.

The Best Actor award goes to...

By the time you start reading this, you will know something that we do not. And that is whether the Oscar for Best Actor has been wrapped in the green jersey for Cillian Murphy’s performance in Oppenheimer. Or whether he was thwarted by that dangerous Cheltenham-style dark horse in the shape of Paul Giamatti, veteran of 105 films, for his role as a grumpy and ageing classics teacher at a New England boarding school in The Holdovers.

The exigencies of international datelines mean that these comments have to be written, and go to hardcopy deadline, way in advance of the decisions announced at the 96th Academy Awards at the Dolby Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles in the early hours of Monday morning.

Without the benefit of a Christopher Nolan mind-warping, time-bending, non-linear plotline, we have no way of knowing if the prize went to the Corkonian. What we do know is he has all the qualities for acting’s top honour, having proven himself a master craftsman on stage, TV, and film, since his professional acting debut in Corcadorca Theatre’s Disco Pigs in 1996.

In the 28 years since then, Murphy has developed into one of the world’s truly great actors, possibly the greatest, with an ability to segue from one role to another entirely convincingly. From classics such as those by Chekhov to horror and science fiction to the head of a crime dynasty, Tommy Shelby, in the hugely popular Peaky Blinders to epics of historical importance. From transgender teenagers to spooky villains, nothing lies beyond his remit.

The 47-year-old has always said the medium in which he works is secondary to the story. And most have come to know him through his screen work, but to witness his performances in live theatre — as the monomaniac Thomas Magill in the one-person show Misterman or as the bereaved writer in Grief is The Thing With Feathers — is to experience performance of several orders of magnitude above the ordinary.

He is a thoughtful and modest man who eschews the cult of celebrity and who describes himself as an actor who is Irish, not an Irish actor. “You should not be limited by your extraction,” he says. Limited is something you can’t accuse him of. Win or lose, Cillian Murphy is a talent who wears his achievements well, is a credit to his country, and from whom much more is possible. Enjoy every moment of him.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

Keeping it clean

There are various ways in which you can judge the efficiency, and the priorities, of a country upon arrival. Speed of transit through security, for example. Or the courtesy, or otherwise, that you experience.

The availability and management of litter bins is another certain clue. But the acid test is — are the toilets clean and well-tended? Can you press that smiley logo with absolute confidence? 

Distressing to hear, therefore, that the country’s largest airport, the one which receives long-haul passengers from the US and visitors from all over Europe, was hit with a €6.7m fine for poor cleanliness in toilets and terminals.

Part of the punishment was for failing to hit targets for security clearance times. But we know that this has been an issue previously at Dublin Airport and can depend on effective recruitment and training. We should take it at face value that matters have improved.

But there’s no excuse for dirty or poorly cleaned toilets. Perhaps when there is a problem management should get the mops out?