The truth will come out

COMMENT

HINDSIGHT is a marvelous thing. It was with knowledge of the future, so to speak, that I recently watched the RTÉ and TV3 presidential debates online.

I was watching them when the Dana controversy was just starting to emerge. Her US citizenship, revealed in an American court in the course of a bitter family row, was beginning to make headlines. For this reason, it was interesting to note that when asked by Vincent Browne and Ryan Tubridy about her qualities as a person, Dana Rosemary Scallon said on three separate occasions that truthfulness was among her greatest assets. She spoke of how the Irish people could depend on her to tell the truth. At the time she was saying it, I’m sure I and many others would have taken this as some kind of slight on the other candidates; a sly jab to subtly undermine their honesty by making it an issue. With hindsight to help us out, it now looks more like Dana’s guilty conscience prickling her internally regarding the question of her citizenship.
How she could feel this issue was not important is beyond me. One of the requirements to be president of Ireland is that the candidate is an Irish citizen. Having essentially recanted on Irish citizenship to become a fully fledged American would certainly seem to most reasonable people to be an impediment to this at least.
What has been very interesting in the light of the revelations is Dana’s reaction to the media. She has said that she is “disgusted” by the media’s intrusion. Given that Dana is far from naïve, despite the all-kinds-of-everything image she clings to, what we are seeing from the former singer and religious campaigner is a fit of rage that she is being questioned at all about topics she would prefer not to be. The fact is her sister made those interesting comments in a court and on the public record and they are very important to the people who will be voting in the election if they are to make an informed choice. What the media has done in this case is nothing more than its duty in reporting the issue of American citizenship. Dana has used the spat to strike out at the media for also questioning her about her strongly held religious beliefs. In the context of legislation, this is also a very valid question and yet Dana feels she is being discriminated against because she is a Catholic and grilled about it by the media. Again the media would be remiss in its duty if it did not ask these questions. There are of course grades of being Catholic stretching all the way from the person who goes along to mass at Christmas and attends funerals through to Dana who is, to put it mildly, on the other end of the spectrum.
It is interesting to contrast Dana’s petulant response to reasonable questions with Martin McGuiness’ reaction to the looming spectre of his IRA past. When he was confronted early this week by David Kelly, the son of Pete Kelly who was murdered by the IRA in 1983, he did not attempt to dismiss the valid questions that followed. What this again highlights is the fact that however any person tries to reinvent themselves for the purposes of an election, the truth will come out. The contrasting public relations approaches of Dana and McGuiness are two shining examples of how problems can be dealt with. In both these cases, however, very real and genuine problems remain to be dealt with and both campaigns will have keenly felt the sting and stain of the incidents.
The past has been a common theme running through this presidential campaign despite the idealistic and aspirational words being peddled by the candidates. They speak of building a new future and a new Ireland and yet their own personal histories keep throwing up fodder for the media to investigate and highlight. This has been more damaging in some cases than others but Vincent Browne certainly managed to have some reasonably sticky questions on past actions for all of the candidates.
This again highlights the difficulty with the post of Irish President. It is a post, which many regard as being above politics. There is a dignity about the post that I think people genuinely wish to see maintained. The population, in a way, is struggling to avoid having to use hindsight in the future. There is a sense that we cannot afford a bum decision in this election. Whoever is elected must be up to the job in the first instance and secondly not have any secret villainy or indiscretion lurking in their past that might sully the office. Candidate rhetoric aside, this post is genuinely a figurehead one on the international scene where our name is mud so we cannot afford to make a bad decision.
As separate from politics as the office of the president may seem, it takes a lot of politics to get there. As we have seen, even getting on the ballot involved schmoozing councilors without shame or getting the backing of your own party. We may see this changed in the future but for now, the race is the preserve of the political in Ireland.
For this reason, the media must stick absolutely to its task in vetting the candidates on behalf of the electorate and holding them to the rigorous standards to which they aspire. We must not find ourselves turning to hindsight once again in the coming years and lamenting the fact that certain information had not been public knowledge at the time of the vote.
These people are seeking election and as a result they must throw themselves open before the public and have their lives examined in minute detail so the voters can make a fully informed choice as to who will represent them. Early revelations have proved interesting but I have no doubt there is more to come. It is difficult to even become a candidate in this race without getting involved with Irish politics and politicians to such a degree that your hands may get a little dirty.