ANALYSIS:The question remains: is the the Taoiseach a victim of bad timing or did he just not perform to his potential?, writes DAMIAN LOSCHER
IF POLITICAL parties change their leaders when they lose elections and keep their leaders when they win, it makes it easy to predict how political careers will end. According to Enoch Powell, “all political careers, unless they are cut off at some happy juncture, end in failure.” According to The Irish Times/ Ipsos MRBI series of polls, all Fianna Fáil taoisigh end their time in office far less popular than when they began.
Charles Haughey’s personal satisfaction rating reached a high of 67 per cent only to fall back to 32 per cent just before he resigned.
Albert Reynolds started out with 60 per cent and ended on 46 per cent, the highest exit rating of any Fianna Fáil taoiseach.
Bertie Ahern was incredibly popular, achieving a high of 84 per cent, only to be brought back down to earth by the Mahon tribunal and a faltering economy. He exited with a 40 per cent satisfaction rating.
Brian Cowen’s decline has been the steepest and deepest of them all, however. Cowen became Taoiseach in May 2008. Ahern’s star had begun to wane and, as tánaiste and a popular figure within the party, Cowen was his natural successor.
An Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll in January 2008 had shown Cowen to have a higher satisfaction rating as tánaiste than Ahern had as taoiseach. It seemed, for the first time in a very long time, that there was someone within Fianna Fáil more popular than Ahern.
Cowen’s election as leader of Fianna Fáil in April 2008, endorsed again last night, was greeted with euphoria by his constituents and optimism by the party.
With some dark economic clouds on the horizon, his reputation as a tough negotiator and capable debater gave Fianna Fáil the confidence boost they needed.
In May 2008, Cowen’s performance as Taoiseach was evaluated by the public for the first time in an Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll. Reassuringly, with a 52 per cent satisfaction rating, he was comfortably ahead of the rating at which Ahern had finished – 40 per cent in January 2008. Another political stroke of genius, it seemed.
Then, from a high of 52 per cent, public satisfaction with Cowen’s performance fell off a cliff. Within six months his rating had halved, to just 26 per cent in November 2008, falling further to 18 per cent in May 2009.
Some signs of recovery were evident early in 2010, when it seemed for a few months the worst was behind us and satisfaction with his performance rose to 26 per cent, only to drop again, finally reaching a low of 14 per cent in the most recent (December 2010) Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll.
The question everyone will ask is: was it just bad timing for Cowen or did he just not perform to his potential or to expectations?
The timing of Cowen’s accession to the leadership was awful. Within a short period the property market had crashed and unemployment had rocketed. National economic output had collapsed and banks were failing. The hopes of a nation were dashed and the public needed someone to blame. Because Fianna Fáil had been in government for most of the boom years, they were accused of squandering it and bankrupting the country.
No leader of Fianna Fáil, it could be argued, would have been able to insulate him/herself from the anger felt by the public. Many in Fianna Fáil have no doubt made this argument over the past number of days.
Yet the decline in Cowen’s popularity was so precipitous that it is equally valid to argue his response to the crisis was inadequate and he failed to mitigate the damage done to his party and to his reputation.
In the December 2010 poll, Fianna Fáil registered just 17 per cent support. Satisfaction in the performance of the Government (at 8 per cent) and in the performance of Cowen as Taoiseach (at 14 per cent) were at all-time lows.
It would be reasonable for Fianna Fáil to wonder if these depths would not have been plumbed had the situation been handled more effectively and had Cowen shown more leadership.
We will never know if Cowen’s wounds were self-inflicted or if he has been a victim of circumstance. Voters would probably say it was a bit of both.
In the longer term, Fianna Fáil need new leadership, if for no other reason than to signal to the electorate a new beginning.
As we have seen, however, timing is everything. Ideally, a new leader would take over the challenge of rebuilding the party after voters had been given the opportunity to vent their frustration during an election.
It will be interesting to see if the party can afford to wait.
Damian Loscher is managing director of Ipsos MRBI