Monday, September 14
By Eanna Kelly
"Fear can hold you prisoner…hope can set you free"
Okay, I am being a little hyperbolic, but the Lisbon Treaty….just got interesting! Declan Ganley- the moral arbiter of the nation- is back! Cue the ‘hissing’ from the Yes campaigners and the 'hoorahs' from the No campaigners. For the No-ites, he is the champion pitted against the evil elites and for the Yes-ites he is a pesky non-conforming rogue. Ganley’s web-page espouses a ‘fight for democracy’- who will follow him this time?
I am undecided on how to vote. Soundbites swirl around me and create a nauseating effect. I have not proceeded through the mist and reached a point where I can discern what is fear-mongering drivel and what is fact. For instance, does "a cohesive European voice on the world stage" mean ‘imperialist military superstate’?? I have a lot of questions to ask Jeeves.
My biggest problem is crippling laziness. The Lisbon text is there to be read- although I am informed that it is virtually unintelligible- so I have the opportunity to get informed. Whilst talking to my friends on the issue, I usually prefer to borrow other people’s words….that is to say I have not put in any ground work of my own.
I can break it down to a simple rationale: Yes, Europe has made Ireland stronger; it has provided us with plenty. There are niggling nuggets of information floating around, though, that I cannot ignore…is Europe heading towards a more federalist structure, and is such a thing desirable? The Commission already has large independent powers...will these be successfully harnessed in the future?
Coupled with these doubts, I have a slight anarchistic naughtiness playing in my head, specifically, what would happen if the No vote passed?? I can envisage Michael Martin entering a room full of expectant European elites, eyes lowered, an apologetic shrug followed by awkward dialogue: "The Irish electorate huh, bunch of cheeky scamps, what are we going to do with them??" I mean, were the No vote passed, we would certainly face a dwindling level of respect and, more importantly, power. Sarkozy and co. already alienate the minnows of Europe with their G5 and G6 meetings; such ostracising is bound to continue.
For the moment though, my message is simple: trust no one! Civil war values are back- members of my family are expressing fixed viewpoints and are expectant that I will comply. My quest for truth and virtue continues...
Showing posts with label Declan Ganley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Declan Ganley. Show all posts
Friday, September 18
Thursday, June 11
Life after Libertas
By Dónal Hassett
Few political obituaries provoked as much interest in the wake of this week's Euro-elections as that of the ever-controversial Libertas leader Declan Ganley. Ganley, who burst onto the political scene as leader of, and infamously, chief financier of Libertas' No to Lisbon campaign, is now licking his wounds from his brief and colourful, but ultimately unsuccessful, foray into Irish politics. The Libertas ‘pan-European’ party, Ganley’s brainchild, failed spectacularly in a European elections which saw an increase in support for virtually all right-wing Eurosceptic parties except those standing under the Libertas banner. While party supporters had predicted upwards of 100 seats, the final result was dismal- just one MEP, French ultra-conservative Phillipe de Villiers, was returned to the Parliament for the party. Where did all go wrong for the Ganleyites and their dream of converting Ireland’s No to Lisbon into a Yes to Libertas?
Undoubtedly, Libertas in Ireland was seeking to tap into a resevoir of conservative Catholic traditionalist voters. Ganley’s candidacy in the North West constituency sought to attract the substantial support base of former MEP Dana Rosemary Scallon who stood on a platform of social conservatism and Euroscepticism. In an effort to woo her voters, Ganley attacked his main rival, Independent MEP Marian Harkin by alleging her allies in the European Parliament were all pro-abortion, attempting to undermine Harkin’s self-professed “social conservatism”. However this move backfired when it emerged that a leading candidate for Libertas in the Netherlands had strong links to pro-abortion and even pro-euthenasia groups. While Dana’s endorsement, arriving late as it did, did indeed bouy up the Ganley campaign, it proved too little too late for what was to be an expensive experiment in Irish politics.
What can the Libertas experience tell us about Irish voters? Firstly, it seems evident that the resevoir of conservative Catholic voters is slowly being eroded in the newly modernised Irish society. Not only did Libertas candidates fail to secure any seats but also Kathy Sinnot, who shares many conservative ideals with Ganley and Dana, lost her seat in the South constituency.
Secondly, these elections show up the ideological divide within the anti-Lisbon campaign. In television interviews from the count centre, Ganely expressed confidence that transfers from the Sinn Féin candidate would narrow the gap between him and the leading candidates. However, transfer rates showed little distinction between pro- and anti-Lisbon candiadtes, in this most anti-Lisbon part of the country. Clearly Sinn Fein's left-wing republican voters saw no great attraction in voting for a conservative pro-enterprise candidate (with an English accent as it happens!)
Finally, the failure of the Libertas campaign was a failure for the kind of expensive and negative campaigning often practiced in America. Ganley’s highly personalised attacks on candidates, a policy echoed by the party’s candiadtes in Dublin (Caroline Simons) and in East (Raymond O’Malley), seem not to have gone down well with the Irish electorate. Simons’ constant barracking of other candiates during a radio debate was very unpopular, while O’Malley’s solo run on ‘blue cards’ for ‘foreign’ workers did not go down well in border areas. No amount of money and slick media advisors could cover these candidates’ gaffes.
The Libertas experience, while a colourful sideshow in these elections, should reassure mainstream politicians that personal attacks and negative campaigning appeals only to a marginal constituency of the Irish electorate. This electoral failure also augurs well for the pro-Lisbon campaign.
Few political obituaries provoked as much interest in the wake of this week's Euro-elections as that of the ever-controversial Libertas leader Declan Ganley. Ganley, who burst onto the political scene as leader of, and infamously, chief financier of Libertas' No to Lisbon campaign, is now licking his wounds from his brief and colourful, but ultimately unsuccessful, foray into Irish politics. The Libertas ‘pan-European’ party, Ganley’s brainchild, failed spectacularly in a European elections which saw an increase in support for virtually all right-wing Eurosceptic parties except those standing under the Libertas banner. While party supporters had predicted upwards of 100 seats, the final result was dismal- just one MEP, French ultra-conservative Phillipe de Villiers, was returned to the Parliament for the party. Where did all go wrong for the Ganleyites and their dream of converting Ireland’s No to Lisbon into a Yes to Libertas?
Undoubtedly, Libertas in Ireland was seeking to tap into a resevoir of conservative Catholic traditionalist voters. Ganley’s candidacy in the North West constituency sought to attract the substantial support base of former MEP Dana Rosemary Scallon who stood on a platform of social conservatism and Euroscepticism. In an effort to woo her voters, Ganley attacked his main rival, Independent MEP Marian Harkin by alleging her allies in the European Parliament were all pro-abortion, attempting to undermine Harkin’s self-professed “social conservatism”. However this move backfired when it emerged that a leading candidate for Libertas in the Netherlands had strong links to pro-abortion and even pro-euthenasia groups. While Dana’s endorsement, arriving late as it did, did indeed bouy up the Ganley campaign, it proved too little too late for what was to be an expensive experiment in Irish politics.
What can the Libertas experience tell us about Irish voters? Firstly, it seems evident that the resevoir of conservative Catholic voters is slowly being eroded in the newly modernised Irish society. Not only did Libertas candidates fail to secure any seats but also Kathy Sinnot, who shares many conservative ideals with Ganley and Dana, lost her seat in the South constituency.
Secondly, these elections show up the ideological divide within the anti-Lisbon campaign. In television interviews from the count centre, Ganely expressed confidence that transfers from the Sinn Féin candidate would narrow the gap between him and the leading candidates. However, transfer rates showed little distinction between pro- and anti-Lisbon candiadtes, in this most anti-Lisbon part of the country. Clearly Sinn Fein's left-wing republican voters saw no great attraction in voting for a conservative pro-enterprise candidate (with an English accent as it happens!)
Finally, the failure of the Libertas campaign was a failure for the kind of expensive and negative campaigning often practiced in America. Ganley’s highly personalised attacks on candidates, a policy echoed by the party’s candiadtes in Dublin (Caroline Simons) and in East (Raymond O’Malley), seem not to have gone down well with the Irish electorate. Simons’ constant barracking of other candiates during a radio debate was very unpopular, while O’Malley’s solo run on ‘blue cards’ for ‘foreign’ workers did not go down well in border areas. No amount of money and slick media advisors could cover these candidates’ gaffes.
The Libertas experience, while a colourful sideshow in these elections, should reassure mainstream politicians that personal attacks and negative campaigning appeals only to a marginal constituency of the Irish electorate. This electoral failure also augurs well for the pro-Lisbon campaign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
