Fianna Fáil TDs discussing efforts to remove Micheál Martin as party leader
Mr Martin had backed Jim Gavin to be the party's nominee in the race, but was embarrassed as he withdrew earlier this month after revelations that he owed a former tenant €3,300.
A group of Fianna Fáil TDs have begun discussing an effort to oust party leader Micheál Martin
The behind the scenes talks come as the fallout from the presidential election rolls on.
Mr Martin had backed Jim Gavin to be the party's nominee in the race, but was embarrassed as he withdrew following revelations that he owed a former tenant €3,300.
Any no confidence motion in the Taoiseach would require 12 TDs to sign a motion — which would trigger a special ard fheis to vote on the leadership.
Sources have said that there could be as many as 10 TDs who would sign a motion, though one source said whether those 10 would be willing to publicly go against the party leader is debatable.
Anger around Mr Gavin's botched candidacy led to a five-hour parliamentary party meeting and the establishment of an internal review, but the weekend's results, which saw Mr Gavin attract over 100,000 votes despite the suspension of his campaign, has reignited the anger among TDs.
One source said that they did not believe those who wanted to see Mr Martin go would move before the review is completed in the coming weeks.
Another senior party source said that some within Fianna Fáil had backed Mr Gavin and were now seeking to "put it all on the shoulders of the leader".
They said that they believed that "cool heads should prevail" and the issue be shelved until after the review.
"I'm not going to say there wasn't an issue there. But why have the review if we're not going to see what it says? We knew the result was coming."
One source said that the weekend had "crystalised" anger against Mr Martin, with another highly critical of the Taoiseach initially looking set to avoid the presidential count announcement at Dublin Castle.
Another source said that it is likely that any move would not come before the publication of the review, but that "options are being reviewed".




