PDs decide Coalition's stability is paramount, writes Stephen Collins, Political Correspondent
The crisis that has bedevilled the Coalition for the past few weeks fizzled out with a whimper in the Dáil yesterday as the Opposition made a last token effort to seek answers from the Taoiseach on a number of outstanding questions relating to the gifts and loans controversy. They also had a final fling at trying to probe his degree of contrition for the whole episode.
Earlier in the day the Tánaiste stood shoulder to shoulder with the Taoiseach in Government Buildings as both of them announced their intention of carrying on with what Mr McDowell loftily described as "the most successful government in the history of the Irish state".
The formula devised by the two men to patch over the cracks was two-pronged. The first involved a change in the ethics legislation to provide that personal loans and gifts of the type availed of by the Taoiseach in 1993 and 1994 would in future have to be checked with the Standards in Public Office Commission. The second was a firming up of Mr Ahern's apology for his behaviour while he was minister for finance.
"It was an error of judgment and I regret having accepted the money at the time," said the Taoiseach, who added that his apology was unqualified. "The apology covers decisions I made 12 to 13 years ago and the recent consequences of those decisions," he said in response to criticism that his Dáil apology last week had been inadequate.
Mr Ahern then announced that he and Mr McDowell had agreed to amend the ethics legislation to require any officeholder, or member of the Dáil or Seanad, who proposes to accept a significant gift from a friend for personal purposes to seek the confidential opinion of the Standards in Public Office Commission that acceptance of such gift or loan would not be likely to compromise the recipient.
It was dismissed as a fig leaf by the Opposition and it was certainly a far cry from the detailed account of the Manchester payment demanded by Mr McDowell at one stage.
Later in the Dáil, Mr Ahern, with a wonderful sense of detachment from the controversy that has been swirling around him, told the House that many people had been surprised that there was no procedure in place to cover the issue of personal loans and gifts but that the amendments now being proposed to the legislation would do the trick. It was as if the whole thing had nothing to do with him personally.
As part of the earlier choreography, Mr McDowell maintained that all the evidence suggested that a substantial majority of the public wanted the Taoiseach and himself to continue in office. He said it would be grotesque if the unlawful actions of a leaker destroyed the Government.
"It would be an act of supreme moral and political folly to reward the wrongful actions of a leaker in this way. It would also amount to a failure of politics and statecraft if such were the result," Mr McDowell said.
A paradox of the affair, which has bedevilled the Government for nearly three weeks, was that by the end, the Tánaiste appeared to be under more pressure for his erratic response than the Taoiseach was for the actions that led to it in the first place.
An illustration of this yesterday was the "media opportunity", in which only four questions were allowed and all four were put to Mr McDowell and none to Mr Ahern.
Something that is worrying the Opposition deep down is that just as Mr McDowell managed to come off worse than Mr Ahern in political terms, Fine Gael and Labour fear that they may suffer more for seeking answers from the Taoiseach than he will suffer from having provoked the controversy in the first place by taking large amounts of money for personal use in loans and gifts.
"It was very interesting the way Bertie came back again yesterday to his personal difficulties and the involvement of friends in helping him out," said one Opposition politician. "The need for good government to continue was another theme and that was echoed by McDowell. It seems to us that both Government parties have been listening to focus group research and have worked out their response on the basis of what they have been hearing."
The counterblast from the Progressive Democrats about ethical standards in Fine Gael and Labour has not caused much concern to the Opposition, as they believe voters are capable of distinguishing between money taken by a politician for personal use and that taken by politicians and parties for use in elections. The PDs themselves have been the beneficiaries of large donations from a range of prominent business figures.
Still, the PD statement was designed to muddy the waters and it may have some impact, particularly if some voters are feeling sympathetic to the Taoiseach for the battering he has taken. The response of the electorate to the affair and whether it will have any influence on the outcome of the next election is something that will only become clear in time.
However, it has had some interesting side effects on the dynamic of politics. The PDs have ended up underwriting Fianna Fáil to an extent that will make many in the party uncomfortable. They will certainly need a very different strategy at the next election to the one that worked so well in 2002.
The other side of the coin is that the pro-Fianna Fáil elements in the Labour Party will now find it much harder to argue for a deal with Bertie Ahern, no matter what the result of the election. Pat Rabbitte was able to joke in the Dáil yesterday about the overtures being made in Fianna Fáil to Jackie Healy Rae and to certain elements of his own party.
He can joke about it because events have made it much more difficult for those of his colleagues who still carry a torch for Fianna Fáil to make their case.
For better or worse, Fianna Fáil and the PDs are now tied even more closely to each other, as are Fine Gael and Labour.