Arrogant or naïve – either way, Leo has mishandled McCabe red button
MEET the new boss – same as the old boss.
This is probably the last and least palatable thing that Taoiseach Leo Varadkar ever wished said of him.
But in politics the truth drives its dagger mercilessly.
This week, Mr Varadkar continued depressingly with the dismal trend of appalling crisis management of the Maurice McCabe saga. Just as his predecessor Enda Kenny did before him, Mr Varadkar has found himself caught in the cross-hairs of a drama involving a whistleblower who will not be blown away by the winds of political change.
His naïve and somewhat petulant handling of the affair is inexplicably bouncing the nation toward an unwelcome general election at a time of critical consequence.
Fresh questions which sprung up courtesy of the legal strategy pursued by former Garda commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan during the O’Higgins Commission have been desperately mishandled. In the short term, Frances Fitzgerald’s penchant for known unknowns may yet lead to her departure as minister.
Ultimately, however, it is Mr Varadkar who stands to lose a great deal more than one of his ministers.
In his staunch defence of the Tánaiste, Mr Varadkar has unwittingly boxed himself into a corner that makes him appear either very politically naïve or borderline arrogant. Poll predictions aside, this is a Theresa May-type punt on his part.
On the face of it Ms Fitzgerald’s refusal to step aside at the Opposition’s behest has brought us to this juncture. On closer scrutiny, however, the Taoiseach is slightly more culpable than one might initially suspect.
Firstly, when pressed into answering questions on the issue of the State’s knowledge of the legal strategy being pursued by the Garda Commissioner in relation to Sgt McCabe – Mr Varadkar’s response should have simply been to refer all questions to the Charleton Tribunal.
Let’s remind ourselves this tribunal was set up to review his administration’s handling of the McCabe affair to date. His undoing lay in the fact that he lacked the humility and political savvy to simply say “I cannot comment”.
As a consequence, he inadvertently misled the Dáil on a total of three occasions. The inaccurate and incomplete misinformation was provided by not one, but two of his serving ministers. It was this singular development that turned the email issue from a tribunal matter to a political cliff-hanger.
Fine Gael is now spouting due process and cites the tribunal as the antidote to all its problems. It is quite a reach given that it was its own leader who deviated from this principle entirely.
Mr Varadkar’s second lapse was to view the “email” question as a singular development from within the Department of Justice. He then attempted to turn the debacle into a debate about chronic maladministration at the Department of Justice. That may very well be the case, but it is hardly the strongest of ground to be arguing from for any member of a government who has been presiding over the Department of Justice for six long years.
I will not bore you with the machinations of previous iterations of this sorry saga. Suffice to say that by now anything with the name Maurice McCabe or any other player in this rapidly escalating crisis should be viewed as red button.
Never mind now, even back in 2015 it should have sounded alarm bells so loud it would have made our deafened army baulk once more.
The kaleidoscope of confusion might be amusing were it not so serious.
Ms Fitzgerald claims to have forgotten an email she never saw because the third paragraph said no action was required. A “third paragraph” is now right up there alongside the third secret of Fatima in terms of iconic status.
Ms Fitzgerald sought refuge in the advice contained within the email. It stipulated the former justice minister need take no action.
A question that no one has asked is this: If there was no ministerial action to be taken, what then motivated the official within the Department of Justice to put pen to paper?
Someone wrote that note because there are occasions where ministers may technically or legally have no function, but politically and morally they need to know. That is why the email was dispatched in the first place.
This was always a highly significant development – and Ms Fitzgerald needed to be made aware of it, as did the Taoiseach of the day.
As a minister, if a departmental communication dictates that no action is required then you are technically covered legally and in terms of administrative accountability.
However, in government as in life sometimes our moral compass supersedes the obligatory and demands action. The simple truth is that this Government, like the administration before it, is designed for self-survival and selfinterest rather than that more noble ambition of progressing public policy.
There was a fleeting moment when we dared to believe that Mr Varadkar might be different. Now he just appears enraptured and enamoured by the power that high office affords.
His determination to protect the Tánaiste in this melee proves that he will take the course of action that sustains most political advantage for his own party, rather than doing what is best for the country.
SINCE taking the helm, Mr Varadkar’s style of political leadership has been diametrically different to that of his predecessor. Enda who? Not since Barack Obama gave way to US President Donald Trump have we seen such a volte face in a stylistic approach to governing.
His political style is built on blunt honesty. This tactic, coupled with a sharp mind, an innate intelligence and an impressive command of facts secured him his leadership.
But in politics the safety of grey areas can be a more benign place to rest while the fuller picture emerges.
Deliberate comment without caution and correct information is not a great long-term political tactic.
His image as a no-nonsense, new modern leader is all very well, but he has yet to master the art of quietly muddling through a crisis.
Outside and inside Leinster House this week the temperatures plummeted – the descent was rapid. The Taoiseach felt the full blast of the first icy chill of just how delicately poised the levers of power in ‘new politics’ really are.
If a Christmas election is somehow averted by Ms Fitzgerald’s resignation in the coming days it will only stave off the inevitable until spring.
This Government is not for life, it’s only for this Christmas.
His determination to protect the Tánaiste proves he will take the course of action that sustains most political advantage for his party