The amendments to articles 90, 97 and 99 of the Constitution limit the calling of referendums only to initiatives backed by 40,000 voters, eliminating this possibility for the National Assembly and the National Council.

Moreover, referendum challenges will not be allowed for legislation dealing with taxes, customs and other levies.

Also banned under the amendments will be referendums on legislation needed to implement the national budget and on laws implementing emergency measures for defending the country, dealing with the consequences of natural disasters, ratifying international treaties and fixing unconstitutionalities.

The changes are moreover introducing the "rejective referendum" model, under which a law will be defeated if the majority of the valid ballots are against but only under the condition that at least a fifth of all eligible voters vote no. A simple majority was required so far.

Also, parliament will no longer be banned from adopting similar legislation for a year, but will be allowed to propose an improved bill immediately after a referendum rejection.

The across-the-board support for the changes was reflected in the debate, one of whose reccuring points was the view that they did not undermine democracy but in fact protected voters from serving as a tool in political games.

The coalition SocDems agreed, with Ljubica Jelušič saying that the initiative for referendums needed to stay in the hands of citizens.

Jože Tanko of the opposition Democrats (SDS) argued that today's constitutional changes - the fiscal rule included - provided the incumbent government with the strongest basis so far to steer the country towards developments.

On the other hand, his party colleague Jožef Jerovšek urged measures to raise political awareness among voters, saying turnout at recent elections and referendums had been shamefully low. He wondered what "has led to the indoctrination of the people that it makes no sense to go to the polls".

A lone point of dispute in the debate was the interpretation of the effect the changes will have on a potential new attempt at liberalising family legislation.

While Jani Möderndorfer of the coalition Positive Slovenia (PS) wondered whether the Constitutional Court would have had to prohibit the 2012 referendum, which prevented an expansion of the rights of same-sex couples, Matej Tonin of the opposition New Slovenia (NSi) said his party definitely saw no reason for this to be the case under the new rules.

PM Alenka Bratušek hailed the yes vote, saying it meant the end of political horse-trading in connection to referendums and would allow a bridging of political blockades that had been undermining Slovenia for years.

She however feels too little had been done to explain to the people what the novelties really mean and reiterated that referendums would now truly be a tool in the hands of citizens.