Cleaning up politics

As the Mahon Tribunal continues, the Taoiseach’s explanations of his unusual financial dealings in the early 1990s become less credible by the day. During the general election campaign the Fianna Fail mantra was that the Taoiseach was fully co-operating with the Tribunal and that his personal finances were matters solely for the Tribunal. Since then there has been a sustained effort to undermine the Tribunal both by the Taoiseach’s counsel in its hearings and by his supporters outside. The two parties that were most vocally sceptical of Bertie Ahern’s finances during the election campaign sit with him on the government benches and have been silent on the matter since.

Past opinion polls suggest that when the media or the opposition has probed the Taoiseach on cash provided to him, Fianna Fail support has held steady, or even increased. Though it is quite likely that revelations on the Taoiseach’s finances played some part in the poor showing by the Progressive Democrats in the election, history suggests that further revelations are unlikely to turn off Fianna Fail voters. Regardless of the short term impact of these matters on party political support, it is inevitable that they undermine public confidence in politicians generally. Proactive steps need to be taken to demonstrate to the public that Irish political parties can meet the best international standards for probity.

With the Green Party and the Progressive Democrats now tied to Fianna Fail for perhaps the next five years, Fine Gael is positioned to lead the debate on this issue. The most immediate areas for reform seem to be public appointments by ministers, campaign spending and fund raising. Hundreds of state positions are filled in the lifetime of every government by ministerial appointment. While criteria are set for the various state boards and offices to be filled, a significant numbers of them are filled with supporters of government parties with little oversight.

Such cronyism means that it is unlikely that the most suitable person for the role is appointed. As a result, not only are salaries, expenses and perks given to the wrong person, but key decisions concerning matters of state are taken by under qualified individuals. Fine Gael could begin the public discussion on how to reform these public appointments. The party could explore how to establish transparent, fair and effective procedures for the majority of appointments. Prospective appointees for the most significant positions could be vetted by the relevant Oireachtas committees.

The same committees or the Public Accounts Committee could be given the power to investigate more minor appointments where they believe established procedure may not have been followed. The legislation that limits electoral spending has been shown to be flawed as parties and candidates spend significant amounts of money campaigning throughout the electoral cycle, not just after an election is called.

Minister John Gormley has suggested that he will be reviewing this legislation. The raising of political funds should also be discussed, considering the levels of money that should come from the exchequer and the levels to be raised privately. In leading these discussions Fine Gael should remember the lessons from its earlier unilateral ban on corporate donations. Proposed changes should be discussed at the parliamentary level first.

The party should aim for cross-party support for any steps to be taken. And the party should seek to reform political standards without attempting to take the moral high crowd. Any posturing on these matters for electoral gain is likely to be transparent to the electorate. Reform should be sought for the benefits that it will bring to Irish politics as a whole rather than merely for interests of anyone political party.

They’ve accepted their own hypocrisy, so why not accept them?

Given the value that the Greens attach to principle, it was no surprise to hear Trevor Sargent a few weeks ago stating in the Dáil that Fine Gael should have done a deal with Sinn Féin in order to get into government. To have gone down that course would have represented a complete insult to the electorate, as throughout the election and for the course of his leadership Enda Kenny had quite clearly and categorically stated his opposition to such a course of action.

Are Sinn Féin still to be frozen in the Coyctus?

But as one government has been formed, we should look forward to the next – and in that context, Fine Gael should be prepared to look at coalition with Sinn Féin if the numbers stake up. Such a course of action is something which cannot be undertaken lightly and there would need to be an open and vigorous debate on this within the part, but the events leading up to this election and subsequent too it suggest that we should no longer consider Sinn Féin as utterly beyond the Pale.

While the events in the North had over the past decade seen a softening of attitudes towards Sinn Féin, a number of factors militated against their participation in the Republic’s government. They still appeared to refuse to accept the common political narrative of this state, their position within that and all that implies; their political strength had the appearance of ever increasing momentum; and all the while the continued to adopt economic policies which were far beyond which could be incorporated in a workable government.

Most publicly through their acceptance of the PSNI, and previously through acts such as the PIRA’s decommissioning, the so-called ‘Republican Movement’ were increasingly adopting the accepted political narrative of this state – that whereas armed rebellion was acceptable in times past, it cannot be repeated again. The continued rhetoric from all levels of Sinn Féin in condemning militant activities and encouraging co-operation with authorities on both sides of the borders confirms this complete about their on their previous past. Indeed, in tandem with the above, their attempts to recast the narrative of the PIRA’s terror campaign as a human rights issue, rather than a war of attempted national re-unification is similarly encouraging.

They have now accepted that what was acceptable to them in the recent past, in circumstances not today dissimilar is no longer acceptable today. They have, liked most of the other political players did seventy/eighty years ago accepted their own hypocrisy, and lacerate those who did what they once did. Their armed revolutionary output is now purely of an historical variety, with no real implications for the future.

While the above has only really settled down in the past year, the potential rapid advance of Sinn Féin electorally in the absence of such settling was worrisome. Now, it is fairly clear that their electoral advance has been stymied, with the threat that they could possess to the general political order clearly limited. While the prospect of having Sinn Féin in a government when they were ever increasing in size and gaining further momentum wouldn’t be stomachable for many, most particularly those in the Labour party – after the most recent election, Sinn Féin as very much a junior partner are a different and more bearable proposition.

Finally, the almost complete abandonment by Sinn Féin of any form of strongly left-wing economic policies – most exemplified by their complete u-turn on corporation tax – show that on the economic front, they offer little that wouldn’t be compatible with a FG/Labour government. Indeed, on the policy front more generally their main issues would be covered by such a government in the main, beyond possibly on a number of issues relating to promoting a United Ireland.

These would appear to be namely a Green Paper on National Unity; speaking rights for Northern Ireland MPs in the Oireachtas and allowing voters in the North to vote for the President. While allowing Northern Irish MPs speaking in the Oireachtas may yet be a step too far – after all, if they aren’t going to be affected by the parliaments decisions, why should they be allowed speak there – the other two areas should present little enough difficulty. A Green Paper on National Unity is something which, as a United Ireland party, we should not be afraid to promote ourselves – indeed, it is something which if promoted by ourselves could be quite a useful mechanism for engaging the Unionist community. Expanding the vote for the President to all citizens would allow Northern nationalists vote, and is something which is largely important only in a symbolic way.

Therefore, as we look forward, Fine Gael should be willing to contemplate co-operation with Sinn Féin in a future government. Labour’s deal with Sinn Féin in the Seanad has set the tone, and we should not be unwilling to co-operate increasingly in the Dáil, with a willingness to one-day potentially work in government with them. Such a course of action will provoke a strong debate in the party, and there will be an inevitable backlash from some members and supporters – this was clear from the last meeting of this forum, when this subject attracted strong opinions from all sides.

And in addition to the above, they present little electoral threat to Fine Gael, but have the potential to be represent to Fianna Fáil what the PDs have represented to us. As they settle further in main-stream centre-left constitutional politics, there should be little obstacles to do a deal with this party in three, four, five years time.