General election 2011 - Focus on the issues not personalities

AT this point in any election campaign all serious candidates know that every opportunity to communicate with voters must be used wisely and exploited to its utmost.

Last night’s TV3 debate was to have been the first set-piece for those who might be Taoiseach though, using that criteria, it is reasonable to question the inclusion of Fianna Fáil’s Micheál Martin. In current circumstances ratings point to at least one Dáil term in opposition for Mr Martin and his parliamentary colleagues, however many he has at the end of the month.

The same opinion polls suggest that Labour’s Eamon Gilmore, last night’s second half of the two-hander, has a far better chance of becoming Taoiseach than Mr Martin. It is indeed a seismic shift in Irish politics to dare suggest that a Fianna Fáil leader played no more than a support actor’s role at such an event.

It indicates too why Mr Martin, at the very first opportunity after he became Fianna Fáil leader, focussed on Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny’s Achilles’ heel.

Mr Kenny can be, but is not always, a poor television or radio communicator. Uninspiring and sometimes confused, grey and contrived, he occasionally unnerves even his party’s staunchest supporters and can frighten off prospective supporters. These, naturally enough, are the traits Mr Martin would like to expose. In a most unPunch-and-Judy like way of course.

Fine Gael have acknowledged this weakness in several ways, including an abortive leadership challenge. Mr Kenny must rely, as he has shown he can, on skills other than oratory. It is a weakness but it not a fatal one.

Of course it would be wonderful if all leaders had the communication skills of, say, a Charles Haughey or a Bertie Ahern, but there are qualities more important to a politician and the country that person might lead, especially in a time of crisis — as was shown by another occasionally indifferent communicator, Seán Lemass.

Mr Kenny’s decision not to participate last night was a calculated gamble and the consequences will not be known before February 26. If the opinion polls were less emphatic it would have been a gamble he could not have taken. He has, however, agreed to take part in three television debates before the campaign ends.

The kerfuffle, and that is all it is, surrounding Mr Kenny’s absence last night is entirely contrived and more a reflection of how today’s electioneering ranks presentation even before the clarity and skill to deliver effective policies. It also distracts from things far more concrete — delivery and achievement.

Communication is so instant, scrutiny so unavoidable, the sound bite so revered, that satisfying these demands has assumed disproportionate importance.

Judge the parties on their performances, their policies and their integrity — maybe their leaders’ communication skills too — but do not lose sight of which of these qualities are, by far, the more important.