Alas

The clock ticks. T-minus 10 hours and counting. A minute until the moratorium on the broadcasting of election news begins. Relax and gather your thoughts, for what is there left to say?


During the past month we have heard claim and counterclaim. We have heard Micheál Martin time and again borrow from Bart Simpson, I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything. Fourteen years, it went by in the blink of an eye.


One can be forgiven for thinking that this has been a one issue campaign. Does policy matter when the narrative inevitably boomerangs back to anyone but Fianna Fáil? Why waste money on glossy election posters when a piece of cardboard with the crudely drawn slogan, ABFF - Vote Fine Gael, will do.


And whilst the issue of the economy is an important one, its singular status has, excuse the pun, short-changed us as citizens. I do not dispute that sovereign debt and the subsequent taxation and cut-backs, are vital components in any electoral discourse, but for it to be so at the expense of other, less tangible but equally important issues, such as national identity and social equality, is a worrying precedent.


I had planned to publish a piece detailing Fine Gael's, and in particular, Enda Kenny's Christian ethos and what we might expect over the course of the next Dáil. In hindsight, I foolishly began my research only yesterday evening. I had expected a deep well of media articles, editorials and analysis to tap, but much to my dismay, such investigations were largely fruitless.


Yes, you can read an article in the Irish Times where Kenny outlines his position on abortion but there is a conspicuous absence of criticism for the Taoiseach-elect prescribing this personal moral view:

"My position is I do not favour legalising abortion on demand. We have a situation where you have difficult, hard cases, and some people have gone through very difficult circumstances but there is an ECHR judgement, there is a Supreme Court decision and there is a constitutional position."

The European Court of Human Rights judged that Irish abortion law breaches human rights. Here, the words "on demand" are key and imply fear-filled banalities such as before you know it.


Before you know it, we'll have abortion drive-thrus, 24-hour termination clinics and 50% off Summer sales.


Perhaps I am being glib but this is the quintessential Irish solution to an Irish problem, which can also be used to describe Fine Gael's opposition to human embryo stem-cell research. (Though an English solution to an Irish problem may be more a accurate appraisal).


Whilst the influence of the Catholic church has waned due to the corrosive effect a decade of child sex abuse scandals has had on the public, its influence on our political leadership is still significant. Only this week, Lucinda Creighton, Fine Gael's equality spokesperson said that she did not support gay marriage as "marriage is primarily about children" and went on to say that the purpose of marriage is to "propagate and create an environment for children to grow up." She elaborated that while she believes gay couples should be treated “fairly and justly” in matters of taxation, marriage is “different.”


Some weeks back Eamon Gilmore, speaking on Pat Kenny's morning radio show, when asked if Ireland was ready for an atheist Taoiseach he replied, "it should not be an issue as it is, essentially, a private matter." As Broadsheet put it, "that'd be a no then."


Whilst it is true to say that #ge11 has gone some way to redrawing the political landscape in Ireland it has not gone far enough.


Lets cross (sorry, atheists) our fingers for 2015.

Election Day 15 - The Morning After

After Ireland's loss to France in the Six Nations Rugby on Sunday, the post game analysis made me wonder if the panel and I watched the same match. So too last night's leaders' debate. Raking through the coals of yesterday's discourse, there is hardly an instance where two commentators agree on the performance of the candidates. The one exception being, that Enda Kenny did well, or at least didn't harm his chances of becoming Taoiseach of the forthcoming 31st Dáil. Opinion. Yours and mine. Hers and his.


One such commentator on Pat Kenny's radio show this morning suggested it was Gerry Adams who won the debate because he made no attempt to engage in real policy and because without pretense he spoke to 'his people.' One is forced to question this logic as, presumably, Gerry's 'people' are already votes in the bag.


Whilst Ireland elects a parliament, the effect of the leaders' debate is not unlike an American presidential debate. The party leaders are not debating merely to ensure their own seats, and are therefore not merely speaking to their own constituents. They, like a presidential nominee, put forth a vision for Ireland on behalf of all the candidates of their respective parties. It is for this reason that I believe Adams performed poorly (relatively speaking). He danced around his podium like a fidgeting child, perhaps a metaphor for his reluctance to engage on specific policy issues.


Early on, it was the Sinn Féin leader, along with Micheál Martin, who traded insults, each calling the other a 'magician' and reference to Paul Daniels was made. But the real magicians of political debates are the practitioners of the dark art of spin.


Spin masks itself as mere opinion, and after all, everyone is entitled to one of those, right? What is striking in the post debate discussion, is how we are unaware of most Irish commentators' political allegiances and as a result their opinions should be treated with healthy scepticism, as if they are dressed in sheep's clothing.


For example, I am surprised by how positively commentators have reacted to the more negative aspects of the debate. Phrases such as 'landed a blow there' or 'had him on the ropes' were used to describe (the albeit rare) personal attacks of one leader to another, such as when Martin reminded Adams that he's not from 'down here.' But in the U.S. participants are warned against such negative attacks as polling data suggests that voters prefer candidates to espouse their own policies in favour of negativity.


Perhaps the most polarising performance of the night was that of Green leader, John Gormley. He was on the periphery of the stage and, for long periods, of the debate. But when he held the floor, he spoke with a coolness that many have misinterpreted as defeatist - as if the nitty-gritty of government has punctured his idealist view of politics. He attempted to engage with the other leaders and his rhetoric was the least partisan of the bunch (what other option does he have). Green supporters may feel aggrieved that Fianna Fáil and Labour borrowed the Green playbook but can console themselves that environmental issues featured prominently over the 90 minutes.


Micheál Martin meanwhile, as the most embattled of all the participants, was bullish and sometimes snide and condescending. But overall he deflected the attacks well and not once did he mention 'Fianna Fáil.' A rebranding has taken place where the tarnished FF has given way to MM.


Enda Kenny, who in his role as Taoiseach elect, looked statesmanlike and calm. He occupied the centre of the stage and visually much of the focus was on him, and as such, reinforced the perception of him as a leader.


The suggestion that, because of a meeting with German Chancellor Merkel earlier that day, Kenny was not coached or 'handled' is preposterous. He stayed on message throughout and mentioned FG's 5-point plan and policy document 'Lets Get Ireland Working' several times and his well judged hand-in-the-pocket-I'm-in-control moment was not spontaneous.


All in all, television debates are a matter of style over substance. I would have preferred if one of the debates was conducted through the medium of radio only. It is a commonly held belief that in the U.S. presidential debate of 1960 between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy that those who listened on radio favoured the former, whilst those who watched on television preferred the latter. Perhaps then, we would have to pay more attention to what was said and not how it was said. Then maybe, the candidates would say something worth hearing. 

*

General Election - Day 7. The First Debate

As I sit down to write this post, Fine Gael's website tells me there are 16 days 4 hours 30 minutes and 56, 55, 54, 53 seconds to election day. For Eamon Gilmore and Micheál Martin a mere thirty minutes stands between them and the electorate, as they partake in the first televised leaders' debate on TV3. In my last post I commented on Enda Kenny's chairman of the board style of leadership, however the joke doing the rounds now is that he is the empty-chair man of the board. This of course is because he is refusing to attend tonight's debate due to personal animosity with Vincent Browne who is mediating. RTÉ announced this morning that, 'Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny is to take part in a public meeting tonight in Co. Leitrim around the time of the TV3 leaders' debate.'

Fianna Fáil have done their best to give this story legs, (the above picture taken from Fianna Fáil's website) and though it is true that for some voters Enda's absence is a grave insult, for most, this story is running out of steam. In the last hour an Irish Times poll suggests that Kenny will not suffer for his failure to attend.


But the media love debates. Heck,  I love debates. Last year I live-tweeted all three UK leaders' debates and found the format conducive to such observational zingers as:

Brown reformats axis of evil: "Chain of terror." Gearbox of fear? #leadersdebate

Clegg: 'can we move beyond this political points scoring?' Someone should remind him where he is. #leadersdebate

But is it important? In 2002 Michael Noonan (then FG leader, now Finance spokesperson) won the debate versus Bertie Ahern but still Fine Gael were brought to its knees in electoral terms.

In 2007, newspaper consensus on the morning after the debate was that it was 50-50 or at worst for Fine Gael,  Ahern won on points. Bertie began nervously; focus on his personal turmoil worried him, but Enda let him off the hook, citing the tribunal investigating Ahern as ongoing. Since then there has been some retrospective analysis done, and it is now the commonly held belief of many that Kenny performs poorly in debates. 

On the flip side, I've heard it said that Gilmore can handle anything Vincent Browne can throw at him. This merely underlines how unfortunate it is that the presenter and chairperson should feature so prominently in the discussion. #vinb must change his style to facilitate a fair debate to inform and benefit viewers. 

The underlying feature of the debate is that there is little or no evidence, at home or internationally, to suggest that political debates change the minds of the electorate at large. However a recent study in the UK of last year's three-way UK leaders' debates suggests there may a price to pay for Fine Gael among younger voters. Edna Kenny will hope that the 18-24 age-group have better things to do this evening and that the symbolic empty chair will will have a negligible effect on voters.

But if the debates themselves fail to move the needle then what of the media reporting of debates and the campaign itself? The Sun newspaper continued to inform the electorate today by sending a chicken to a Fine Gael press conference; a presser that Kenny looked comfortable and performed well in.

Picture from Bryan Dobson

Take this tweet from @RTEElections:

"FF’s Darragh O'Brien says FG has been making increasingly personal attacks on Micheál Martin in recent days. #ge11"

RTÉ are an impartial news organisation and the media outlet through which the majority of the Irish electorate access their information. Why, in that case, report a he said, she said story. All Fianna Fáil have in their locker is to attack and play on the fear of change. Whether or not O'Brien's assertion is true, merely saying it (and subsequently reprting it, verbatim) reinforces the idea that FG are engaged in dirty politics (albeit Irish style, which thankfully resists the poisonouss personal attacks that disenfranchises American voters and was the catalyst for Obama's win for the Democratic nomination and General Election, because of his bi-partisan approach). It brought to mind Newstalk's current advertising slogan, "get the news without the State-run spin."

But then again, FG don't need Enda Kenny or Micheál Martin or the media to look foolish and damage their campaign. Today Fine Gael launched what they call its "Twolicy". To see how they arrived at this public relations car-crash take the words policy and Twitter, watch an episode of The Hills, have a lobotomy and then mash them together. The party has invited supporters to become 'eCanvassers', by signing up to Twitter and tweeting the party’s policies and news. “Help us knock on virtual Irish Doors, simply by accessing your computer every day.” There will be a lot of virtual doors slamming shut in the face of "Twolicy".


In spite of the continuing FG PR gaffs, this time there will be no panic or talk of replacing the leader. Fine Gael will make up the majority of the next government. Fianna Fáil's desperation to cling to power is manifesting itself in what has been a negative and underwhelming campaign to date.


Fianna Fáil have already lost the battle for the hearts of the electorate and if as Fintan O'Toole outlined today, they have also lost the battle for their minds. FF's campaign exists inside of a credibility vacuum, so when Micheál Martin says, 'few parties would have brought in the kind of budget cuts [we] did on the eve of an election,' it smacks of the delusional. The Fianna Fáil government that delivered the budget of December 2010 was like a spokesperson for the IMF/ECB. FF turned the sovereign government of Ireland into a PR firm. Today Martin said of their manifesto:

“In drawing up this manifesto I set a clear limit. There are no new spending commitments, there are no gimmicks and there are no poll-tested sound bites targeted at different sections of the population. The reason for this is simple, the money is not there.”

If the money was there would FF be awash with gimmicks and vote-getters?


On day 7 of the election campaign, the three main parties' focus was reform; political, electoral and public-service.


For Labour "it is time for a fundamental review of our constitution." They are proposing "a constitutional convention, a coming together of all strands of Irish society to redraw our Constitution. The constitutional convention would include experts and specialists, but would also include individual citizens, randomly chosen to serve in much the same way that we choose juries."


Their 90-member 'constitutional convention' will have an 'open mandate', and "thirty of its members would be drawn from the Oireachtas, 30 members would be academic or practicing lawyers and others with experience or expertise from non-governmental associations and organisations and 30 would be ordinary citizens. The mandate would be to review the Constitution and draft a reformed one within a year."


Labour, like Fine Gael, favour a single chamber, directly elected government and both parties outline in detail the reasons for the abolition of the upper house.


Labour also outline how they would increase the frequency with which the Dáil sits, saying there will be "a 50 per cent increase in Dáil sitting days. Dáil Éireann will in future meet four days a week. There will be a summer recess of just six weeks and significantly reduced breaks at Christmas and Easter. We will abandon the practice of providing a “mid-term break” – a full week off at St Patrick’s Day and Hallowe’en."


Other unexceptional reforms such as involving public representatives at an earlier stage of the legislative process and "restrict[ing] the use of guillotine motions" are listed but these are the sort of "reforms" that are more bark than bite. Oh and they will ensure that Dáil standing orders provide a minimum of two weeks between each stage of a Bill," with the caveat,"except in exceptional circumstances." For which I read: whenever we feel like it. And therein lies the problem with electoral reform manifestos. They are bullshit. Real political reform must come from the government of the day. Some of Labour's reforms can be boiled down to, we'll do business with more humility or we'll listen more.


Of all the outlandish promises made by parties during an election campaign, electoral reform is the easiest to abandon when in office. Unlike the UK leaders' debates, where a specific, tangible electoral reform policy took centre stage i.e. voting systems, in Ireland there's a more general, lets reform our broken politics. It is understandable that in the wake of FF's rein, where it is apparent that at Cabinet level in particular, there was either a reluctance or an inability to listen to ordinary people and see beyond their own self importance, that Labour may want to expand the discourse between the body politic and the citizens whom it serves. But that must be balanced with leadership. Many of the electoral reforms contained in Labour's brief are open-ended, talking of a need to consult the public at every turn and are therefore vague. There is, of course, some detail but it s not headline grabbing and refers mainly to the technical day-to-day running of the Dáil. This lack of glamour, though, does not demean it - after all, the more efficiently and transparently our parliament works, the better the chances of restoring public confidence in politics.


There are also policies that will make voters scratch their heads and think, huh? Such as Labour's proposed introduction of 'a role for the Ceann Comhairle in deciding whether a Minister has failed to provide reasonable information in response to a question." They don't already do that? They really should do that. But considering the speaker is usually taken from the government benches one could argue that this is a case of style over substance or good intentions with little practical application.


Within the Labour proposals, there is undoubtedly a sense of the National.

"Government long-term goals will be clearly stated and communicated to the public service and citizens. The factors and factions influencing the formation of these goals will be identified. Actions to achieve goals will be capable of measurement and a midterm report on performance in relation to the goals provided."

When one visits Fine Gael's website, one is confronted with a story, the headline of which reads, "Micheál Martin has zero credibility after he takes €90K to leave Cabinet."


The accompanying video of Enda and Lucinda Creighton holding signs aloft outside Leinster House reading, "DOWN WITH THIS SORT OF THING" and "CAREFUL NOW" respectively, rams home that FG are morally outraged*.


* DISCLAIMER: WARNING VIDEO MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED.


Stepping back (slowly) from the surreal, one then notices 'The New Politics,' a 101 page booklet published by FG,  which begins by stating; this is the "most ambitious programme for political reform since the 1930s. Fine Gael, the party that created the State and declared it  a Republic, will build a New Republic in Ireland" - at least that will get some of the unemployed construction workers back on the job for a while - "where trust is restored in our democratic institutions and the concerns of the Citizen, rather than the elites, are placed firmly at the centre of government."


They go on to say, "Fine Gael’s starting point is simple: political failure lies at the heart of Ireland’s economic collapse."


FG love 5-point plans. They love them almost as much as they love Collins. That's why I was struck by the following statement: "The New Politics is built on four key pillars:" Four! These points consist of a single chamber Oireachtas, a new Dáil (for those of you without Junior Cert Irish this is not to be confused with FDR's new Deal), Open Government and Empowering the Citizen. In case that's too much for you they even included this graph, to help you visualise the complexities of their 5 point....sorry 4-pillar plan.

Or as Enda succinctly puts it. “the answer for me is both simple and profound. Before we were a Tiger we were a Republic.”


Fine Gael, via twelve appendices, do go into some detail of their plans and identify the specific articles of the constitution they intend to reform. They also include a draft bill, entitled 'Open Government Bill 2010'.


I have outlined two of the three main parties' pledges in some detail. I enjoyed reading them, political reform is an issue I put a lot of stock (beef stock) in, this election. I have no such appetite to discuss Fianna Fáil's plans for political reform, as I believe, more than any other issue, this arena is where they have the least credibility. After 14 years in government, the reason is self evident. If you would like to read about some of Martin's reform proposals you can do so here.

P.S. Since I included screen-grabs from FF's and FG's websites, here's one from Labour's:

General Election - 25th February 2011 - A call to arms

Fianna Fáil were in Mount Street for theirs. Fine Gael were at party headquarters for theirs. And Labour went to the Guinness Storehouse for theirs.

If one were to graphically represent, as a word cloud, Labour leader Eamon Gilmore's remarks this morning, as the three main parties launched their election campaigns, it may look something like this:

Yesterday in the Dáil he used the word twenty times and today it also featured prominently.

In response to questions over Pat Rabbitte's sexist remarks concerning female FF candidates, Mr. Gilmore said publicly, that the comments were 'flippant' and not to be taken too seriously. But privately he will know, in an election campaign, everything you say counts. It's as if words undergo a change of state, a transformation from some gaseous form to dense, dark matter.

But then again, it's difficult to account for the idiosyncrasies of an individual voter; forgotten, as the electoral discussion revolves around the twin suns of polling data and sample sizes.

One man in Galway said he would "always vote for Fianna Fáil, as they had always been good to pensioners." He said it as I have reproduced it here; without an exclamation mark. One resists the urge to quip, à la Grandpa Simpson, where are my teeth, who am I? To do so would commit a grave disservice to the thousands of pensioners who marched on Leinster House to overturn a Fianna Fáil government decision to regressively curtail medical card entitlements. 

But sometimes the mind is impermeable to reason. Loyalty in politics should not be so easily earned and so rarely given away. It is this sort of narrow ideological fundamentalism that has seen Fianna Fáil regarded as the most successful political franchise in Europe, and which gave rise to the arrogance and sense of entitlement exuded by their big players over the last decade.

Enda Kenny will hope that Labour, and in particular Fianna Fáil and Martin, will heed the last Dáil words of Taoiseach Brian Cowen:

“This election will define our economic future and decide whether Ireland moves forward from this recession, prolongs it or succumbs to it. I urge the people to examine the policies being advanced by each of the parties and to cast their vote accordingly.” And pertinently, “this election should not be about personalities but serious debate, reflection and the solemn business of democracy."

 A text to the Lunchtime show on Newstalk said sagaciously of Enda:

 "He simply hasn't got it."

Got what? (Secular lefties look away now). Perhaps Deputy Kenny will prove the antidote to sleaze, to tents in Galway and to policies which maintain the status quo of an economic elite, who acted as lobbyists for their own monetary advancement. Perhaps he will perform to the exulted standard that his supporters have promoted (nay mythologised), that he’ll be a chairman of the board kind of Taoiseach.  So if Enda can’t get the job done he knows a man (sorry Lucinda) that can. It will probably be a man. FG are running a mere 15% of female candidates of a total of 102. [i]

And what of Micheál Martin? For he too seeks to brand himself as the candidate of change, he who has been in cabinet for 14 years. Where do FF grassroots get their motivation from? He will need every last splutter the Fianna Fáil machine, running perilously low on gas, has to give him. Martin will need to win 39 seats or more to avoid being anointed as the least successful FF election leader in history.

Martin has identified Sinn Féin and Labour as his battlegrounds, and if he can attack Fine Gael while doing it all the better. His employment of the term “tug of war politics,” at his party’s campaign launch, neatly highlights the policy gulf that exists between the two would-be government partners, and is perhaps a euphemism for; a vote for Labour is a vote for Fine Gael. This strategy gains credibility in the wake of  both FG and Labour  candidates foolishly attacking one another in the past week.

Normally I would not advocate a pre-election pact, and allow Fine Gael and Labour to battle it out on the merits of their separate platforms, and if the time comes, to negotiate a programme for government and bridge the ideological chasm. But under these circumstances, it is vital that the electorate is presented with a cohesive plan and message; a one-hymn-sheet-only agreed manifesto where economic policy, financial regulation, job creation, education investment and a strategy to rebuild brand Ireland that all the people of Ireland can support, or not.

With these doubts, these unanswerables, Fianna Fáil may gain ground playing on the anxiety such uncertainty fosters. But what Martin is overlooking (publicly, at least - but then, what else can he do?) is that for now the only certainty the country needs is to know that FF will be confined to the opposition benches for the foreseeable future.

This may be an election where anti-government (FF) rhetoric is enough to win, but the electorate should hold the probable usurpers to a higher standard than that. Political reform must feature prominently in the discourse of #ge2011.

As for Sinn Féin, are they going to run a campaign, solely mimicking the anger of voters? Can they afford a leader, in Adams, who is out of his depth economically, when it is an issue of singular importance in this election? Are they capable of shaping a narrative that outlines the political and policy failure of Fianna Fáil's bank guarantee, bailout and NAMA, beyond lip-synching the average coat on a bar stool?

Can Fine Gael outline feasible policy positions that they belive in and resist a manifesto, which has been vetted and combed over by the PR department? Public sector reform is music to the ears of most disgruntled private sector workers but will the detail of such reform stand up to scrutiny?

The axiom, the only poll that counts is the one on the 25th, is true, but only up to a point. In American election campaigns they have a phrase, "the big mo." Opinion polls in the run up to elections can invigorate campaigns deemed to have momentum and cut the legs of those without it.

Does it even matter? Does Fianna Fáil have any credibility when attacking opponents’ policies?  For even when FF receives, what on the face of it seems good news, for example, a reduction in numbers of un-employed, closer inspection exorcises any feelings of mitigation and solidifies what many assert is the total betrayal of their self-aggrandised and readily espoused founding principles. 


Falls in the live register figures, announced today, must be tempered with the ESRI's (Economic and Social Research Institute) assertion that the numbers of Irish jobless has actually risen, whilst the overall decline can be accounted for by a significant drop in non-Irish job-seekers, many of whom are merely returning home.

Will the Irish electorate show the steel at the ballot box that they failed to show in 2007, when the pre-election opinion poll invective, whist not as bilious as now, nonetheless suggested a Fianna Fáil defeat? Fine Gael losing the 2007 election was a blessing in disguise. In 2011, nothing other than a victory which inflicts severe electoral damage to Fianna Fáil can be countenanced.

To meet the enormous challenge facing Fianna Fail, Micheál Martin it seems has borrowed the Gordon Brown/New Labour play book, a word cloud of which would probably feature, solely, the word FEAR.

Some will regard Eamon Gilmore's adamant declaration that we must change the deal with the IMF as primal polemic chest beating, but others will feel he is mirroring their own frustration, and as we struggle to regain some sort of national pride, may clench a fist in defiant unity. Even if we know it's a lie, maybe it's a lie we want to believe.

What is self evident is Gilmore’s observation that this election will be like nothing we have seen before. Does this signify a move from micro to macro, local to national? One can only hope so. We are a single brush stroke on the economic landscape of the world and as such our political institutions must evolve to shape a national vision.


[i] Evening Herald - herald.ie - Family portrait puts women on frontline for Kenny campaign