I have been elected to Seanad Éireann on three occasions after standing as a liberal republican candidate. My record as a parliamentarian since 1987 has been consistently liberal on social and economic matters. I have taken the liberal side in successive referendums such as the divorce, marriage equality, Oireachtas powers and the Repeal the Eighth referendums. I have consistently supported liberal causes as a member of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann since my first election to the Oireachtas in 1987.
In the care and family referendums, I advocated rejection of the Government’s proposals from the same liberal perspective. I was careful in my advocacy to avoid denominational or conservative arguments.
In early 2025, I considered suggestions that I should seek nomination for the presidential election and decided against doing so. My decision was made public on May 23rd in this newspaper.
In July, my office was informed of plans by pro-life members of the Oireachtas, including Aontú, to establish a process in which members of the Oireachtas would interview aspiring candidates chosen by them, and that these aspirants would include Declan Ganley and Maria Steen, both known pro-life activists. I indicated then that I was not interested in becoming involved with such a caucus.
Heather Humphreys denies Simon Harris pressured her to drop disability reforms
The process that left us with only three candidates for president needs an overhaul
Michael McDowell: Why I didn’t nominate Maria Steen for the presidency
Presidential debate: What Catherine Connolly, Heather Humphreys and Jim Gavin said in first TV debate
In August, a significant number of potential candidates were mentioned in the media – some well-known public figures and others less well known. At the end of August, Steen was reported to be considering standing for election. She formally announced her candidacy in an article published in the Irish Catholic in which she stated that she had deliberately chosen that paper for her announcement, confirming that she stood by all her previously expressed public positions, and that she saw the president as the guardian “of the indefinable spirit of Irishness”.
On Thursday, September 4th, I was contacted by the leader of Aontú, Peadar Tóibín, who stated that time was running out to nominate for the presidential election and that it would be a major pity if there wasn’t “a voice standing up for our values in the race”.
He informed me that eight members of the Oireachtas had said they would support “a nominating caucus” to take presentations from potential candidates and that the caucus would vote by secret ballot for who was best and nominate the winner. But there would be no compulsion to nominate the winner if a TD or Senator did not want to. He asked me to let him know if I had an interest in this. I informed him that I did not agree with such an approach. Subsequently, I was asked whether I would change my mind and chair the caucus. I refused. The process was clearly intended to select a pro-life candidate. It was put to me that I could nominate such a candidate on a Voltaire principle: the misattributed quotation that “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
I again declined because I would not propose a candidate for the presidency to whose election I was opposed. My view of the role of Oireachtas members in making a nomination is that they should support the subsequent election of any person that they nominate.
A number of people sounded me out as to whether I would support their candidacies. On September 1st, Steen contacted me by text saying: “you may have seen I am looking for a nomination would you have time to take a quick call today”.
I replied as follows: “Maria, thanks for your message. My position is that as I have already informed two hopefuls, I will make no decision or commitments on nominations until the likely set of nominees becomes clearer including the possibility of Local Authority nominations and whether SF are running an SF candidate. Michael”
The outcome of the local authority deliberations and the position of Sinn Féin, who had promised a “game changer”, only became clear on the weekend of September 20th. On Friday, September 19th, I was asked by Michael Collins TD of Independent Ireland whether I would be supporting Steen’s nomination. I informed him that I did not intend to support her.
On September 22nd, the Irish Daily Mail published a front page splash that described me as “gatekeeper” in relation to Steen’s nomination chances, according to an unidentified “source”. I reconfirmed my position to Collins.
His party intended to meet her on September 22nd, and then to make their own decision as to whether they would nominate her. That day, in response to a request to meet me, I informed the Steen team that I would not be nominating her.
There were at that point 12 Independent non-party Senators, of whom at least eight, including four women Senators, were unwilling to nominate Steen for different reasons. I was in no sense “gatekeeper” for her nomination, as each of those eight Senators had already made their own completely independent decisions on the matter.
I did not consider that a face-to-face meeting with Steen would serve any useful purpose, as her Seanad supporters well knew my position.
Suggestions that I was motivated by envy, jealousy, misogyny or other base reasons are simply untrue. For the reasons stated above, I was opposed to her election, which might very well have happened, in my view. It would have been divisive and a step backwards for the kind of Ireland I believe in.
