Fianna Fáil is to retain the presidency by default for another seven years, until 2011. Fine Gael thinks it is OK for Fianna Fáil to retain the presidency, writes Vincent Browne.
Indeed Fine Gael supports that. Labour thinks two inconsequential by-elections are more important than an opportunity to campaign for values it thinks (or says it thinks) are important. The Green Party is so afraid of rocking the Rainbow boat that it passes up the best opportunity that has come its way to advertise what it stands for and win support. All parties are united in ensuring that the electorate should be denied an opportunity of passing any verdict on the McAleese presidency or supporting any alternative.
Once again money plays a big part in election campaigns or rather in electoral considerations. And the establishment parties wonder why the electorate is apathetic about politics?
First let's deal with the money question. One of the considerations supposedly in the calculations of the Labour Party and the Green Party in deciding not to advance candidates of their own is that a campaign would diminish their coffers, especially if it were to attempt to match Mary McAleese's hugely-funded operation. Mary McAleese last time around was supported by the usual conglomeration of builders and businessmen (and maybe even businesswomen) who see it as their democratic duty to support the electoral process by financing the party and the candidate that best represents their interests. Mary McAleese certainly fits their bill. She unashamedly "showcased" their wares around the world during the last seven years and can be relied upon to do so again. Speaking at the press conference last week launching her campaign she said that such initiatives were not in support of millionaires or billionaires but ordinary small business people. Maybe. But at least one billionaire, Martin Naughton of Glen Dimplex fame, benefited from her "showcasing" during her trip last year to China and, incidentally, he reputedly has been one of her campaign's major financial benefactors. Coincidentally, Mary McAleese appointed him to the Council of State, although it should be acknowledged they knew each other prior to her first presidential campaign.
But, one way or another, the Fianna Fáil fund-raising machine this time has been able to drive off potential competitors. Once again, money talks in Irish politics.
Doesn't it say something about the state of our political culture that after all we have found out over the last seven years (as it happens) about the cancerous infection of politics by money, that money is a major determinant in a presidential election? Of course money does not fully explain away the cynicisms of the Labour Party and the Greens in opting out of this campaign. These people are interested in office primarily, not in changing society. Because to change society they would have to campaign on issues, win support for change. That is not the agenda.
They, along with Fine Gael, have allowed an opportunity to campaign for change to pass them by (and pass us by) and they are allowing one of the great symbolic offices of the State to symbolise blandness, mixed with self-satisfaction and self-congratulation for another seven years. But worse than that. Not alone have they themselves refused to engage in a campaign but they have contrived through their parties to deny any candidate the opportunity to stand by the instruction to local councillors.
Now, the idea of Dana being president is too ludicrous to contemplate - at least I think so. However, others think differently and why should they be denied an opportunity to register support for what they think Dana represents? Furthermore, were there to be an election with just Dana as an opponent to Mary McAleese it would enable those of us who oppose Mary McAleese but who could not bring themselves to vote for Dana an opportunity to register disgust at the whole charade by spoiling our vote.
Fine Gael justifies this on the grounds that Dana had fought four elections against the party and had also opposed Fine Gael's position on Europe. So what? Mary McAleese fought a general election and a presidential election against Fine Gael and opposed Fine Gael's position on the divorce referendum and they support her for the presidency. They are not being asked to support Dana for the presidency, they are being asked merely to afford her the opportunity to stand.
As for Fianna Fáil. Remember the last time around, the leader of Fianna Fáil thought Mary McAleese was not the best person for the presidency, he thought Albert Reynolds was, or so he said. Why, if he was prepared to vote against Mary McAleese, should he deny others now the opportunity of doing likewise? In a "short" on page 5 of yesterday's Irish Times, the headline trumpeted: "Rabbitte calls for debate on clean needles."
Isn't that comforting? No debate on the presidency, no debate on a fairer society. A debate on clean needles!