Sinn Féin president Mary Lou McDonald finishes the year as leader of Ireland’s most consistently popular party, anticipating elections that may see her party in power in both Dublin and Belfast.
But the nearer that election comes, and the more her party trumpets its promises of change, the more she will be asked to spell out exactly what that means.
She spoke to Irish Times political editor Pat Leahy
Pat Leahy: How many seats do you expect to win?
Inside Sinn Féin: Who really makes the big decisions in Ireland’s most popular party?
Galway city councillors pass contentious budget raising commercial rates by 6% during fractious meeting
Labour Party ‘unlikely’ to enter government but not out yet, says Bacik
Why FF and FG are not looking forward to potentially forming a government with Independents
Mary Lou McDonald: We will win as many seats as the people give us. It’s as simple as that. We are very conscious that for us to be in government we have to be ambitious. And we’re going to have to win a lot of seats. We are going to have to have critical mass. Not least because the kind of government that we wish to participate in and lead even is a government that will be very much about change. And the momentum for that change will have to come from us within Sinn Féin.
PL: Could a government that included either Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil in coalition with Sinn Féin be a government for change?
ML: My sense of it is that once we have critical mass I think we can drive change for sure. I think the waters are untested as to what government, what the momentum is like, what the chemistry is like in the event that you have a larger party and then one of the establishment parties as the smaller entity within government. So I think that’s up for speculation and debate. What’s not up for speculation or debate would be the absolute priorities of things that have to get done by the next administration. And at the heart of that is the issue of housing. You won’t be surprised to hear me say that [the other] issues [will be] around our health service and then longer-term planning and preparation issues in respect of energy independence, the climate obviously, preparation for reunification and a step change in terms of how the State transacts its business.
PL: What do you mean by that?
ML: I have found it very interesting in the conversations with every sector across Irish society, but let me instance specifically business, large corporates, smaller indigenous entities – they have consistently raised with me three things. The first [is] infrastructure, particularly housing; the second, prospects for the future, around energy, climate, the prospects of reunification. And the third issue that comes up all of the time is how the public administration functions, the lack of pace, the lack of ambition. And in saying this, by the way, let me just acknowledge the huge talent and capacity that we have within our public service. I am in no way wishing to diminish that for a second, but we need to be more efficient in how we go about our business. There is an issue just around delivering.
PL: Do you think it takes too much time?
ML: Absolutely. Everything. Things take too long.
PL: On the one hand, you’re telling people that there’s going to be a great change if Sinn Féin leads the next government, and on the other hand you are telling people like businesses, people such as the tech companies, that the fundamentals of our economic system and our enterprise policy, they’re not going to change.
ML: I think business and investment correctly needs to have a sense of direction, of what happens next. I don’t think it’s an unreasonable ask for any sector to say to me that they don’t want to see rabbits pulled from hats. That they want a sense of direction.
PL: So you won’t be pulling rabbits from hats?
ML: No, no, no. I think it’s very, very important to develop our economy to maintain those things that we have gotten right and also to build firmer foundations, that people have a sense of the direction of travel. I think that’s reasonable.
PL: And that’s not going to change with you?
ML: No, absolutely not. I don’t want people fretting or sweating things that are not about the kind of change that we’re talking about. We want an economy that is robust, that is diverse, that generates prosperity and then we want to share it in a fair and equal fashion.
This business of open borders that is touted by some is the stuff of fiction. There is no such thing
— Mary Lou McDonald
PL: One of those infrastructural deficits that you make reference to is clearly in housing and it seems to me that a lot of the problem there is that there’s a massive crisis of affordability and you wish to see houses become more affordable.
ML: Absolutely.
PL: Isn’t that the same thing as saying you want to see prices come down?
ML: Yes, of course it is.
PL: How much would you like to see prices come down?
ML: I want to see rents come down also. I think there is a huge crisis of affordability. I mean, for us, the figure of affordability, I would say the €300,000 mark in a place like Dublin, but obviously there would be a regional variation on that. The objective has to be to get prices as low as we feasibly can, to remedy a situation where in the greater Dublin area we are now told a couple would have to have a combined income of €127,000 per annum. The vast majority of people working in the Irish economy, joint income holders, they’ve nothing like that. In regular districts such as I live in myself €500,000 for a standard home is insane.
PL: To bring house prices down to that sort of level of €300, 000 for an average home in Dublin would involve quite a substantial drop in home values. That’s a politically dangerous position to take, do you think? Because you’re going to saying to voters, this may be difficult, but we want the value of your home to drop?
ML: Well, no, you’re going and you’re saying we wish your children, your grandchildren to have homes. You cite that as a political danger. Let me say to you, the far greater political danger is that we have still an entire generation for whom home ownership is a dim and distant fantasy.
I think in this decade we will have the referendums [on a united Ireland]. And I think the preparation needs to start now
— Mary Lou McDonald
PL: What would be the changes, if any, in migration policy that you would introduce?
ML: I have mentioned the housing issue and that’s core because I think for lots of people that I would talk to who are like really good people, reasonable people – their worry is: I don’t have a home for my daughter or grandchild and now more people are coming ... it’s not being managed, there’s no plan, there’s no scale, there’s no ambition. [But] this business of open borders that is touted by some is the stuff of fiction. There is no such thing. We have freedom of movement within the European Union. But outside of that, it’s a question then of how the system itself functions, the efficiency of it, the resourcing of it, the extent to which third countries are correctly identified, how we deal with what are called secondary movements.
PL: But how would you deal with that?
ML: You have to apply the rule book, and the rule is safe haven, asylum, refugee status, absolutely for those who seek those protections. We have, as a matter of international and a moral obligation, to discharge those duties. But in the event that there are safe countries, safe third countries that are safe for secondary movements, then equally we have to apply the rule book. And if somebody doesn’t qualify, then they have to leave the jurisdiction and that’s not to be harsh with people.
Podcast: Listen to the Mary Lou McDonald interview and analysis from Pat Leahy
PL: Do you think that those rules are applied efficiently enough by the current government?
ML: No, I don’t think so. I don’t think so and in fact I think they have conceded themselves that they need to step things up and that there needs to be a greater efficiency and I think there was some question marks with this idea of people self-deporting.
PL: Do you accept that there is a chilling effect on media by the legal actions taken by many Sinn Féin TDs, including yourself, against media organisations?
ML: No, I don’t. And let me speak from my personal experience because I’m at this now a while. And a lot of things have been written about me personally. I mean, including in your own newspaper where at one stage [a former journalist wrote] the most awful misogynistic drivel about me – and for completeness, he apologised. So I want to recognise that. The Irish Times never did and that’s what it is.
That was never pursued, by way of litigation because it was obnoxious, it was uncalled for, but you didn’t break the law. And sometimes in a democratic society, lots is written – good, bad, different, up to and including things that are hostile, but they are within the law and they are within the playbook.
It becomes different when somebody is defamed. Or if an untruth or a lie or something that’s damaging to somebody’s reputation. You see, I could equally say to you, the act of defaming public figures, people who are elected, that’s not good for a democracy. Is that not chilling also?
You should know the difference between fair and critical robust comment and defamation. Defamation is against the law, and journalists have to accept that, I’m afraid, like the rest of us.
PL: Is your own legal action against RTÉ proceeding?
ML: Yes.
PL: And that of your husband against [journalist] Shane Ross [over the book he wrote about McDonald]?
ML: Well, that’s my husband’s business.
PL: Presumably you have discussed it with him
ML: Well, of course I have and yes, it is. But that’s a matter for him.
PL: Would you accept that on the current state of play that the timetable for a viable vote on a united Ireland is into the next decade?
ML: No, I don’t. As a matter of fact, I think in this decade we will have the referendums. And I think the preparation needs to start now. What you are observing in that excellent work [the recent Irish Times polling on a united Ireland with the Arins research project] is the absence of a declared intent by the Government in Dublin and the absence of clarity from the government in London. So I would suggest to you that as and when a government in Dublin – and Dublin has to lead on this issue – says: ‘We will now have and start this conversation, start the preparation, start the work,’ I think you will see a very different kind of political dynamic unfold. That’s my prediction.
PL: Would you as taoiseach try to construct a new state after unity that would be more British, in a way, than the current Republic and might things such as flags, anthems, membership of the Commonwealth come on the table in that?
ML: I certainly think it’ll be more Ulster than it currently is.
PL: To a lot of people Ulster is British.
ML: Yeah, yeah, and to lots of others it’s not. Like we’re missing six of our nine Ulster counties. So of course it’s going to be different. And I think that’s something to be welcomed. As regards flags, emblems and all of that, of course we need to talk about those things. I mean, for me, the Tricolour, the orange, the green, the two great traditions and entente between them is the definition of inclusion, but I accept not everybody sees it that way.
PL: As taoiseach, would you expel the Israeli ambassador, take sanctions against Israel, recognise the state of Palestine? Would you commit in advance to doing all those things as taoiseach?
ML: There have to be consequences for Israel for this. We have seen onslaughts against Gaza before, but we have never witnessed something as relentless and savage as this. And it’s unfolding before our very eyes. So, the answer is that Ireland – either in concert with others or on its own, leading the way – has to take action. It’s not enough for us simply to say the right things. We need to do the right things. So, recognition of the state of Palestine, I mean, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a resolved matter. In terms of sanctions, the case is unanswerable. And it needs to be more than putting violent settlers on a no-fly list. That’s [a] very, very, very poor response. There should be very serious trading sanctions against Israel. And I think, for us then when it comes to the ambassador, I mean, the Government have said: well, it’s important to keep the diplomatic lines open.
PL: But would you, if you were taoiseach, would you expel the ambassador?
ML: If I were taoiseach at this juncture, yes. What are we going to do? Sit on our hands? I don’t think any taoiseach or any government worthy of the name should or could do that.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here
