Catherine Connolly has accused Fine Gael of “the politics of fear ... the politics of smear” as she and Heather Humphreys exchanges barbs in the latest presidential debate.
Ms Connolly said her opponents were making false accusations about her instead of having a “real debate” about the presidency.
With another poll in the Business Post this morning confirming that Ms Connolly enjoys a significant lead in the race, Ms Humphreys struck a more combative tone in a debate on RTÉ Radio, directly addressing Ms Connolly with questions about a series of issues that have followed her throughout the first half of the campaign.
Ms Connolly accused Fine Gael of following the advice by former minister Ivan Yates, who advised the party in a podcast to “smear” her. Ms Humphreys denied the charge, saying that Mr Yates has nothing to do with her campaign, adding that he has as much to do with her campaign as Joe Brolly – who apologised on Friday for a lewd intervention about the presidential race – had with Ms Connolly’s.
READ MORE
Afterwards, Ms Connolly said while Ms Humphreys had said she was not involved in any smear campaign, “actually today there was a lot of allegations against me without any basis whatsoever.”
From the outset Ms Humphreys sought to take the fight to her opponent, reopening questions about controversies that her campaign has encountered in recent weeks.
She said that Ms Connolly had “insulted” Germany, France, the UK and the US.
“That doesn’t go without consequence. If you are a president of this country, you have the meet other leaders,” she said. “And how are you going to speak to talk to them, will they want to talk to you?” she said.
Ms Connolly said she was speaking out in the context of a “genocide” in Gaza and said Ireland’s neutrality was the key to being able ask questions of powerful countries. She said she was a “committed European”.
Asked by journalists afterwards if she had ever voted in favour of a European treaty, Ms Connolly said that she “probably” had, but could not say offhand how she had voted in a number of referendums on EU treaties.
She said she had taken an active role in the campaign against the Lisbon treaty, because of the “military industrial complex and the way we were going” and the “blatant neoliberal ideology that sets out the price of everything and the value of nothing”.
[ The most important trait in a presidential candidate? VibesOpens in new window ]
“But I have no recollection of canvassing against any other treaty,” she said.
Pressed on how she had voted, Ms Connolly said: “I’d say I voted for them.”
In the debate, both candidates promised to speak up for people if elected president. Ms Humphreys said she would “never be afraid to speak up, to be a voice for the people of this country, to be the conscience of the nation”.
Ms Connolly said she would be a president who was “unafraid to speak out” though she acknowledged that “policies are decided by Government”.
But she said that people wanted a president who gives them a sense of “hope” and “reflects their values”.
Confronted by the legacy of having served in sometimes unpopular governments, Ms Humphreys said: “It’s much easier to sit on the opposition benches and give out about everything.”
She defended her record of assisting Lucia O’Farrell, whose son Shane was killed by a hit-and-run driver out on bail and who has since received State apology.
“I’m sorry if Lucia thinks I didn’t do enough,” she said.
Ms Humphreys said she had “never objected to a housing development”, while some TDs had.
Asked by journalists afterwards if she had ever objected to housing, Ms Connolly said she had “never objected to housing”.
But she said: “I might have put in submissions that expressed my concerns, sharing the concerns of residents, that’s over my lifetime in politics ... I certainly shared the concerns of residents in Galway in relation to where certain student accommodation was put.”
Asked if that was not an objection in practice, she said: “I think it’s very important to use language properly. I have never objected. I have shared concerns on occasion, not many.”
The candidates clashed on the triple lock, which Ms Connolly described as “at the core of our neutrality ... one of our most important policies”.
[ Lack of presidential debate in Irish ‘disappointing’, says ConnollyOpens in new window ]
She declined to say if she would refer a Bill abolishing the triple lock to the Supreme Court, because she would have to consider any Bill when it was passed.
However, she said she believed there should be a referendum on the question.
Ms Humphreys said she was in favour of abolishing the triple lock, but also that she “fully, fully” supports neutrality, pointing out that permanent UN security council members could veto Irish participation in peacekeeping missions.
