November 28, 2011
Hi Folks, due to time pressures on writing and the upcoming launch of my new book ‘Dynasties: Irish political families (available in shops from around 2 December 2011) I havent updated this blog as often as I should. You will find articles by me over on Independent.ie in the Opinion/Analysis section. If you have any queries in the meantime or wish to contact me about any writing/comentary/articles or broadcasting then I am as always desperate for work and opportunities. I can be reached on 087-6202297 and thanks for checking out the blog……….
October 10, 2011
I came from a family with deep Fianna Fail roots. I grew up surrounded by the FF organisation. I have been a long time critic of how the party has been run internally. However, while not wishing to be boastful, I will say that I know a little about what a grassroots political organisation is and a tad more than some other commentators about what its like inside a political party.
Now, usually the stuff about how Fianna Fail runs its organisation is only of interest to those within the party. In recent years however, some of its own internal failings were also part of the same sick system that caused so many problems in the country and therefore the discussion has widened somewhat. In recent weeks it has become an issue in the presidential campaign.
Let me state clearly what follows is not some fawning piece to play nice for Sean Gallagher; he can fight his own battles. Instead, it is an attempt to draw people’s attention to some of the problems within FF and they are problems that many outside the party clearly don’t understand if the questions thrown at Gallagher are anything to go by. The reason they are important is so that other parties do not fall victim and so that the public has a reasonable understanding of what things are like in a political party.
Fianna Fail destroyed its own grassroots. It took power completely away from them. It hoisted decisions on them in a take it or leave it manner, always depending on loyalty to get it through. This worked for a while once things seemed to be going well. Like most of the electorate, FF members assumed people were doing their job and concerns were only voiced here and there. But when the abject failure of this came to light FF members like the electorate were angry, betrayed and far less trusting. In any event, there was nothing they could have done, no more so than any other voter because they had absolutely no power or input over anything. That is the key lesson number 1. Fianna Fail reduced its members to having no more of a role than any voter in the public at large. Therefore, why would anyone bother being a member? Just so you could have the honour of knocking on doors or taking abuse?
Fianna Fail has a membership system that is in need of a complete overhaul. Some cumainn are particularly well run, many others are not. There are people out there who are listed by a cumann as members who have rarely, if ever, attended an FF meeting. Indeed I know of some examples of people who never vote FF and are still listed as members of particular cumainn. When you join FF you just show up at your cumann, sometime later you will get a membership card. To leave FF is simple, stop going to meetings. Yes, your name will probably remain on a list somewhere but you will more than likely never hear from them again, once your cumann either decides to remove you or just stops contacting you. I know many former members of Fianna Fail. They never wrote a letter, they never officially resigned. What would be the point? The view on the ground is that it’s so inefficiently run at the top they would probably not even know what to do with a letter if they got one.
In a county there is a Comhairle Dail Ceanntair. This is made up of the plebs from around the county. There are a number of roles such as the chairperson, the secretary, the PRO and indeed the delegate to the Ard Comhairle or National Executive. None of these roles bring any great power or influence; they simply signify that your peers respect you. But one of the great problems for FF has been that it has removed the authority and relevance of the people in the roles and their main function is to arrange a canvass during an election and to do what the TD tells them.
So for starters let’s get over this nonsense that somehow the county organisation is a deep and powerful unit. If it was FF would not be in the mess they are today and believe me, if you are young and able getting a position on your CDC is not an overwhelming task.
So let’s look at this next level, the National Executive. Vincent Browne when questioning Gallagher suggested it was ‘at the very heart’ of the decision making in FF. I felt very self important when he said that. I served on it for two years. Unfortunately the reality is very different. Like the rest of the organisation, it has been devoid of power or influence for many years. It is the very definition of a talking shop. Government policy is never discussed other than in the broadest terms, there is little or no room for raising a matter not on the agenda and even less point. Nothing comes of anything. Its real function is to listen to recommendations on election strategy, finances or organisation from the all knowing sub-committees, strictly controlled by leadership and HQ. Its job is then to rubber stamp these proposals, should it refuse, the sub-committee will reconsider and re-present the same proposal, until you accept it. It is an utterly powerless body that could have done much good if it was properly run and organised. Unfortunately it is not.
I served on the National Executive via what is now called the ‘Committee of 20’, this is not a committee at all, its just 20 people directly elected to the executive by the party grassroots at the Ard Fheis. Now that is probably the toughest route to get on the executive. Ogra have representatives too and the rest is made up of CDC delegates, which is by far the easiest way to get on the executive. It doesn’t involve a big election or much political clout, just a few people in your home county to respect you. And that is how Sean Gallagher made this august body.
Once there you very quickly realise that this doesn’t afford you the opportunities or influence that is suggested on paper. There are very few people who have served on the FF national executive in recent times who will not tell you that it was a futile and disillusioning experience. It is at best a powerful example of how little influence grassroots actually had that here at the pinnacle of where you can go as a grass rooter you are nothing more than window dressing.
I am amazed Sean Gallagher bothered to send a letter at all. Many would just walk away. There is no obligation to send letters and no incentive as an ordinary party member when you see how you are treated, why even show the respect of sending a letter? Just go.
In the Independent, Bruce Arnold took issue with Gallagher’s description of ‘sporadic’ Fianna Fáil membership. Clearly Bruce Arnold has never served in the bottom rung of a political party in his life. Fianna Fail has had far too many ‘sporadic’ members. But it’s easy for it to happen. You get involved you join ogra and have a busy few years, then you move away with work, you don’t go to meetings, and yes your membership remains, but there is no way you are doing your party any good and they will not thank you for it. You have kids a family and running around to local meetings takes a back seat. Any volunteer knows this. If you are in any sports club I’m sure you know what its like is, sometimes you are heavily involved and then years can go by where you are not really sure if you are still in it at all, before someone asks for your help and you get stuck in again.
Stopping being an ordinary member of something does not usually involve big letters or statements; it involves a personal decision to just give up. Many Fianna Fail members have done the same in the last two years, no flood of letters or signals, just drifting away. It is this more than anything that can threaten a party’s future. People just stop engaging and you don’t even know about it. Some may come back but not unless FF reforms not just its grassroots, but it’s TDs their interaction and accountability to those on the grounds and not without a complete overhaul of how its central command in HQ does its business, starting with new people. Sean Gallagher did what many Fianna Fail people did, they just stopped.
Ironically this debate is not to my mind damaging Gallagher but it is doing a lot of damage to Fianna Fail. For someone like Bruce Arnold there is no such thing as a decent Fianna Fail person. Once you were there you are a blackguard for life. That’s fair enough if that’s your view. But people who join political parties of any shade are volunteers, and yes they can be wrong. They can change course and opinion many times over their lives, that’s what living in a free democratic state is all about.
For the hardcore in FF, Sean Gallagher is no friend. He walked out of the party when it was weak. However, if they start to think that membership of FF is being criminalised and they are not entitled to hold any views except the stereotype someone wants them too then they are likely to react and thus, Gallagher may benefit. Especially given that polls show Michael D. Higgins as the main beneficiary of current FF votes, such tactics could backfire as some may turn to Gallagher who were formerly opposed.
Can FF claim Gallagher as their own if he wins? Absolutely not. The reason for this is simple. We know Gallagher left FF having seen the petty constituency rivalries to which he fell foul; we know he felt frustrated by a lack of input. Let’s remember the TV3 documentary where even PJ Mara said they wouldn’t listen to him. Anyone trying to influence FF in recent years has been knocking their head off a stone wall. Many brave souls are still fighting the good fight, hoping to regain control of their party, many others like Gallagher, gave up and walked away. Gallagher knows that if he had sought the FF nomination there is a snowballs chance in hell that he would have got it. It’s a closed club and the party proved him right in the absolute mess they made of the nomination after. If Gallagher wanted to be the FF candidate he would have to have agreed to spend years sucking up to the right people, keeping leaders sweet, keeping HQ in the know and seducing them at every attempt. That is one of the problems FF faces, their inability to get the right people in the right positions. It is a challenge that Micheál Martin will hopefully confront soon, but for this campaign it was quite obvious that the changes in FF were never going to be revolutionary, but instead just steady. Gallagher would never have got a nomination. Combine this with the feeling of futility and you have your answer. It’s been said in many households in the last 2 years ‘Why bother? They don’t respect you and they don’t seem to want you, feck them.’
Out of this FF can only hope that it is the toughest of the tough that has survived and therefore there is hope if they get the right people to lead the party again. However, the idea that anyone who left cannot have an opinion contrary to the stereotype of FF is just nonsense. Sean Gallagher was a nobody in FF, there are other names you have never even heard of who far surpassed his experience or ability in FF. Gallagher does not deserve now to have his status suddenly ramped up by his opponents, and for those who are interested in FF there is a serious question as to why Sean Gallagher was never successful within the party and why he would not have had a hope of getting a nomination. Its not like FF can afford to lose decent people.
September 14, 2011
Once again the annual political party think in season is upon us. The chance for each party to take a nice weekend before a tough new season ahead and spend time thinking and talking about their plans. A time when each party is meant to listen and absorb what is being said about them and respond accordingly. Remember it was the political ‘think-in’ that brought us Inchydoney back in 2004, with Bertie Ahern deciding to abandon any attempt to rein in spending and instead to ‘listen’ to the voices that said there was still much more spending that needed to be done and targets to be met.
It was the ‘think-in’ season that brought us the famous ‘nasal-congestion’ episode with Brian Cowen. This years offerings were a lot less exciting. It’s hard to imagine a raucous FG front bench letting its hair down. No stories of 3 am duets between Enda Kenny and Richard Bruton, doing a cover of ‘Suspicious minds’. As the Labour party met it was certainly tempting to think of Eamon Gilmore treating us all to his version of ‘Under pressure’ but alas we had no such luck. As for Fianna Fail, well the political correspondents definitely seemed to miss the old days, it seems it was just a fairly plain affair lacking in the good company FF was once famed for, but what do you expect when you have lambasted them for ever acting like normal people.
The last few months have not been particularly easy for the Labour party and the months ahead look even trickier. At this stage it is a well known fact that in the run up to the last election both FG and Labour were so obsessed with the idea that FF was going to have some kind of vampiric rise from the dead, that they focussed on one thing: ensuring the destruction of FF. Yes that meant some silly promises, and meant that there was no management of expectations. They would say anything was possible. They could deal with everything else after, the most important thing was not to admit that FF was saying anything that could be construed as sensible.
Once that objective was achieved and FF was cast into an abyss, the problems have mounted in government. What is slightly unfair though is that Labour and Eamon Gilmore seem to be shouldering most of the blame at the moment. While most meaningful decisions are yet to be made, there is a sense that with the EU/IMF vetting things, Labour are on to a loser and that it is the more right wing policies of FG that will win out. Junior coalition partners usually get things by holding an unspoken threat to pull out of government. Once the PD’s gave up using that threat they faded into insignificance. Talking about stable government for the long term good of the country does you no favours in politics if people think your policies are now irrelevant in the face of a larger partner. Just ask John Gormley. There is no feeling however that Eamon Gilmore intends using that card, the last week of the general election showed us a man very happy to play support for Enda Kenny and thus far it would appear nothing has changed.
Labour did hold true on their promise of reversing the cut to the minimum wage and there is little doubt but that it is a party that still offers much potential in this government. However, Social Welfare was never going to bee an easy area for Labour. If you want a crackdown on social welfare fraud then go and implement the rules and inspections quietly. Making a point of talking about fraud and its levels is far more suited to right wing FG policy than Labour, so how did Joan Burton end up carrying the can? Reforming the public service expenditure is going to cause problems with unions and workers no matter how well intentioned it is, and yet again it’s a problem for Labour and Brendan Howlin. Ruari Quinn has problems ahead in education, Pat Rabbitte has all but disappeared. Indeed Labour has relied recently on some of it’s younger voices to carry its message and they have done so ably, but they must surely be wondering why some of the older crew were rewarded ahead of them.
Its not like FG has performed majestically. Enda Kenny disappears from view for longer periods than Halley’s Comet but yet, his leadership is fine. Phil Hogan is in the midst of several arguments about charges but it hasn’t damaged FG yet. James Reilly and Health? Well that was probably best summed up by FG Councillor Peggy Nolan on radio a few weeks ago when she was highlighting a crisis in Mullingar Hospital and when asked if she had raised it with the Minister said ‘The minister is away from his desk at the moment.’
The fact is that people are still largely hopeful that this government can work. There are encouraging economic signs for the country. We need this government to work. However, its policies seem to be based on what FF was doing and that leaves voters a little uneasy. In the months ahead Labour ministers will need to show leadership within their departments and convince the public that they are not just another grouping set to follow civil service advice on every single issue. In the early ‘90s Labour did bring many new and innovative approaches to government, they need to do that again. Right now, people who are still fearful of the future see FG as the safest boat in this storm. They seem to get what they want, they appear in government to have just a little more conviction and belief than Labour.
There is a long way to go for the government though. The next budget could change much and somehow I get the feeling that by that stage Labour, possibly lifted by the presidential election, will not be so quick to roll over. There is a problem though, in the absence of any public support for the opposition we have an extreme lack of choices. Essentially we can have FG on their own or FG with Labour. Labour is bound to think that it’s preferable that they at least have some influence on policy. It is only with a rise in support for either Sinn Fein or FF to see them into the mid 20s at least, that one could even see a mild threat to the government. Sinn Fein would certainly threaten the hard Labour vote and would represent a sea change in political thinking away from the centre. A rise in support for FF might work out better for Labour, as it would appeal to the soft left vote but also to some of the massive FG vote that was once FF. For Labour to remain comfortable in government and to get its policies through it is important that the gap between it and FG is narrowed. Life is more fun when you have options.
August 15, 2011
The presidential race has thrown up a far few surprises already and it hasn’t even kicked off yet. It would be impossible for me not to comment on what happened last week with Gay Byrne and Fianna Fail however. It was a poor outcome for Micheál Martin and while it has not mortally wounded him it has unfortunately raised questions.
First let’s deal with Gaybo. This is a man who has spent a lot of time before the public as a radio and TV presenter. Let’s be straight about it though, while it requires very specific talents it’s still easier to ask questions than to answer them. Gaybo has always had a habit of pontificating about a point and then ending the argument. He was never a man used to being chased or harried on a point and to not being in control of the debate. Like other celebrities Gaybo probably fancied a bit of politics, but as they all find out soon enough, it’s a profession that’s a lot harder than it looked. The suggestion over the weekend that Gaybo was surprised at some of the negative reaction to him speaks volumes. There are some who went as far as saying the attitude forced Gaybo out of the race. The naivety of this is shocking. Last week it was ok for Byrne to term others as simply ‘mad people’ but the slightest insult to him and he was hurt by it. That’s not a politician, that’s a prima donna.
From the outset it should have been obvious to leave Gay Byrne to it until he got a firm handle on what it was he actually wanted or intended because, like George Lee, there was always the opportunity for a petulant strop.
We know of course that Fianna Fail did not leave well enough alone. So how did it happen?
We must first give some background. After taking an almighty thumping in the general election, Fianna Fail is trying to rediscover its path. This started with a number of strong internal party meetings across the country, where its grassroots were promised the reforms necessary to return the party to being something of its old self, owned and run by ordinary people.
If that is your strategy then your course of action is obvious. You have to be honest, up-front and you have to give up central control and put some faith in your people. However, Fianna Fail is hounded by money worries. Once accountants start telling you how to be a political machine, you are in trouble. While you must heed their advice, let’s face it that no political endeavour makes real accounting sense. Politics is a game of beliefs and convictions first and foremost and they do not make for wealthy individuals or bank accounts. So, you must stand by your belief and then ask the accountants how much its feasible to raise or spend, even if it amounts to very little. If you lead by the spending argument first and belief comes second, then you will opt out of almost everything and gradually fade. The financial problems in FF led them to want to opt out of the presidential race. If FF was going to do this however, it needed to meet with those who were interested in running within the party as early as last May and lay out the financial problems and state openly and honestly that all were behind the decision that FF would not run a candidate. The longer the debate dragged on the more likely it was that FF would have to run a candidate.
So badly advised on how to avoid running a candidate FF were now facing a growing desire among its grassroots to get back into action. There is a Celtic tiger phrase I came to despise. It was the phrase of choice in management groups and political backrooms for years. That phrase was ‘We need to box clever on this…’ It was a polite way of saying we need to pull a stroke or cod people into believing something we don’t entirely believe ourselves. I could almost hear the phrase being said in FF backrooms last week. ‘Here is the solution, forget Crowley and these other nut job believers and Zealots, look at the finances, we can box clever, we back Gaybo before anyone else does, he strolls home and we beat FG, all achieved without costing us a penny, total sense, pick up the phone, we have to do this, don’t be so innocent, we cant win the race otherwise, lets live in the real world, this is politics.’
I’m pretty sure some variation of that is what Martin got told. Sadly he bought it. Failing to ask a few simple questions. Is stopping FG all that FF represents? Has it no view of its own to put forward on society, citizenship and the presidency? How do you keep a party going if you don’t have believers and keep overruling them? Is winning an election the only thing that matters? Is it not about gradually trying to build support for your political view? Is it not better to lose for the right reason than win for the wrong one? And of course most importantly, what does Gaybo offer FF? His views are incompatible and he will deride its previous governments and its organisation, so what does that achieve?
Micheál Martin exceeded his remit as leader in offering FF support. Firstly he had only one vote at the parliamentary party, he should not have spoken for other TDs, secondly those TDs had a duty to discuss any vote with their own constituency party machines before making a decision and this is how a party in a healthy state would work. But somewhere in FF there is someone who hates these troublesome grassroots and their old fashioned ways and would rather be shot of the lot of them. Unfortunately for martin, he was the man who promised that would no longer be the case and his failure to establish a new internal regime in FF came home to roost with this debacle.
FF can only hope that Martin will learn from this and think twice about such arguments in the future. FF needs to stand for something, even if that is only for being FF. Last week it appeared that it would no longer even stand for that. A collective deep breath is needed and Martin now needs to demonstrate his capacity to learn and how deep his convictions are.
August 8, 2011
The Irish Presidential race is lumbering along and so far is about as satisfying as a nice long yawn. But it is perhaps a good opportunity to take stock of where the candidates are at. David Norris is of course no longer in the running but the rest of the field must all fancy their chances.
Gay Mitchell. Fine Gael has still to get its campaign into swing but when it does we can expect a massive mobilisation. This is now Ireland’s largest political party and it has a lot to prove in this campaign. The presidency offers parties a chance to talk about something other than policy, percentages and rates. It gives you a chance to discuss vision, to show what your candidate represents in society and thus the image and role your party wishes to convey. It’s one of the reasons celebrity candidates are a bit farcical for a party, because even if they win as McAleese did for FF they still offer nothing as to what your party believes it represents in society. Mitchell is very different and FG will roll in behind him strongly. The biggest issue he has is trying to calculate how much of the new FG vote is actually just disaffected FF and has turned to FG as a temporary home only. Enda Kenny famously asked for disgruntled FF to ‘loan us your vote’. Since that many of the FF voters and particularly those that transferred to FG are feeling less than happy with the FG habit of dancing on the FF grave and the continual blame of all ills on FF. Some of those transfers had half expected FG to be different in government and be more at ease with FF than Sinn Fein but FG seem intent on seeing FF off. Mitchell is right to keep a low profile for now, he can still mobilise the biggest grouping when the call comes. He just needs to figure out where he is going to get transfers from and start to woo them. If Michael D. is the man he wants to beat then does he need to attract opposition votes? The letter controversy does not seem set to affect him unless it gets another drive but you never can tell. The real danger for FG is that opponents start to try smoke out Mitchell in terms of his religious beliefs and how he will handle the question ‘Do you fully back everything Enda Kenny said about the Vatican and do you believe they are the major party to blame in the controversy?’
Michael D. Higgins. So far so good for the elder statesman. But this is the easy part of the campaign. Back in 1990 when Eoghan Harris advised Mary Robinson he focussed heavily on the benefit of her youthful profile in comparison to Lenihan. He made the point that Lenihan would struggle to deliver the same energy on the campaign trail. This is the big worry for Michael D. Can he really last the pace of the crisis crossing of the country, the late nights, early mornings and endless tough interviews? If he can then it’s no problem but don’t underestimate the toll it can take on anyone. FG are bound to focus on his perceived bias against America and its policies and question whether he is the best man to meet and greet Irelands biggest friends, America & Britain. Michael D. needs to quickly get out and about and lose the poetic/academic image. Not because this is a bad thing but because he already has those votes, it’s the people that don’t relate to that image he needs to attract. Labour also have a tough task in fighting for the presidency while, unusually in Irish politics, the two main contenders parties are sitting together in Government. There is always potential for a rift and bad feeling developing over certain comments and the government can do without that. Michael D. is in a nice position in the polls, but the question is what next? For such a candidate the TV appearances in the campaign can make or break you by either reinforcing a positive image or by causing people who had related to your name to realise that it was only the name and not the person they were following.
Fianna Fail. As they have yet to decide we may as well bunch them as a group. Not much to say except that if FF could get 380k votes last Feb then those people must be fairly die hard, so if they attract that to their candidate they are in with an outside shout. Much is made of the money situation, but here’s how it stacks up in reality. The candidate will raise a certain amount of funds themselves as an Independent has to. They are refunded circa 200k so you can bank on that. The party gives what it can after that. The maximum you can spend is Circa 700k but there is no minimum. You do not have to go into debt and you do not have to spend a fortune. Of course spending helps you win but no harm contesting with a small budget either. Crowley, O’Cuiv or Hanafin can all help to position FF particularly with its own voters. It’s an opportunity to talk about the future of FF, what it has learned and what it sees as representing in society. The party desperately needs to show even its own supporters that it’s not completely dead, it can still fight and that it has good honourable people in its ranks. Regardless of success that message would be an important stepping stone for FF internally. If they opt for the likes of Gay Byrne it pretty much states what everyone thinks, FF are looking for a quick fix to get back, FF just want to stop FG, FF has no one capable or decent within its own ranks. That message would be an error but if the spirit of Bertie is alive within the bowels of FF then the quick win may be still attractive.
Mary Davis. Many see Davis as the dark horse in the campaign and indeed she is sitting nicely in the chasing pack. If we consider recent polls then the Davis/Gallagher/FF bloc could have a winner in there if they transfer among each other. Davis as a charity worker is bound to be well received and will be transfer friendly. She is also avoiding the attention of the big guns so far. However she is bound to come under greater scrutiny. Her challenge is not the one to one interviews but how will she handle the head to heads. Amazingly while her campaign team and apparently her roots all have lots of FF connections she is avoiding this question thanks to Gallagher getting all the attention on it so far. It has to come at some stage though. When it does everything she has said so far suggests she will disown and disassociate herself from FF and especially from Bertie Ahern during the campaign. With FG in full pursuit of the mater and continually questioning I am not sure this will play well for Davis. Nonetheless she remains a dark horse and so far a nice Teflon coating with no tough questions.
Sean Gallagher. The Dragon has a real fight on his hands, particularly with FF now ready to enter the race. One might have suggested some earlier back room manoeuvring from him to help ensure FF opted out on this occasion. Gallagher distanced himself for FF and it has only ensured FF grassroots became more determined to get into the race. Opponents of FF have conveyed an image of a duplicitous campaign where Gallagher is just afraid to say what he really thinks. Sitting where he is however Gallagher has some genuine positives. He is a nice guy, he has the potential to be very warm, humorous and folksy in TV interviews and this always goes down well. In order to win however, Gallagher needs to gamble, he needs in particular to get ahead of Davis. His one weapon in doing so maybe to change tack and openly court the FF vote. The trick for all in the chasing pack is to be the last one standing and then its may be possible to overtake either Mitchell or Higgins. In Gallagher’s case he should hope that’s Mitchell and he also needs to hope that FG and Labour do get a little bitter during the race.
As things stand it seems a three horse race. Mitchell, Higgins and whoever comes out on top of the battle for transfers during the elimination process for Davis/Gallagher/FF. This third candidate could then be a genuine contender. The real issue is that a bit like GE11 Fine Gael and Labour can still wrap it up and silence all opposition if they want. Rather than fight each other or try score points and possibly raise heckles in the government I am pretty sure someone in the bowels of government buildings is considering a gentlemanly ‘arrangement’ between the two government candidates that will see one or the other of their candidates over the line…..
July 22, 2011
As some of you will have noticed I now blog for the Irish Independent and you can catch me in the blogs section most weeks. I will also be continuing this blog of course and I would like to thank all of you who take the time to read it and have made it such a success for me! THANK YOU.
Ireland can feel positive in light of the news from the EU summit. While the full details are yet to emerge and face the cold hard analysis, the country should be happy whenever we get a crumb of good news. This government came to power on a wave of goodwill. Several public events added to this. However, they had begun to waste much of this and squander their chances with a series of avoidable errors.
Enda Kenny’s speech on the Cloyne report and the EU deal has however restored some of the publics faith. This is good for the government and also good for the country. There are many dark days and tough decisions ahead and only the strongest of heart will stay the course. This is not going to be easy and the task ahead of the government will be a lot more difficult that the gentle incline they have been cycling up laboriously in the last couple of months. They will enter the Alps in Winter.
IT is good news for the country however, that they do this with broad public support. Ireland does need to believe in itself again. It is the opposition’s job to read the small print and rein in a government from getting carried away with their own hype. A cursory glance at opposition statements over the last decade will turn up very little evidence of compliments or support from either Fine Gael or labour when they were in opposition. This must change however. It was encouraging to see that FF may yet prove it has learned harsh lessons from its time in government. This deal can be welcomed while still pointing out the dangers, FF seemed more willing that the other opposition groups to note this and that too is a positive for the country.
This is not a time to try heap criticism on the government, they did their best and seem to have come out of Brussels with a decent deal, they deserve a pat on the back, they know full well there are others itching to take their place on the pitch. But government is a hard slog and you take solace where you can.
Political predictions are a dangerous business. I once made an utterance that I will forever regret. It was in September 1994, Albert Reynolds had secured an IRA ceasefire. Inside and outside government he had been told time and again that it was impossible. He alone had believed it. He walked into the Dáil chamber and was met with a spontaneous standing ovation from all sides of the house. Given that economic news was improving and the government had EU money to invest, I was watching him walk down the steps to the Taoiseach’s seat, nodding and smiling. Fatefully, I turned and said ‘Nothing can touch him now’.
July 5, 2011
Social media has become the new buzz term in business and even more so in politics. On a beauty parade of what an organisation will change it is bound to feature highly. The problem is, not many truly understand just what it means for them. Politicians in particular suffer from this. Twitter, Facebook, blogging and the whole interwebs thing in general is a world they don’t really have time to explore. They rely heavily on advice about how to engage and interact with such media. Unfortunately for many they turn to people who are experts in old media for that advice and their view of what the internet means for politics is often biased and clouded by their need to keep the same rules in place for handling more traditional communications.
For some time now I have had a theory on Social media and politics that goes back to how society changes and develops but in the end it’s not something radically new just an evolution.
Let’s go back to Ireland in say the 1930’s. A political party was by and large controlled by its TDs. A party leader would have been very close to each TD. Policy discussion was debated in greater detail at parliamentary party meetings. A party had a very limited resource of advisers, or staff. Party policy had to be formulated by those TDs present. This in turn allowed Ds more input and also meant that they were better informed on the reasoning behind a decision. This was necessary because in the days before mass media the TD then went back to their constituency and delivered the news. This filtered down through a Party’s structures. Any feedback could be debated and duly brought back to the parliamentary party via the TD. Now, a TD also mixed and mingled within the community. The TD spread a message through particular opinion leaders. For instance, the views of the local teacher or Doctor would be seen as important to the community and therefore discussion and debate was an important part of engaging with particular people and groups within various parishes. It was communication via community. It didn’t always work but this was at least the theory.
The advance of Radio and Television began to change things. There was now much greater coverage and a demand for more information on the spot. At first this was a huge benefit to ordinary people. They no longer had to wait for a message to be distilled down the line or to hear the news second hand. Suddenly as an ordinary person in an ordinary community you could hear the news directly from the leader yourself. People outside of political parties could also gain more direct access to the news without interpreters putting a slant on it along the way. The benefits were pretty obvious.
Over time the downsides became apparent to the political leaders however. They were often caught on the hop, they had to give answers before a party might have properly debated an issue and this caused conflict. As years went on and things like local radio developed it became apparent that TDs going back to their constituency and speaking openly and frankly about what was said or their own views was not ‘helpful’. A new system was developed in response and was perfected during the 80s and 90s. In this system the centralised Press Office took control. Parliamentary parties took second place to advisers, handlers and policy geeks. There was one definite path to success. The policy and debate was kept to a nice neat group. TDs are kept happy with a nicely packaged ‘info pack’ telling them exactly what to say when they are approached by the media. The decisions were instant and the feedback of information from ground up died a death as there simply wasn’t time to take it into account. To protect politicians an array of buffers was put in place, direct access to those at the top became very difficult. They were hidden, well tutored and only appeared when arguments were well thought out and prepared, unless of course they were ambushed but this was rare enough.
The approach was not to different to many other walks of life. Once upon a time you talked to you local doctor, then media allowed you to hear from other health experts and Executives but before any real interaction took place a layer of PA’s and administrators ensured you couldn’t really talk to them directly.
In politics, the phrase ‘managing the media’ became common place. The new system was all about control. Whereas in the past you instigated debated and awaited the outcome while trying to influence it, the system was now about the outputs rather than the inputs. You take a decision, you feed very little info in but you tell everyone what to say and why its great. What TV and Radio had now allowed politicians to do was to control the output.
Society always finds a way around things however. People tired of the one way nature of discussion and the inability to contact people at the top. This was true across the world and in several walks of life. The Internet allowed the response. Firstly through blogs and online material it allowed a wealth of information at your fingertips. Expert debate and analysis was instantaneous. As soon as a press release was issued it could be praised or rubbished before it even made the newspaper the next day. This should be the first lesson for politics. You can no longer be the sole influencer of the discussion by keeping something secret and springing on the country. People could access alternate viewpoints all too easily. Online boards and groups allowed discussion and debate among ordinary people that may previously have never met. The likes of Facebook allowed network and sharing of ideas by grassroots people who might never have even talked to each other before. This should be the second lesson. You can no longer decide something without consultation and expect everyone to be too disorganised to do anything about it. For instance, grassroots dissent within parties was never seen as serious, they were isolated and could be cut off. But in an age when a local member in Kerry can interact with others in Mayo and Dublin at a moments notice and build online friendships its all very different. Suddenly they can organise and oppose and challenge. Therefore you cant just control the output you must seek more input.
Tools such as twitter brought a new element that society craved. Not only could news be dispersed easily but you could finally access the top dog. It was a way of circumventing the established buffers. Such tools only work when the person themselves is operating them. Now people could tell Dan Boyle himself what they thought, now they could engage with him in debate directly. This should be the third lesson. The day of managing the media and the control of the press office has ended. A politician must now be able to interact and debate without advice and without someone to interpret. They must engage constantly and directly and to do so requires that TDs are much better informed, that they have bought in to the policy through discussion and debate but most of all that they are honest. The days of saying one thing and meaning another are over all to easily a tweet is recorded and comes back to haunt you. The message cannot be controlled and must instead be a definite personal belief. Yes it may lead to some argument within parties, yes it may undermine some policies but there is no other option.
Of course its not really all that new is it? We have just come full circle. Politicians must once again feed into the decision making process, grassroots views must again be taken into account, and communication must be person and direct to the community. The only difference is that the community is no longer just a geographic one, its an online one. Some politicians might think this online community is not that large. However, going back to the original example the community a politician sought to influence was not large, but it included opinion leaders, respected voices in communities. You will find that most opinion leaders are active online and they in turn are the ones writing, debating, running the local groups, or even canvassing. One thing is for sure, these opinion leaders use the internet to glean the information that makes others respect them. Therefore you must work with them and influence them.
We are just back to communities and a lot of Irish politicians should actually understand and welcome that. Communication must be open, honest and focussed on inputs rather than outputs. The day of the controlled press office is over.
June 22, 2011
The race for the presidency is currently being played out in a sub-plot involving council chambers across the country. Fine Gael has decided that its councillors will not support any independents looking for a chance to run. This position is entirely understandable and justifiable. However, the events in Longford last Monday suggest that not only will Fine Gael Councillors vote against an Independent, but where there is a delicate balance or where casting votes may be required FG councillors will actively work to thwart the proposal of any candidate. In Longford this was done through a deferral of the vote and a now ongoing argument as to whether the motion to back an Independent still stands. In short, FG manoeuvred to get to a position where their chances of defeating a motion would be significantly better than if a vote had gone ahead. This changes things because we can now safely say that FG are not just voting against independents but are effectively campaigning against them at local level and seeking to thwart any prospect they might have. Much also depends on how determined FF and Labour councillors really are to allow a name go forward. If they are, then independents could find friends where they thought they had none. If not then FF or Labour apathy could scupper the process in the face of a highly motivated FG. Each Council can only nominate one candidate. Te real danger particularly with the entry of Mary Davis is that in most Councils, while parties might agree on the desire to allow an independent a chance, which independent will be the question. If they can’t unite FG will put paid to their plans.
So, we now have three Independent candidates looking for a very small pool of votes. If there were only one then the pressure on councillors might be greater they fact that three are running makes it tougher. Westmeath County Council probably spoke for most FG members when they suggested there was no point in Independents addressing the chamber as FG were in control of the council. This however is another interesting point on a quite aggressive FG strategy. FG do not hold an outright majority but do hold the position of chair with Labour support. The suggestion is that where FG hold the chair then there is no pint in an Independent coming looking for votes. This is derived from the policy that it is the chair that decides what motions can be voted on and while there should always be a good excuse, FG clearly feels it can ensure motions are delayed or scuppered. With no outright FG controlled Councils therefore in play, just where could the votes come from? Listed below are the numbers, but if FG policy is that their chairs will frustrate the process then it would make many of these impossible. Fingal Council has already backed David Norris here are some of the others
Carlow – With FF holding 4 seats, Labour holding 4 and Others holding 2 it swings the balance in their favour as FG hold 9. However with a majority of just 1 it will require this disparate grouping to unite behind one candidate if Carlow is to nominate someone.
Clare – Its easy to see why the Independents have focussed heavily on Clare, a decent showing by FF Gave them 11 seats, Labour have 1, Greens have 1 and Others have an impressive 7. With FG struggling on 12, it would be a shock if Clare is not one of the first councils to give the go ahead to an independent.
Cork City – FF 6, Lab 7, SF 4 and Others 6. Another strong tally when compared to FG’s 8. Once again the groupings will need to show a little unity but a nomination is highly likely once the vote doesn’t split.
Cork County – FG hold an impressive 22 seats here but FF hold 12, Labour 7, SF 1 and Others 6. It will require a meeting of minds on one candidate but it should be possible.
Donegal – With FF holding 10 seats this council should be another magnet for Independents. Labour hold 2, SF 4 and Others 5. While FG on 8 would find it difficult to block any candidate.
Dublin City – Dublin will be closely watched to see how committed Labour really are to giving Independents a chance to run against their own candidate. FF only hold 6 seats, but Labour hold 19, SF 7, and Others 8. With FG only on 12, there is little they can do if Labour is intent on assisting an Independent and gather some support for the rest.
Dun Laoghaire – FF again struggle for numbers with just 4 but Labour on 8 and Others on 5 make up for this. FG are on 11 but It will take an agreement on one particular candidate to bring all votes together or FG see the vote split and ensure no one gets through.
Galway City – FF and FG hold 3 each here with Labour on 5 and others on 4. Its up to Labour and it will be interesting to see what they do in Michel D.’s back yard.
Galway County – Unlike the City, Labour only have 1 seat on the County Council SF have 1 and others have 8. With FG on a commanding 13, it will be up to FF on 7 to find agreement on a candidate with those in the other camps. This may not be easy with so many independents.
Kerry – While FG have a strong 10, FF are not far behind on 7 and Labour with 4. SF have 2 and Others 4. If FF and Labour are of inclination to support the same candidate it should be possible as they could surely convince some of the reminder to back them.
Kildare – 6 seats for FF and 6 for Labour added to 4 in the Others camp gives a commanding lead over FG on 9. Once again it comes down to the desire to back a candidate and the ability of FF and Lab to agree.
Kilkenny – With FG on 12 they do not hold an outright majority but it would take agreement on all sides to beat them with FF on 7, Labour on 5, Greens on 1 and Others on 1.
Laois – Once again it will take a genuine rainbow to overcome the FG block of 12. FF are on 8, Labour only hold 1, SF only hold 1 and Others just 3.
Leitrim – The size of the FG victory in 2009 is apparent as you go through the chambers. Again FG hold a block of 10. FF are not far behind on 8 but with SF only on 2 and Others on 2, it will require a concerted and united effort to get one candidate through against FG wishes.
Limerick City – With FG on 8 the task would seem almost impossible here. FF are on a disastrous 1. Labour hold 4, SF hold just 1 and there are 3 Others. It means every single vote uniting behind one candidate
Longford – Scene of much confusion this week as to whether they had voted on a motion or not. The nomination tabled by FF was badly planned at the very least. However, it showed FG willing to go to some lengths to block any independent, and tore away any veil of Councillors just voting with a party and not openly trying to stop anyone. FG hold 10 seats, FF are on 8 and there are 3 Others. If they can resolve the issue and if they can get a motion on the table again (a big IF) then they need a very united vote.
Louth – Things look a bit brighter for Independents in Louth. FF are on 5 and Labour on 2, this still leaves them just short of FG on 8 but with SF on a very strong 6 and Others on 4, the numbers should certainly be there.
Meath – FG hold a strong block on 11, but if FF on 8 and Labour on 4 unite behind a candidate then they have a good chance of success with SF on 1 and others on 5.
Monaghan – This provides a very interesting test. SF are the dominant force on 7, FG are jut behind on 6, FF hold 5 and Others 2. It will be up to SF but they will need to agree on an independent with FF if its going to happen.
Offaly – The faithful county remained so for FF and they still hold 9 seats, FG are just behind on 6, but the are 6 in the Others camp. A serious game of courtship can be expected here if the FF councillors decide they are up for a fight with FG.
Roscommon – There are 7 councillors described as Others in Roscommon and it gives a hint of the fragmented nature of politics there. SF only hold 1. FF are on 8 but getting agreement on which independent could be a headache with FG hoping the vote will be split as they sit pretty on 10.
Sligo – FG are dominant on 12 seats. It would require everyone to unite to get an independent across the line here with FF on just 7, Labour on 2, SF on just 1, and others on 3.
South Dublin – Back to Dublin and back to Labour. They hold 9 seats here, but FG are close behind on 8. FF on 4 and SF on 3 could give the numbers with others on 2. But they may find it difficult to agree a candidate and will Labour be that bothered if they cant?
Tipperary Nth – Things don’t look too good for the FG blocking tactic here. They have just 4 seats. With FF on 6 and Labour on 3 there is a good chance if someone can get enough of the 1 SF and 7 others to come to some agreement.
Tipperary Sth – Different story in the south of the County where FG on 12 would be optimistic they can block a candidate. FF are on 6, Labour on 3, and others on 5. Unity behind one candidate would be essential.
Waterford City – With Others on 5 here we can see yet again how difficult it can be to predict voting blocks when there are 3 Independent candidates looking for a nomination. With FF only holding 1 seat and Labour 3 and FG 4, the vote is very fragmented. SF and the Workers Party also hold 1 each. Hard to see agreement in these groups an hard to see who will drive the effort.
Waterford – Yet again FG are dominant with 11 seats. It would require FF on 5, Lab on 4, SF on two and the 1 remaining other all to combine to overcome the might of FG.
Westmeath – The FG chair has already rubbished any chance of a nomination for an independent but FG hold 8 seats, FF have 9 and FG only hold control thanks to the support of 6 Labour councillors. There is also one independent. Labour run the risk of being seen as an FG lapdog in Westmeath in light of the comments of the chair.
Wexford – FG hold a commanding 10 and have already successfully deferred a vote on David Norris candidature tabled by FF. FF have 5 and Labour 4, they will need the support of the two Others to get an Independent in the field.
Wicklow – FG are on 9, but with FF on 4 and labour on 6, SF on 2 and Others on 3, the numbers are certainly there.
June 7, 2011
Back in the days when people didn’t like Enda Kenny but professed to like Fine Gael, Enda had to state an approach to leadership that people would buy. They didn’t trust his grasp of economics, they didn’t see him as an inspirational leader and questioned his ability, often unfairly. In response Enda played to what people saw as his strength, his organisational ability and the FG team. He picked the team and was the manager. He suggested that as Taoiseach he would ensure his team worked, that he put the right people in place for the job.
The people liked this idea. Enda would not be a leader well versed in all aspects of policy or decisions, instead he would be a quality controller and manager checking the outputs were up to standard. It all sounded pretty good. Once in government Kenny has pushed this idea even more, the ‘team’ approach. Indeed he underlined it recently by suggesting that he would soon be calling Ministers in for them to appraise him on their progress and to illustrate what they were doing to deliver the programme for government. In other words Kenny definitely does not believe that he should be involved or know what Ministers are doing on an ongoing basis, it is up to them to report to him. If he was the type of leader that involved himself in the minutiae of policy he would have no need to call Ministers in because he would know exactly how they were performing.
The big benefit to this style of leadership is that it can allow Ministers to flourish, they get on with implementing ideas and discussions without the fear that someone is looking over their shoulder. Bertie Ahern had a wonderful ability to distance himself from decisions and Ministers if they eventually proved unpopular, but in reality Bertie watched and observed every little detail that went on. Every Minister knew that he always had an ear continually checking for anything that might not be in line with his thinking or could destabilise a government. It’s partially why his governments lasted so long. Ahern may have given off a ‘devil may care’ attitude but you could rarely approach him on even the most obscure piece of policy but he didn’t already know what was being planned and he knew how he wanted it to turn out. This approach can stifle Ministers, it leaves little or no room for experimentation or free thinking and very little questioning of decisions or overall policy occurs.
John Bruton and Dick Spring let Ministers get on with things but unlike Enda Kenny both seemed aware of the downsides. By using advisers and in particular programme managers they ensured that while Ministers had some freedom the Taoiseach and his office were always well informed. Eamon Gilmore seems to have adopted this approach. It is quite clear that the Labour front bench are very clear on what each Labour Minister may propose. Gilmore certainly is standing behind his team. On the other hand the big personalities in FG have caused some problems. Richard Bruton, Phil Hogan, Leo Varadkar all fell foul of this. Each in turn was rebuffed as simply putting forward proposals for discussion and not speaking for the cabinet. That is ok for now but it cannot last. Media and the people will tire quickly of a situation where they don’t know whether a Minister is serious or just throwing something out there. The Ministers will also tire of being essentially undermined to appease the other half of the government.
Over the summer Enda Kenny may be forced to rethink his approach to government slightly. It’s not enough to be the hands off manager. There is no point always coming in after the event. Kenny needs to head off at least some of these solo runs. He needs to remind his front bench that although they are free to carry out their duties, he is the Taoiseach and Eamon Gilmore is the Tánaiste and they must agree a line on each issue before it hits the media. This may be easier as advisers bed in to their positions but it needs to be fully in place by winter.
These issues are normal in any government and are unlikely to affect the immediate stability of this government which should be safe until at least the next local elections. However, a government cannot all such an early build up of argument between Ministers, Taoiseach and government parties. Very quickly this can snowball into Ministers feeling that the Taoiseach does not have their back or that the government partners do not trust each other. It’s a bit like taking a few yellow cards in the opening minutes of the game. These things can come back to haunt you.
