Why this one’s different

As the latest round of Ahern’s financial irregularities seems to be coming to a head, the fear amongst opposition parties (and the hope within FF) is that this, like last time, will see Ahern storm ahead in the polls due to strong public sympathy.

This time, however, the Teflon Taoiseach won’t have it so easy.

In October 2006, the crisis that consumed the Irish Government was in relation to personal loans given to Ahern from a number of businessmen. That in itself seems pretty unforgivable, but once Bertie set out his side of the story on RTÉ’s Six One News, things changed completely.

He wasn’t getting personal “loans” from people for no reason - or at least no legitimate reason - he was getting them because he was faced with the very real financial burden of a very personal separation.

We all remember the display, the watery eyes, it was magical. And it worked. People responded well to Bertie because he seemed to tell them everything, and more than they needed to know and because he justified his inappropriate deeds with an honourable wish to see his children straight amidst a difficult time for the whole family.

In short, he was being a bit bauld, but he had a heart of gold in his motivation for it - a lethal combination amongst the Irish electorate.

This time, however, it’s not so handy.

Of what is a very complicated issue, the core of the matter is as follows:

Michael Wall gave Celia Larkin £30,000 to “administer”, which was to be spent on the renovation of a recently purchased house (which Ahern was renting). Ahern pledged to put £50,000 towards the same, but later decided not to.  Larkin set up two accounts to put these sums of money into - and apparently the £30,000 was later used to settle a Stamp Duty bill.

Putting aside the credibility issues raised by Vincent Browne about the age of the house, its overall value and the need for renovation on the scale of £80,000, this is a far cry from the Manchester payments fiasco.

Even in a far more affulent Ireland we now know, your average voter wouldn’t have €50,000 to just throw into renovating a house (let alone someone elses), as much as they’d probably like to. They certainly don’t have landlords who would give them €30,000 to do the renovation work at their own leisure.

As such people have a hard time buying the arrangement and an even harder time feeling sympathy for a man who can afford to be in such a position.

In fact, some may feel a little betrayed as they see Bertie Ahern coming off as a far more wealthy man than his former “dig-out” self of 1992. They’ve supported Bertie for being victimised through the recounting of a difficult time in his life, but now they’re faced with an Ahern that is nothing resembling a victim.

With that being the case FF have a far harder time dealing with the situation, and it’s why Ahern has been so defensive in detailing the way he spent “his” money (which I believe he said is the same money he got in Manchester - he musn’t have been in that much of a bad way so).

Of course, the public aren’t likely to desert FF in any great number on this issue alone and most will show apathy, but it’s a far cry still from the public reaction we saw in October where the whole country seemed to rush to his defence. This time, he’s far more isolated and he has far less room to spin this in his favour.