Head over to our T
The Irish Republic, Past, Present and Future
Read more about: Democracy, Economy, Ireland, Irish Politics, Labour Party 
I am sorry to say it, but as far as I can see, Ireland is no longer a true Republic because the present Government, and its two immediate predecessors have killed it, culminating with their wreckless nationalisation of a bank propped up by their friends. As far as I can see, this means that if the banks used by the citizens of this country require nationalisation, the State will not be able to cope with the amount of bad debt.
My grandfather was Chairman of the Labour Court and he retired in 1982. He served his country all his life in the Post Office, in the Army and in his trade union, the Post Office Workers Union (now the CWU), eventually becoming the President of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, and as I mentioned, chairman of the Labour Court. His last act in office was to oversee the construction of the new Labour Court building in Dublin. He didn’t like the idea of the building being called Beggar’s Bush House (the new building being located at Beggar’s Bush barracks). So he looked at the history of the Labour Movement, and after only a little thought, chose Tom Johnson, as the only Labour leader of the opposition and a founding father of the State and author of the Democratic Programme which was passed in the first Dáil Éireann 90 years ago yesterday.
My grandfather died in 1996, about 30 years after Johnson did. I’d imagine they are both rolling in their graves these past few months.
I believe that 215 years after Wolfe Tone conceived of it, 93 years after Connolly and Pearse and their comrades declared of it, and 90 years after the modern Irish Republic came into being, that the present Irish Republic has died.
The only way to conceive and give birth to a new Irish Republic is to have the Labour Party lead a government, free of the leadership and influence of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Their time – as two parties at least – is over. Their economic policies and their social policies have failed, outdated by the world which has moved on without them.
I am both deeply angry at what has gone on, and heartbroken as well.
We need our own Obama-type figure, and I think Eamon Gilmore could be it – if he is brave enough to be, and if we, the people, are brave enough to support him.
Tom,
Labour and Fine Gael seem to think that the state works rather than needs fundamental reform; they think that we dont need a revolution but we do.
Not a revolution with arms and conflict rather with new laws and maybe a new constitution even but for that no less a thorough cleaning of these augean stables.
It sounds dramatic but we cannot say that the island of Ireland has achieved what it should have.
There is a fundamental problem in Irish society with closed circles, corruption and the brown envelope that permeates the entire state structure and that has once again failed us.
Will Eamon Gilmore have the strength to realise that we are living in a banana republic and do something about it or will he believe that structurally this state is sound and there is no need for a drastic restructuring of how we govern ourselves.
Dont hold your breath Tom.
Tom,
I knew your grandfather – which gives an indication of my own vintage – and had a lot of respect for him. He was shrewd and highly intelligent. He was also a man of his time.
I’ve known Eamon Gilmore since his days in Galway as a student leader, and I have a lot of respect for him too on a personal level. Another shrewd and intelligent individual; affable, approachable and decent. He has many excellent qualities that he brings to his current role.
But as a politician he is first and foremost obviously a populist. Positions taken by the Labour leadership throughout the present crisis exemplify the extent to which they would apparently sublimate the best interests of this country to narrow party political interest e.g. voting against the bank guarantee plan in September; calling for a ‘general election’ in the middle of a national crisis; threats to oppose Lisbon 2 on grounds that apparently didn’t bother Labour at all during Lisbon 1; contradictory policy positions on public service reforms and public expenditure etc.
The new President of the US has attained his ambition to become President, not justt because he is a superb organiser and campaigner and has remarkable qualities of character that mark him out from other candidates for high office, but also because he has tapped into something that crosses all racial and social boundaries – that yearning citizens have for their political leaders to put aside their differences and work together to find solutions to the problems that affect the lives of ordinary people and diminish the lives of whole swathes of other more disadvantaged citizens within society.
Obama is a pragmatist; not a populist politician – from his own writings it is clear that he despises the trivialities, overweening vanities and ideological baggage that are so much a part and parcel of populist demagoguery, whether it’s coming from the right or the left. He is no messiah, nor a revolutionary; just a politician who appears to want to do things to make his own society a better place to live in and happens to think he has hit on the most likely political process whereby this might best be achieved.
Of course it’s hugely inspirational right across the world because it mirrors what is politically uppermost in the human heart in any society or regime – the wish that those who represent us or rule us would focus more on finding practical solutions to our problems and fashioning distributional mechanisms to provide opportunity to every one in our respective societies, rather than indulginh their tendency to become mesmerised with a sense of their own power, notions of status and entitlement and ever-increasing levels of personal self-absorbtion.
Can he succeed? We can’t know that yet, and time will tell. But as someone else put it, if President Barack Obama never got out of bed in the morning for the next four years he would hardly do any worse than what has preceded him.
There is nothing of Barack Obama in Eamon Gilmore, and it is as unfair as it is ridiculous to attempt such a political transference. Gilmore is an entirely different type of political animal, from a completely different background, operating in a wholly different political system. Personally I think Gilmore has the capacity to become a very able leader of the Labour Party and is doing a reasonable enough job as it is; in what passes for a good enough job in Irish politics these days anyway.
Being lionised by the Sunday Independent and provided with a lot of latitude by the rest of the media – aghast as they are at Brian Cowen’s ‘bottling’ it and the continuing charisma defict of the well-meaning leader of the Opposition, Enda Kenny – has worked to the benefit of Eamon Gilmore. For now.
Watching him on Q&A this week when he had to endure the self-inflicted ignominy of having not only the rest of the panel crack up at his posturing, but the entire studio audience as well, created the impression that any current media and public Obama complex around Gilmore won’t last long. This is especially so if people, and particularly the media, really start listening to what he is saying on the issues and asking hard questions about Labour’s actual proposed solutions to our problems. Gilmore has enveloped his persona with all the airs and attitudes of a student leader who never grew up. It’s worrying that he appears to have succumbed to a hyped up media image of himself.
There’s no pleasure in thinking such things; even less in feeling compelled to say them. But every time I see yet another op-ed piece or drooling editorial extolling the hitherto unsuspected qualities of Labour’s current leadership – without any coherent analysis of its policy positions of course – that old adage pops into mind: beware of what you wish for.
At the absolute minimum, I think there should be a general election immediately. This government is operating in a set of circumstances utterly different from the ones in which it was elected. Even those voters who did the nod and wink at the FF-developer nexus must be wondering if multi-billion dollar bailouts was what they signed up for. But maybe they did. In which case your depressing conclusion is vindicated. On the other hand, we might be underestimating the extent to which the FF machine was kept on the road by patronage (i.e. jobs for the boys) — the capacity for which is now severely weakened by the state of the economy. They could be like Tony Blair’s quip about the NI Peace Process — like a bike, it has to keep going forward or it topples over. Maybe that could trigger a party consolidation on the right and energise a real left alternative.
Gilmore as an Obama figure? No thanks. In three years time, when Obama has lost his shine, all of the cheerleaders who think a messiah are disillusioned, then maybe we can compare the pair.
Heck, do we even want an Obama figure?
Thanks for your replies – I’ll spend a bit of time replying to each of you. Veronica, you posted the longest, and so I’ll leave yours until last.
While it is obvious that people think otherwise, I was not comparing Gilmore to Obama. I was saying that Eamon Gilmore had the potential to be, like Obama has been, a figure of hope, of inspiration and of political awakening. That is all I suggested, or tried to.
Jer, Fine Gael think many things, none of which are particularly consistent. They also lack nerve, as was seen in the debate about the Anglo Irish Bank nationalisation, which I watched. Richard Bruton failed to ask any of the hard questions about the dodgy dealings in the bank. That task was left to Joan Burton – who had to wait until Bruton was finished – the larger party had first dibs as they are supposed to be leading the opposition.
Labour however, stepped up and asked the hard questions that day. Joan Burton, Pat Rabbitte and Michael D. Higgins were the people asking just precisely what was going on in that bank. The Labour Party knows that the Irish State is broken and that it needs fundamental reform – reform in a way that puts government in a position to nurture, and not dominate society, protect and not undermine people.
I can tell you for certain that there is already a series of constitutional drafts, written by legal experts who are members of the Labour Party, ready to clean the augean stables, as you put it. It would be a Herculean effort of course, but it has been thought of.
You are correct in your analysis of the present state of Ireland, but I entirely disagree with you in your analysis of Eamon Gilmore. Your lack of belief indicates just how damaged Ireland is. I imagine I would not be far wrong if I were to suggest that you would not trust any party leader; none of them have given you reason to thus far and certainly, none of the
other present political leaders are as capable as Gilmore is.
P O’Neill, I think you are correct, we do need an election now. The government, as you say, has no mandate. It was not elected by people who thought they’d be dealing a truly awful recession and listening to daily reports of job losses all over the place. They certainly did not vote for people that couldn’t manage the economy. They voted for Fianna Fáil because they were either kidding themselves that they could manage it, or else because they were afraid to take the risk on the alternative on offer.
Niall, you may be interested in my comments below, but if I can just say to you that yes, we do need an Obama figure – we need somebody who we can believe in politically, who inspires the electorate to believe in them – but that said, that figure must be open, must be accessible and must treat the electorate with the intelligence and respect that it deserves. And I think that Eamon Gilmore is that individual.
Veronica, thank you for the complimentary words about my grandfather. You are right in that he was a man of his time, and I would have strenuously disagreed with him on social and religious issues. But as a trade unionist, he was quite a way ahead of his time. I brought into my piece because I wished to do two things – to provide a very tenuous link from myself to Tom Johnson, and to pay tribute to the public integrity of both Johnson and my grandfather. They are a stunning contrast to the carry-on in Government and financial circles these past recent years.
It is after those words, that I’m afraid we’re going to have to disagree
I don’t believe that Gilmore is a populist. Voting against the guarantee plan was done because the Government would not release the full details of the extent of the bad debts in the bank. These bad debts probably run into at least a couple of hundred billion Euro. The Labour Party felt that it would be unwise to support something about which little was known. I think that it was the correct decision. It was not populism that led to the vote against the banking guarantee in September, it was common sense, and a deep desire not to bankrupt yourself, myself or any other tax payer.
Labour also believe that the bank guarantee was made without any real thought – that it would never have to be called upon. But as we have now seen, it does indeed have to be called upon, to bail out a bank that is run for the benefit of the friends and supporters of Fianna Fáil. It was not for nothing that Joan Burton referred to the crisis in Anglo Irish Bank and its chairman as “Son of Ansbacher Man”.
It is the present situation that has led Gilmore to call for a general election. The present Government is not competent to handle the present crisis, the electorate does not trust it, and are terrified of what is going on, and because of this, the Government must be replaced before any further damage is done to Ireland and its economy.
As for Lisbon, that is an area where I have been fairly vocal in my disagreement with the position that Labour has taken. With regard to the public service, Labour has not been contradictory – at all times, it has indicated that the way forward is to protect public services for the benefit of the people of the country.
The new President of the US has attained his ambition to become President, not just because he is a superb organiser and campaigner and has remarkable qualities of character that mark him out from other candidates for high office, but also because he has tapped into something that crosses all racial and social boundaries – that yearning citizens have for their political leaders to put aside their differences and work together to find solutions to the problems that affect the lives of ordinary people and diminish the lives of whole swathes of other more disadvantaged citizens within society.
You are correct in this. And while the Irish political situation is different from the US situation, I do believe that there is a real desire amongst Irish people for change, to find solutions to the problems faced by ordinary people in society, problems such as poverty, under resourced education provision, grossly badly managed health services, and as is now recurring in Ireland, unemployment. Fianna Fáil have either caused or aggravated these problems, Fine Gael have no coherent policies apart from attacking public sector workers such as doctors and teachers, and the Greens are in thrall to Fianna Fáil. The Progressive Democrats never cared for anything but to make their rich circle of friends richer and less responsible to society, and Sinn Féin are not yet matured as a political party.
The only viable alternative, in my view, is Labour and Gilmore.
He is no messiah, nor a revolutionary; just a politician who appears to want to do things to make his own society a better place to live in and happens to think he has hit on the most likely political process whereby this might best be achieved.
This sounds like it could be a description of Eamon Gilmore.
Can he succeed? We can’t know that yet, and time will tell. But as someone else put it, if President Barack Obama never got out of bed in the morning for the next four years he would hardly do any worse than what has preceded him.
In all fairness, Veronica, that is a mean-spirited comment; and it is also exaggerated and false.
There is nothing of Barack Obama in Eamon Gilmore
I can give you two similarities right now, off the top of my head. Neither had their father to look up to – Both were raised and supported by their mothers. Both of them were organisers of people, encouraging them to stand up for themselves – Obama as a community organiser in poor areas of Chicago, and Gilmore as a trade unionist.
Obama also had ties in his early Chicago days to the Democratic Socialists of America – the US sister party of the Irish Labour Party. So I put it to you Veronica, that while obviously they are different, they also do share common, and I believe, fundamental values. Sure, Obama is no socialist, but his are a great deal closer to that of the Labour Party than any other president in US history, save perhaps Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
that old adage pops into mind: beware of what you wish for.
That we might just get Labour? I sure as hell hope we do. Gilmore as Taoiseach would be a damn sight better than the inept Brian Cowen or the spineless Enda Kenny.
Tom,
Ah yes, I can see clearly now: Comrades Eamon and Joan resplendent in their armour of righteousness on their chariot of fire, waving their constitutional drafts in the air. Ready to lead us all to the promised land of a new Republic as they sweep the forces of the ‘inept’ Cowen and ‘spineless’ Kenny (What happened to John Gormley? Surely he too is worthy of some easily coined epithet of denigration?) into the political abyss.
Meanspirited I may be, blind and stupid I am not.
Nice Debate just a quick point
This government is operating in a set of circumstances utterly different from the ones in which it was elected.
The belief that we should have an election because the circumstances have changed is utter nonsense. The constitution says every 5 years (or when the president approves a taoiseachs request) It does not say when the GDP figures decrease two quarters in succession or should the constitution say 3 quarters in succession. If the GDP increased would you say an election should be called because circumstances change?
Also Irish politics does not lend itself to the type of Obama mania that we have seen in the states. The most voted for TD was Willie O’Dea and he only got 20,000 odd votes about 0.5% of the population. A parliamentary democracy does not lend itself to that sort of hype.
Anyway keep up the good comments
Veronica, the fact that all you can do is to utter a bit of invective after my substantive reply tells me that I might be on to something!
Simon, while the government certainly does have a legal mandate to continue in government, it is my view that they do not have a political mandate, for the reasons I outlined above.
Tom,
People are trying to be kind here.
You are entitled to your hero-worshipping and your opinions, but they do not square with the facts as I have outlined them in my oirignal response to your post and as Simon has pointed out in his.
Tom,
Thanks for the reply. Its not that I dont support politicicans or even trust party leaders. I am politically engaged and trust and respect my party’s leadership. Honing in on Gilmore I have time and respect for him but I wonder whether he will be able to ride two horses at once – growing his party into an effective force and also reforming the southern state. Both aims will not always overlap though the latter would provide some opportuntiy for the former. Still unless you have a very explicit mandate to do such reforms its going to be hard.
Also Labour has structural problems with a some what haphazard spread across the country. One reason the corrupt FF party has been able to strengthen its hold in constituencies is because of the width of its organisation and frequently the only real alternative is FG which is often precluded by civil war politics. So If labour wants to develop as a real player then it needs to develop a national organisation to do so.
Simon,
Despite you think Willie O’Dea is the Irish Obama, a transformational figure biding , always biding, his time.
Tom,
forgive me for being facetious but when you say:
“There is nothing of Barack Obama in Eamon Gilmore
I can give you two similarities right now, off the top of my head. Neither had their father to look up to – Both were raised and supported by their mothers. Both of them were organisers of people, encouraging them to stand up for themselves – Obama as a community organiser in poor areas of Chicago, and Gilmore as a trade unionist. ”
So was Hitler. His dad died very young and he could organise to beat the band. ( and I know about Godwin’s law but this is an honest point.)
We dont need an Obama in this country we need to be able to produce our own inspiring leader with genuine vision rather than importing a template from the US.
We all thought Dick Spring was the longed for Messiah in 1992—and he voted FF back into Govt–what guarantee have we that Gilmore won’t do the same thing.????
Betty – quite frankly, if Labour go into coalition with FF after the next election, I will apologise for my post here, and announce my resignation from the party also.
But Gilmore, it should be said, has now been quoted as having rejected the idea – Asked if Labour would be going into coalition with Fianna Fáil after the next election, he replied: “No, I don’t think we will be, I think you can make that as a prediction.”
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0122/1232474673251.html
Veronica, while my post can certainly be described as enthuastic and optomistic, I don’t think it’s on the level of cheer leading. I have rebutted your initial comment in several different ways – would you care to give a response?
Jer – I’ll forgive you the Hitler reference! As for the the comment about importing a US style template – all I was saying was that we needed an Obama like figure in that we need a figure, with, as you say, is inspiring and has genuine vision. And I think that person is Gilmore.
This constant looking for an Irish Obama is nonsense, we do not have a presidential system of government. It is true that election campaigns have tended to move to be closer to the American Presidential style but that doesn’t mean how our system operates between elections has changed. Ministers are constitutionally responsible for their departments and they need to front up instead of expecting the Taoiseach to be the all knowing voice.
In general terms we, as a people, need to be a little less catholic about our politics and stop looking for a political priest figure to guide us out of the darkness and be a bit more protestant in our outlook and learn to do it for ourselves.
My apologies if my religious comparison causes any offence.
Tom,
If I thought your responses had any merit or addressed my original points in any definitive way, believe me I would be the first to concede that. Is that what you do?
All that aside, when things are very bad – and they are very bad right now and there’s more fear and uncertainty about the future than I can ever remember in my lifetime – of course we all look for someone to emerge at a political level who will know what to do and will pursue the right course of action relentlessly and with purpose. That does not entitle us to dress people up in mantles that don’t fit them at all, or were never designed to fit such flawed individuals ( i.e. normal human beings) in the first place.
But when we do, and there are many examples the world over, and when they then begin to swagger around and preen themselves in their finery of undue adulation and misguided self-belief in their own prowess, we watch in horror as they lose the run of themselves and disaster unfolds.
Which is why I have no time for foisting delusions of capability onto any politician in our own system and I am thankful that the very nature of the system itself precludes the emergence of little Napoleons or allows them to endure for any great length of time.
Tom, minute I wrote the post about Hitler i regretted not because i though it was poorly applied but because i thought it detracted from my previous post’s merit (if any
)
Quickly summarised that was that:
Labour have structural weaknesses across Ireland that preclude them from establishing the critical mass they need to be able to challenge the FF/FG contest and effect actual reform.
That allied with the challenges Gilmore will face in building party representation while simultaneously pursuing a reformist agenda will tax the ability of any leader to keep onside with our electorate.
The structural weakness is for me a big problem with labour.
The belief that we should have an election because the circumstances have changed is utter nonsense. The constitution says every 5 years (or when the president approves a taoiseachs request) It does not say when the GDP figures decrease two quarters in succession or should the constitution say 3 quarters in succession. If the GDP increased would you say an election should be called because circumstances change?
I think the Constitution supplies the necessary conditions for legitimacy, but not the sufficient ones. If enough people think that the government is over-matched by the new circumstances, the system can and does respond to that. We’re really not that far from the conditions that could lead to another election: nervous Greens, independents, and even a few FF backbenchers. One other thing: have Dermot Ahern or Micheal Martin said a word about the economy in the last 6 months? It’s like they’re waiting for something.
We’re really not that far from the conditions that could lead to another election: nervous Greens, independents, and even a few FF backbenchers. I think you are dreaming P. They are nervous because they think they wouldn’t keep their jobs in 5 years time. they know if they jump they wouldn’t have jobs in 5 months.
Tom do you seriously think Gilmore will get something like this. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU
the nearest he will get is http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzqktoIkhqY
Simon,
Thanks for the YouTube links – best laugh I’ve had all day!
Hilarious stuff, Simon
I’d doubt Gilmore will get much like that. Probably a few jokes in the Phoenix though!
Jer, I meant to reply to the substance of your post – you are correct in saying that Labour have structural weaknesses, but there are plans afoot to try and address some of them. Running more candidates, and running the correct candidates will be the biggest challenge. Finally, and as said above – all I was saying was that we needed an Obama like figure in that we need a figure, with, as you say, is inspiring and has genuine vision. And I think that person is Gilmore.
Dan, November 2008 wasn’t just a presidential election, it was a general election, and I do think there are similarities between Irish national politics and US national politics in the impact of one leading candidate on the success of candidates below.
Veronica, I stand by my remark to you – you stated there was no comparison between Obama and Gilmore and I disagreed and gave examples. Subsequent to that, all I got was a few digs.
I am always a bit dubious about comparisons and analogies. Wasn’t Cowen like Brown – both unelected leaders taking over as leaders after long serving, electorally successful predecessors. Both, unlike the men they succeeded, not media friendly. And so on and so on. But these likenesses are terribly superficial and hide more than they explain. They waste time which should be spent answering the real questions, what kind of leader is Brown? What kind of economic policies did Cowen pursue? What are the chief problems gnawing at the British economy? You get my point.
And so I find attempts to draw comparisons between Obama’s extraordinary and surely unique journey and any Irish leader a bit facile and completely useless as an analytical tool.
Gilmore is who he is. Personally I find him far less populist and far more able than Rabbit. But then, perhaps the current crisis, which left the present government reeling, makes it easier to land punches. Far harder in Rabbit’s time when the nation still seemed to be basking in the rays of a decade long super boom (Even if shadows were already encroaching). I too found Gilmore’s posturing over Lisbon to be dangerous populism. But I don’t have the same problem with his opposition to the banking gaurantee. When governments tell us they need to take swift action and prevent the details from being made public ‘in the national interest’, that is precisely the time we need to ask questions. That is not to say I disbelieve the current regime when they said they had to act quickly to save the system. They probably had, and their demeanour in the days that followed suggested they had been shocked. But those occasions where hiding information is beneficial to the common good are rare indeed and I feel still more questions need to be asked about how our banking system unravelled.
Back to Gilmore. I think it will be very interesting to see how he reacts to the imminent proposals for serious cut backs and if he can table credible alternatives the perhaps he demonstrate why he is serious leadership material. For me, it is still too early to judge him. But I suppose the same could be said of Cowen.