Comments (0)PrintEmail

On the presidential trail...

Well, there is no doubt about it - the divisions, fault lines and contradictions inherent in modern Irish life certainly showed up in no uncertain manner over the past couple of weeks. As usual, of course, the epicentre of our latest outburst of futile debate and controversy was colonial Dublin where the media and academia conspired to convince us that one of their own should become President of Ireland.

At this stage it is difficult to tell whether David Norris was motivated by personal ambition to put himself forward as a presidential candidate or whether the cabal which so bitterly opposed the candidature of Mary McAleese 14 years ago felt that its time had come to turn back the clock and put one of their own in the Áras. From an early stage The Irish Times was telling us that "surveys had shown" that Senator Norris was the chosen one of the broad mass of the Irish people and that the long-awaited new dawn of "liberalism" was about to appear on the horizon. Inevitably, and as usual, the rest of the media got on the bandwagon and a minor debate got underway as to what issues should be confronted by the new presidency. A few TDs promised support and Fingal County Council gave a warm welcome and commendation to the Senator.

Even at this stage, however, fault lines were showing. Seasoned observers were unconvinced by the surveying methodology and results. It was pointed out that long experience had shown that this type of survey, so far out from an election, could be notoriously unreliable in that many of the people surveyed would not vote at all and that another block would change their minds many times. Furthermore, the indifferent reception the aspiring candidate received on his tour of rural areas should have set alarm bells ringing - but no, it took two unexpected bombshells to blow the campaign out of the water. One was the production of a most ill-advised interview with Helen Lucy Burke and the other a disastrous letter written on Seanad notepaper on a sexual assault court case. It was obvious from the outset that Norris would have to withdraw from the presidential race - in the current Irish political climate anything remotely connected with sexual deviation is strictly taboo and he therefore fell victim to his own "errors of judgement" as he put it.

The above short resumé of events appears here only for the purpose of demonstrating the bias and double standards which our east coast elite will adopt when faced with broadly similar issues. In the Norris case his withdrawal was greeted with loud, long and bitter complaints about the "sinister" forces which conspired to de-rail his ambitions. All possible targets were identified - Catholic Ireland, the political system, homophobia, our immaturity in failing to appreciate the wonderful work the good Senator had done in the area of human rights. Never mentioned was his complete inexperience in dealing with rural matters or his bitter attacks on Pope Benedict.

The Brian Lenihan affair

For the presidential election of 1992 Fianna Fáil was faced with choosing between two high profile and highly experienced candidates - Brian Lenihan Senior and John Wilson. In choosing Mr Lenihan the party made a serious error. He was a fine man and an accomplished politician but was suffering from a serious illness which was bound to inhibit his ability to conduct a vigorous election campaign. In the event he passed away before the term of the eventual winner, Mary Robinson, had expired. Nevertheless he started out as front runner and was going well until he was hit with an unexpected obstacle. This was an allegation that some years earlier he had, in the course of a minor political controversy, made a late night phone call to the then President Paddy Hillery, on the matter.

Lenihan denied that he had made the call but unfortunately for him a young, aspiring politician/journalist, a Mr Jim Duffy, produced a tape proving that he had in fact done so. Led by The Irish Times, the Mary Robinson campaign went into top gear. A specially convened news conference chaired by the assistant editor of The Times was convened for a city centre hotel at which the tape was played and Lenihan's campaign was in severe difficulty.

Fianna Fáil, in defending Lenihan, said that the probability was that the drugs being taken for his illness by the candidate caused a temporary impairment of his memory, but this was immediately rubbished by the media. He himself went on TV and stated that after "mature reflection" he had recalled that he did indeed make the phone call. He apologised profusely but it was all to no avail - his campaign was doomed.

The point of all this is that the media and the constituency which went berserk at what was by any standard was a minor indiscretion by Brian Lenihan are exactly one and the same which defended, and continues to defend, the much more serious actions of David Norris and are adamant as to his suitability to be elected President of the Irish Republic. Curiously a study of one day's letters to the media last week revealed the majority in support of Norris were women.

On a broader front I pose the question - is not the current presidential election campaign just a charade of fripperies and trivialities and is it not past time that some or all of the candidates mentioned alcoholism, obesity, street violence or the crime epidemic? Furthermore is it not long past time that some at least of the aspirants spoke a few words in our native language?

Footnote

Mary Robinson was easily elected in 1992 but didn't even finish out one term in office. She resigned and went off to the United Nations.

Sean Fhocal

A deir siad go gcanann fearg fíor. Drunkenness and anger speak truthfully.