He has a point. At by-elections, for example, it's common both in Britain and in the south of Ireland for the electorate to pound the government candidate into very fine dust and scatter it to the winds, not because s/he is a poor candidate, but because they want to give vent to their feelings about the government. A protest vote, as they say.
But isn't that exactly the point? People's reasons for voting for a candidate or a party or a referendum issue are complex, unpredictable and frequently mixed. There was a time when Catholic clergy would, directly or indirectly, urge their flock not to vote Sinn Féin, because that party had not denounced/renounced violence. Lots of people ignored the advice. Some would have done so because they supported the armed struggle; others would have done so because they liked Sinn Féin's emphasis on equality; others would have voted for a mixture of both. Or for other reasons completely. Complex, you see.
There's also the anti-democratic tendency of past governments in the south to repeat a referendum if they didn't like the results the first time round. And then there's the awkward fact that if a referendum on capital punishment were held in Ireland tomorrow, there's a good chance most people would be in favour. An item allowing the householder to shoot dead burglars might well get the thumbs-up as well. How would you feel about that?
So as I say, they are tricky little demons, referendums. But then so is democracy itself: it's a maddeningly imperfect way of governing. But in the present context, with the south of Ireland's semi-sovereignty being sold down the Swanee, it makes sense to let the people who are on the receiving end of such decisions have their say. Either that or we say "Aw, the hell with democracy - let's slip on our blueshirts again".