Now Ye're Talking - to a Political Correspondent

Boards.ie: Niamh

With the general election in full swing, we thought it would be a great idea to get someone in the thick of it all to answer any questions you might have about the election process, candidates, canvassing, predictions, whatever you want to know.

Gav Reilly of Today FM has agreed to come along and answer some of your questions tomorrow (Tuesday 16th February).

Gav is the Today FM political correspondent and host of it's Election Daily podcast which you can listen to on iTunes

or on Soundcloud

As you can imagine, Gav is a very busy man at the moment so he'll be coming on to answer questions tomorrow only. Please post your questions here for him and he'll answer them then

Thanks!

Agent Smith

Which political party comes across as the most professional in their setup?

Polo_Mint

Should Heckling in the Dail be stamped out and which politician stands out to be the worst for heckling?

5rtytry56

Does any political group, party try to avoid political correspondents like you?

Kerrydude1981

Who is the toughest politician to interview?

How do you see the Kerry constituency going in this election?

Dave!

Any advice for aspiring journalists/political correspondents?

Any reflections on the direction that the news industry is going, the changes taking place in the industry? What will news look like in 5-10 years' time?

dulpit

Hey Gavan.

1. How different is it being a correspondent for a radio station versus working for a newspaper/online paper?
2. Why do interviewers not push politicians more on answering the question asked, rather than allowing them waffle on and on?
3. Have you been tempted or have you called politicians on their obvious bulls**t?
4. Is it difficult to keep your own political leanings out of your reportage?
5. Based on the polls and your experience/soundings, do you reckon the next Dáil will collapse in a few months, or will it go a couple of years?
6. FF + FG = match made in heaven or not a chance in hell?

Gone West

Why did you move to Today FM, and can you talk about what restrictions this relationship will have on your reporting? I know that you have been doing absolutely amazing work with FOIs over the years, and were never afraid to ask tough questions and turn over stones that others weren't looking at. Thanks a lot BTW, there aren't many like you out there.

My outside perspective is that surely working for an established media organisation means that you need to be much more careful about what you say and where you go looking. Can you talk about this a bit?

horgan_p

Have you ever interviewed a politician so intent in not answering your question that you wanted to come across the table and shake the answer out of him ?

handlemaster

Why are all Irish governments unable to deliver on the big projects such as renewable energy, trams systems for the cities etc ?

Buona Fortuna

Hi Gav and thanks for taking the time.

I was listening to local radio this morning and some politician was on. The interviewer asked "How would this be paid for?"

The politician answered, but he kept qualifying what he was saying and adding sub clauses and going on to his own tangents - I think the closest he ever came to answering was something like "the general exchequer".

Maybe this is unfair but there almost seems a bit of collusion with the journos. They'll ask the difficult question but no one is going to give a "Paxman slap" to make sure the answer is in any way relevant.

mahoganygas

Do Political Correspondents from different media outlets help each other out?
Do you share tips/rumours with the understanding that you will be tipped off in return?
Or is it a case that you will try to get an exclusive and hold onto it?

Thanks.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Gloomtastic!

Good man Gav, thanks for coming on here.

I take it you've met most of the current lot of TDs. A couple of questions...

1. No names necessary, but what's the daftest thing you've seen or heard in Leinster House?
2. How influential are spin doctors?
3. Would you like to be a spin doctor one day?
4. Red Flag Waving Socialist TDs. Are they really so naive to believe that nationalising Dell's old plant in Shannon was something Ireland Inc. should have done? Or are they just trying it on, grateful they have a very good job for being nothing more than an argumentative twat?

_Tombstone_

Is louise Duffy sound? She's the only one on the radio worth listening to nowadays.

blapabrew22

Hi Gav, what do you think is most likely to happen first: a government led by Sinn Fein, or Meath bringing home Sam?

Agent Smith

What type of horse is Matt Cooper?

Kerrydude1981

Has Gerry Adams ever said this to you?

"I didn't interrupt you, so you shouldn't interrupt me"

5rtytry56

Has anyone who has retired from political life ever come to you and said "I really made a mess of that issue". Or do they all just rest on their laurels and receive their pensions?

Oasis_Dublin

Neil Prendeville suggested, in his interview with Enda last Friday, that the Taoiseach's handlers were trying to interfere towards the end of the interview. How much of a pain in the backside are the handlers?

Are any of the politicians like David Cameron, in that they answer a question, and then immediately walk away from the microphones so that you don't push them on an issue?

Skrynesaver

Why don't presenters turn off their mike and say "You didn't answer the question asked, you have to pay for advertising on this station" when a politician ignores the substance of what was asked ?

swanvill

Just a quick note to say thanks for the podcasts, informative and enjoyable. keep up the good work.

Comic Book Guy

Hi Gav,

What are the core principles that differentiate fg from ff? As a non clued in voter they appear much of a muchness in centre right more closely linked together than either are to labour on the left or sin vein even further to the left.

robdonn

Last night Lucinda put on a performance that very closely resembles Sarah Palin. Beyond her own new party, is there a lot of support for introducing the failed 3-Strike system of the US?

Also, the debate introduced 3 smaller parties to the larger public audience. As none of these parties are capable of creating a majority, would it be in their interest to become part of the opposition or form a coalition with a larger party and risk disappearing like the Greens did?

TodayFM: Gav

Hi everyone! Thanks to those of you who have posted questions so far - I'm just back in the office after being in Limerick for the seven-way debate last night. Suffice it to say: I'm voting for Claire Byrne.

So, let's get to it...

Agent Smith wrote: »

Which political party comes across as the most professional in their setup?

To be fair the 'big four' (Fine Gael, Labour, Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin) are all quite professional in their dealings, but to be honest this is a natural by-product of the amount of money they have, which is again a by-product of the state funding they get because of the number of TDs they get elected.

There's only a couple of observations I'd have about this, in the two-and-a-bit years that I've been in this job: firstly, Fine Gael hasn't had cause to hold many events because when it's in government the events tend to take on a 'State' angle and are run by the various government departments rather than the party itself. That said, when it's running its annual Ard Fheis the events are very professionally run and always go very smoothly. (Labour's conferences run equally well but it seems to me that Labour holds more 'standalone' events for various party policies or documents that aren't directly linked to government.)

The other observation is that Sinn Féin has come on quite a bit in this regard in the last couple of years and are now, in terms of dealing with the media, on a par with the other larger parties as regards the facilities they offer at party events, and the degree to which they're prepared to take calls and questions after hours. Even little things like providing a stand for the various TV and radio stations to sit their microphones into make a big difference - up to a few months ago, if Micheal Martin was speaking to the media, FF would provide a mic stand which then gives any little interview a sense of gravitas as we're all then stood a few yards away. With SF there were no mic stands, so we'd hold microphones up to the mouths of Gerry Adams/Mary Lou McDonald and it would end up feeling a little more claustrophobic. SF on their own initiative are dealing with little things like this now.

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Should Heckling in the Dail be stamped out and which politician stands out to be the worst for heckling?

As a citizen I'd say absolutely, heckling should be stamped out - and certainly as a radio reporter covering Dáil events it gets pretty tiresome trying to find a good clip that isn't then ruined by a verbal brawl breaking out towards the end.

The only point I'd make is that it's virtually impossible to really stamp it out - bear in mind that when people are heckling in the chamber their microphones aren't turned on, and their roaring is only heard simply because of how loud it is. Ironically enough the only way you might be able to stamp it out is to leave every mic turned on, all the time, and then shame people into realising how disruptive their comments can be.

That said, the speaking time in the Dáil is so closely regulated that sometimes a well-placed heckle might be the only chance that a TD has to raise a legitimate concern during proceedings, so we'd need to tread carefully about any sort of measure that stops elected TDs from being able to make comments in a house of parliament.

I can't think of any obvious standout offender but the worst would generally be the elder members of Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil who tend to descend into the odd tribal heckle when it comes to any discussion about the records of either party.

5rtytry56 wrote: »

Does any political group, party try to avoid political correspondents like you?

In all honesty, no - but it's worth bearing in mind that the opposition parties realistically need the media to get their message across, so they are always going to make themselves more available. Generally speaking Labour are also very keen and amenable - especially since Joan Burton took over, she's been available to the media almost on a daily basis, which is fairly rare for the leader of a government party these days. Fine Gael are less accessible in relative terms to the other parties, but Enda Kenny generally speaks to the media once or twice a week - less than other past taoisigh, from what I'm told, but far more than some of his counterparts in Europe.

blapabrew22

You get to interview 3 players or coaches from Man United, past or present, alive or dead, and ask them each just one questions. Who are the 3 players and what question would you ask each individual?

TodayFM: Gav

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Who is the toughest politician to interview?

How do you see the Kerry constituency going in this election?

The toughest are the party leaders, but all for different reasons - Enda Kenny simply because although he's available more regularly than other prime ministers, it's in a fairly controlled environment where he'll only have time for a few questions, one from each reporter. This means you have to think a little bit about what's the most worthwhile question to ask and you generally don't have the chance for a follow-up or to put something under a little more scrutiny.

Joan Burton is frustrating simply because she's prone to tangents. If you ask her what colour the sky is, she might start by saying how important it is to recognise all the various colours it might be from time to time, and while it's blue now it might not always be blue, and bear in mind that when it's not blue it's because there might be clouds which are full of condensation, and that condensation is compromised of water that has come from all manner of different households and businesses into our natural estuaries, and that it's important to make sure that the water that gets pumped into those rivers and lakes is clear and that's why we need Irish Water and so in answer to your question the sky is blue but of course my favourite colour is red, ahahaha.

Gerry Adams and Micheal Martin have a similar propensity to declare a question 'answered' when it would be more correct to say it's been 'addressed'. Adams is by far more prevalent at this - if you ask him what colour the sky is, he might say it's more relevant to comment on how much rain is fallen, and then you ask again about the sky he'll say he's answered the question. Martin is a lesser offender at this but more recently when it's come to coalition questions he's adopted the same tack.

As for Kerry... it's a very tough call. It's such a vast county and has no history of people transferring geographically from one end of the county to the other. Take a random example like Louth: if FG ran a candidate in Dundalk and another in Drogheda, you could reasonably trust one candidate to transfer their surplus/preferences to the other. Kerry has no history of doing that and it remains to be seen how 'local' people will vote. In my mind, Michael Healy-Rae (Ind) and Jimmy Deenihan (FG) are the only truly safe seats; the big question is whether the Healy-Rae gene pool splitting in two might eat up more of the traditional FF vote that John Brassil might have hoped for.

Dave! wrote: »

Any advice for aspiring journalists/political correspondents?

Any reflections on the direction that the news industry is going, the changes taking place in the industry? What will news look like in 5-10 years' time?

To be honest it seems foolhardy to try and offer an analysis of what news will look like in 5-10 years' time because nobody could possibly have predicted, 5 or 10 years ago, what the news world would look like in 2016. That said, I would safely imagine that one or more of Ireland's daily broadsheets will have gone the way of the Independent in ten years.

As regards advice... my own path was a bit random but if someone wanted t get into politics/current affairs reporting, a good start is simply to watch a lot of Dail/Seanad/council proceedings. In fact, a very good idea would be to get into the habit of going along to meetings of your local city/county council, if you can at all, and just sit in the public gallery studying how things work. A lot of this game is simply understanding the procedures and therefore knowing when to expect newsworthy exchanges/events to happen. I remember doing some trial shifts at a previous job and some colleagues would leave the Dáil stream running all day just in case it yielded some news. That's not a bad idea, but it's a far better idea to become familiar with the general scheduling and timetable of Dáil events so that you can spend that time more wisely.

One other idea would be to get to grips with the written answers that are tacked onto the end of every day's Dáil transcript - they can often be a treasure trove of interesting stuff that can yield a good story that you can sell to a newspaper and get yourself going. This is one example!

dulpit wrote: »

Hey Gavan.

1. How different is it being a correspondent for a radio station versus working for a newspaper/online paper?
2. Why do interviewers not push politicians more on answering the question asked, rather than allowing them waffle on and on?
3. Have you been tempted or have you called politicians on their obvious bulls**t?
4. Is it difficult to keep your own political leanings out of your reportage?
5. Based on the polls and your experience/soundings, do you reckon the next Dáil will collapse in a few months, or will it go a couple of years?
6. FF + FG = match made in heaven or not a chance in hell?

I'm aware that my answers are probably longer than anyone wants to read, so I'll try to rush through these...

* The biggest difference is that when you're working in the written word, you have more scope to do 'background' stories or analysis pieces. When you're working towards an hourly news bulletin, which only has space for perhaps 5 or 6 stories each hour, you generally have to be filing the sort of story that could potentially be on page one of a newspaper.

* I think every interviewer has different reasons for doing so - my gut assumption would be that if you pursue them, you might end up betraying your own anger and veering away from an interview into a straightforward row, which is not your job. There might also be a (naive?) belief that if you wait long enough, you'll get your answer anyway - or, if you give a politician enough rope, they'll say something stupid that you can latch onto afterward.

* I wouldn't use those words, but I have done in the past - where I've interrupted someone giving answers to say that their stance now completely contradicts something they've said in the past. Generally speaking the politician will have an excuse prepared - they'll either brazen it out, or offer some sort of explanation about circumstances changing or something.

* It's tricky sometimes - it's an especially prescient concern when you're in broadcasting and are more heavily regulated, with more obligation to be totally impartial. Naturally every reporter will have sympathies or leanings in a certain way but I try to approach every reporting job with the mindset of, 'I am a punter and don't know how I will vote. I hope that attending this event will help me make this decision,' and that pulls me through it. (As a general rule, I always approach jobs with the mindset of 'Citizen first, journalist second'. It's a useful rule of thumb.)

* It depends who's in power! Right now my leaning is that FG will be a minority government with FF offering what's called 'confidence and supply', where they agree to support the government (or abstain) in motions of confidence and on budgetary matters (i.e. money 'supply'). How long that lasts, though, I'm not sure. Both sides might be perfectly happy to keep that arrangement going until after the Budget simply so that they can rest and gather the resources they need for another election in early November.

* FG and FF is a match made in hell only for the more tribal members of either party who appear to think there is a difference between them. From the outside it's always seemed to me that they agree on 90-95% of major matters and that the only thing keeping them apart is how many bodies would turn in their metaphorical graves at the idea of coalition!

TodayFM: Gav

Fuzzy wrote: »

Why did you move to Today FM, and can you talk about what restrictions this relationship will have on your reporting? I know that you have been doing absolutely amazing work with FOIs over the years, and were never afraid to ask tough questions and turn over stones that others weren't looking at. Thanks a lot BTW, there aren't many like you out there.

My outside perspective is that surely working for an established media organisation means that you need to be much more careful about what you say and where you go looking. Can you talk about this a bit?

I think you might be getting me mixed up with Gavin Sheridan of TheStory.ie (@gavinsblog on Twitter) who is a bona fide FOI legend, but your question is valid nonetheless!

I've been here for over 2.5 years and I can honestly say the station's ownership has never interfered in my work or how I handle certain subjects. The only time it's even come close was during the row last year about whether Catherine Murphy's Dáil comments on Denis O'Brien's banking arrangements with IBRC could be reported or not - and this was only the same concern that every other newsroom in Ireland had (i.e. whether we could report the comments Catherine made in the Dáil, knowing that some of the matters she raised were also the subject of an injunction granted by the courts). Once this got straightened out by the courts we reported on it freely and at length - and any other O'Brien-related stories, like concern about the sale of SiteServ by IBRC, get the treatment they deserve.

In this sense it's maybe worth pointing out that the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland rules are a protection for everyone concerned. We have to give fair treatment to every story we cover and we'd therefore be putting the station's licence at risk, if its ownership began to influence its coverage of certain issues.

horgan_p wrote: »

Have you ever interviewed a politician so intent in not answering your question that you wanted to come across the table and shake the answer out of him ?

I'm a fairly placid fella so this doesn't happen much - to be honest if someone goes to sufficient lengths to avoid answering a question, that in itself becomes a story: that they've got something to hide or are refusing to admit an inconvenient truth. See, for example, the recent series of questions about whether Enda Kenny would ever consider a coalition with Fianna Fáil!

handlemaster wrote: »

Why are all Irish governments unable to deliver on the big projects such as renewable energy, trams systems for the cities etc ?

Firstly it depends on your definition of 'deliver on the big projects' - let's take your example of 'trams for cities'. FF and the Greens both promised in 2007 to look at the viability of having the Luas in Cork or Galway, and ordered studies to examine it in 2008. Then the financial collapse happened and there was no way the country could afford it. I don't think that's an inability to deliver on a big project, so much as an inability to manage the public finances prudently.

For what it's worth, I've always suspected that public transport in Ireland is of a lower standard than in other countries because we've never had a left-wing led government. It tends to be something that socialist/social democrat-led governments put as a higher priority - and those governments, generally, are more willing to raise taxes so that those projects can be paid for.

The only time Ireland ever legitimately had enough money to build light rail systems was during the boom time of the early 2000s, but instead Ireland kept electing FF/PD governments that chose to use that money for tax cuts and SSIA schemes instead. You get what you vote for.

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

Hi Gav and thanks for taking the time.

I was listening to local radio this morning and some politician was on. The interviewer asked "How would this be paid for?"

The politician answered, but he kept qualifying what he was saying and adding sub clauses and going on to his own tangents - I think the closest he ever came to answering was something like "the general exchequer".

Maybe this is unfair but there almost seems a bit of collusion with the journos. They'll ask the difficult question but no one is going to give a "Paxman slap" to make sure the answer is in any way relevant.

Good question - I'll start at the outset by saying, tangents are either a sign that a politician knows too much about a subject, or too little. Generally you have to make up your own mind about which is the case!

I'd be interested to know what the interview was in this case but, to be fair, 'out of the general exchequer' is a legitimate answer for a lot of plans. That's the understated importance of elections: the government you elect can throw out ANY previous spending plans it wants, and use the money to fund other things. (That's the reason for the whole debate about the 'fiscal space' in the last few weeks - if the economy keeps growing at a reasonable rate, the general exchequer will be able to fund €8.6 billion in extra spending measures or tax reductions.)

Buona Fortuna

TodayFM: Gav wrote: »

I'd be interested to know what the interview was in this case ...

I think it was Michael Ring

..... to be fair, 'out of the general exchequer' is a legitimate answer for a lot of plans.

Sure - but he could have said that from the getgo instead of going round the houses and he could then have explained how they intend growing it ...

The answer would have been clear and everyone would know what they stand for. Instead we got several minutes of waffle - leaving people like me thinking - He's hiding the answer or doesn't know.

TodayFM: Gav

mahoganygas wrote: »

Do Political Correspondents from different media outlets help each other out?
Do you share tips/rumours with the understanding that you will be tipped off in return?
Or is it a case that you will try to get an exclusive and hold onto it?

Thanks.

I have to admit that when I started in Leinster House I was pleasantly surprised by how collegiate the political correspondents (or "pol corrs" for short) are to each other. If one of them gets a scoop or spots something legitimately newsworthy, they'll usually keep it for their own outlet, which is totally fair enough - but on other occasions where, for example, a reporter arrives late for a press conference and misses the whole thing, a colleague from another outlet would always be happy to share their audio recording of it. 'There but for the grace of God', and all that...

JT26 wrote: »

In your opinion why in Ireland there isn't an appetite for a libertarian party and also amongst the newer parties formed no one seems to take the reigns from the old progressive Democrats is there no market for a PD type party now?

Honestly I think it's because people tend to vote with their own locality in mind, probably more so than they do in other countries. Over the last few weeks I've been hearing Ivan Yates' constituency predictions on Newstalk and was almost disappointed to remember/realise how much of the Dáil will be elected on the basis of geography. Take for example my own native turf of Meath West - the way the population is spread, two of the three seats will probably come from the Navan region, and the third from Trim, and a lot of people who might vote Communist #1 would happily vote Anarchist #2 if the two candidates both came from their own home town. Democracy is democracy and there's nothing wrong with that kind of localised mindset but sometimes it does result in the election of some fairly weak candidates who don't contribute much to public life.

A partial party list system (like they have in New Zealand) would probably help to facilitate more parties like this because it would give voters an opportunity to vote for a 'local' candidate while also letting them vote for another party on the basis of its ideology.

One other point: the difference between the PDs' era and now is that the rules on party donations and funding are now an inhibition to new parties. It's illegal for anyone to donate more than €2,500 to a party in any one year - including its founders - and that means it's really really difficult to compete with the bigger parties that get millions in state funding, on the basis of previous election results. I know Lucinda Creighton is on record as saying that because she and the other Renua founders can't directly plough their own money into Renua, she's effectively had to lend the money to the party - so if it fall short in this election and doesn't qualify for state funding, she could well end up personally out of pocket. It's an anecdotal example but it illustrates how hard it is to compete - the clampdown on political donations has had the inadvertent effect of pulling the ladder up on the smaller parties.

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Good man Gav, thanks for coming on here.

I take it you've met most of the current lot of TDs. A couple of questions...

1. No names necessary, but what's the daftest thing you've seen or heard in Leinster House?
2. How influential are spin doctors?
3. Would you like to be a spin doctor one day?
4. Red Flag Waving Socialist TDs. Are they really so naive to believe that nationalising Dell's old plant in Shannon was something Ireland Inc. should have done? Or are they just trying it on, grateful they have a very good job for being nothing more than an argumentative twat?

1. I once saw a TD bringing a school tour around Leinster House (which is common enough) and showing the kids the wall that has large portraits of all the former Taoisigh. He mis-identified three of them. (The TD in question is also one of those who gets elected largely because of a geographical vote.)
2. They're more influential for the government side than the opposition side, simply because on the government side they are often the vehicle through which news gets out and so it can be difficult (nay impossible) to un-spin something that they announce. That said, they're only really as influential as you allow them to be!
3. I'd be lying if I said the idea didn't fascinate me, but I really enjoy the sort of role I'm in now and to be honest I don't think it would be feasible to go back to a journalism job afterwards. There was a time where you could be Government Press Secretary and then go back to reading the Six One News but spinning is so partisan nowadays that it's just not plausible to go back to a job where people require you to be as objective as possible.
4. To be honest I don't know - I do genuinely think they want major companies to be in national hands, but I have no idea how they expect to be able to pay for it. Take Dell - if Dell were nationalised to save those jobs, how would it be paid for? You'd have to tax the profits of major companies like... Dell...

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Is louise Duffy sound? She's the only one on the radio worth listening to nowadays.

Yep, she's utterly lovely.

5rtytry56

Has been in politics made anybody a better person than when you first knew about them?

TodayFM: Gav

blapabrew22 wrote: »

Hi Gav, what do you think is most likely to happen first: a government led by Sinn Fein, or Meath bringing home Sam?

:eek: Meath bringing home Sam? Will we ever see those days again?! The last Meath team to do that are only eight years away from their jubilee appearance on All-Ireland final day...

In all seriousness, it depends on the outcome of the next election, but at this moment in time a SF-led government is far more likely. The sheer force of necessity could see FG and FF end up working together (in some format or another) in the next Dáil and if that's the case, Sinn Féin will immediately step up to the plate as the largest opposition party which gives them the perfect platform to challenge for the leadership in the election after that.

Agent Smith wrote: »

What type of horse is Matt Cooper?

Matt Cooper is secretly a Budweiser Clydesdale. Sssssh, don't tell anyone.

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Has Gerry Adams ever said this to you?

"I didn't interrupt you, so you shouldn't interrupt me"

Alas, no - I have yet to experience that journalistic baptism. (Generally if I'm interrupting someone I start with a perfunctory "Sorry to interrupt, but...")

5rtytry56 wrote: »

Has anyone who has retired from political life ever come to you and said "I really made a mess of that issue". Or do they all just rest on their laurels and receive their pensions?

Nobody's ever come up to me saying that but the simplest explanation for this is that I'm not in the job long enough - this is my first general election as a full-time political correspondent so I haven't been around for long enough to see a government turfed out and see what they'd be like afterwards.

Anecdotally some of the old Fianna Fáil crew are split between those camps - there are some who keep themselves to themselves, quietly acknowledge that their turn on the merry-go-round is over and who get on with their own lives. But there's a few others who are still sniffing around the edges, hoping they might get another chance in future - and who wouldn't be too quick to accept responsibility for any failings that happened on their watch. Bear in mind: someone who was in Fianna Fáil from 1997 to 2011 presided over nearly a decade of fairly spectacular economic figures before it all went to **** so suddenly in 2008. That collapse was a seismic event to the public as a whole, but in their political lives it was a two-year crisis after 12 years of boom. In their minds that probably mitigates some of the blame for just how devastating the crash was. I'm not saying they're right to think so - but it's probably a by-product of them being paid so well that they would never feel the personal pinch of the austerity they enforced.

mahoganygas

Great responses Gav!
Very interesting stuff.

barry181091

This is so silly but I have always wanted to know; Are politicians from different partiess (Specifically TD's.) friends behind it all? Like the leaders debate last night, I could all imagine them joking after it. In a sort of, "Good match!" kind of way.

I get the feeling that a lot of the promises new far-left parties are offering may sound possible *technically* but are not possible in reality. I feel the experience of actually being in power/politics for so long is that you know how the whole system ACTUALLY works and what is ACTUALLY realistically possible. My question is this; Should the experience that the bigger parties have add to their ability to run the country?

Kerrydude1981

Weirdest experience you have had as Political Correspondent?

robdonn

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Weirdest experience you have had as Political Correspondent?

Please say a 7-way with the party leaders...

panda100

TodayFM: Gav wrote:

As regards advice... my own path was a bit random but if someone wanted t get into politics/current affairs reporting, a good start is simply to watch a lot of Dail/Seanad/council proceedings. In fact, a very good idea would be to get into the habit of going along to meetings of your local city/county council, if you can at all, and just sit in the public gallery studying how things work. A lot of this game is simply understanding the procedures and therefore knowing when to expect newsworthy exchanges/events to happen. I remember doing some trial shifts at a previous job and some colleagues would leave the Dáil stream running all day just in case it yielded some news. That's not a bad idea, but it's a far better idea to become familiar with the general scheduling and timetable of Dáil events so that you can spend that time more wisely.

I thought you cut your journalistic teeth on the UCD Forum of Boards.ie

Really interesting insight into the world of a political journalist so far.

TodayFM: Gav

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Neil Prendeville suggested, in his interview with Enda last Friday, that the Taoiseach's handlers were trying to interfere towards the end of the interview. How much of a pain in the backside are the handlers?

Are any of the politicians like David Cameron, in that they answer a question, and then immediately walk away from the microphones so that you don't push them on an issue?

There's nobody who would 'do a Cameron' and immediately walks away so as soon as they've said what they want, though Enda happened to do it on his way in and out of the Limerick debate last night!

To be honest with the Neil Prendeville thing I suspect the 'interference' was simply because Enda Kenny is almost always late for absolutely everything he attends. The interview was nearly 30 minutes at that stage and I think it's honestly more plausible that they wanted Neil to wrap up simply so that they could get him to his next appointment. (If they were trying to pull him out of the interview, why would they have let it continue for over 25 minutes first?)

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Why don't presenters turn off their mike and say "You didn't answer the question asked, you have to pay for advertising on this station" when a politician ignores the substance of what was asked ?

It's a decent question but I suspect that it's a case of wanting to give the politician enough rope to hang themselves. Every interviewer or broadcaster has a different style - some of them see themselves more as an intermediary, a vessel through which a politician speaks to the public directly, and who think it's up to the listener to draw their own conclusions. (If an interviewee is evidently crap, the presenter won't really feel the need to state it out loud.) Others prefer to be a bit more adversarial which is equally legitimate, and perfectly fine, but it's just a different style.

I'm sure there's a certain sense of pragmatism about it too - if you basically humiliate someone on air, you're a lot less likely to get them back on the show again when you might genuinely want to hear from them on another topic in future. If you allow them to humiliate themselves, and let the listener reach that conclusion themselves, you don't burn that bridge.

Comic Book Guy wrote: »

Hi Gav,

What are the core principles that differentiate fg from ff? As a non clued in voter they appear much of a muchness in centre right more closely linked together than either are to labour on the left or sin vein even further to the left.

To be perfectly blunt there aren't many - I sometimes wonder whether the large catch-all, slightly-right-of-centre bloc in Ireland split into two parties simply so that there would be a degree of competition and require at least the semblance of a debate about the issues of the day. (Don't get me wrong - I'd much rather have a Jack Johnson and John Jackson situation than no democracy at all!)

It was only recently that I heard a Fianna Fáil member give me what I thought was the most cogent explanation of what the party stood for. He said:

Fine Gael generally measures the progress of the nation by how well its enterprises are doing and how much money the average punter has in their pocket; Labour measures the progress of the nation by how well it treats its poorest. Fianna Fáil tries to strike that balance all the time.

Whether you subscribe to that picture or not, I think it's probably fair to say there's always been a bit of a Labour-y wing within Fianna Fáil - so it might be true to say that historically FF was such a large catch-all party that an overall FF government (in the Lemass/Lynch era at least) had the same social make-up as a FG/Labour coalition did.

A lot of party members will tell you (eventually, potentially after a drink or two) that there isn't much of a difference between FG and FF, but they would rather have the faction split in two than exist as an all-dominating single entity that won every election by a landslide. That's probably a true assessment.

robdonn wrote: »

Last night Lucinda put on a performance that very closely resembles Sarah Palin. Beyond her own new party, is there a lot of support for introducing the failed 3-Strike system of the US?

Also, the debate introduced 3 smaller parties to the larger public audience. As none of these parties are capable of creating a majority, would it be in their interest to become part of the opposition or form a coalition with a larger party and risk disappearing like the Greens did?

The three-strikes policy doesn't have anyone else explicitly supporting it but that's not to say that others wouldn't have an open mind for it. Generally the opposition to it wouldn't be specifically against the policy itself, but against the proposed list of offences it would cover. Renua's manifesto included suggestions for murder, rape and burglary (but wanted the final list referred to the Irish Penal Reform Trust for their feedback). Murder already carries a life sentence and you'd imagine a three-time rapist would also be facing a decades-long sentence so there'd be no opposition there - the question is whether someone should be jailed for life for three burglaries, given the extenuating circumstances that might apply in their lives.

As for whether the smaller parties should join government or not... that's an impossible question to answer really; they'd simply have to decide where they're more likely to be heard and to have influence. To be honest I would personally have a grievance with any party that runs for office but who doesn't actually want power.

A Greens/PD-style meltdown is not inevitable, by the way - you just have to be assertive in power, and appreciate how differently the public sees a coalition to those inside it. Labour has a third of the seats in the current coalition, so within government, Labour probably considers itself to have a third of the influence. But to an outsider, Fine Gael doesn't have the numbers to do things alone and therefore Labour appears to have a veto on everything. If a junior partner was assertive enough (and picked a good enough reason to collapse the government) they can easily survive and thrive. Remember the PDs doubled their size in the election before they collapsed!

blapabrew22 wrote: »

You get to interview 3 players or coaches from Man United, past or present, alive or dead, and ask them each just one questions. Who are the 3 players and what question would you ask each individual?

It would be George Best, Eric Cantona and Roy Keane, and each would get the same question: "Are you honestly telling me you don't regret anything about leaving Old Trafford?"

TodayFM: Gav

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

I think it was Michael Ring

Sure - but he could have said that from the getgo instead of going round the houses and he could then have explained how they intend growing it ...

The answer would have been clear and everyone would know what they stand for. Instead we got several minutes of waffle - leaving people like me thinking - He's hiding the answer or doesn't know.

To be honest, this is the classic example of the answer I gave Skrynesaver - clearly the presenter in this case decided it would be more diplomatic to hand Ringer a shovel and dig a hole for himself, rather than to push him into it. Again, it's a really nifty rule: if they're talking at length, they either know loads about the subject or almost nothing...

5rtytry56 wrote: »

Has been in politics made anybody a better person than when you first knew about them?

A great question, and one that unfortunately I'm not around long enough to answer because I haven't seen enough people come in and out of the halls of Leinster House and how it's changed them. Generally speaking, being in there tends to make people more mature - but that could easily be because they're simply getting older while they're there, or they might get married or have kids or whatever. It's a tiring gig though, so you can't be a total jack-the-lad in the way you might potentially have been as a councillor.

barry181091 wrote: »

This is so silly but I have always wanted to know; Are politicians from different partiess (Specifically TD's.) friends behind it all? Like the leaders debate last night, I could all imagine them joking after it. In a sort of, "Good match!" kind of way.

I get the feeling that a lot of the promises new far-left parties are offering may sound possible *technically* but are not possible in reality. I feel the experience of actually being in power/politics for so long is that you know how the whole system ACTUALLY works and what is ACTUALLY realistically possible. My question is this; Should the experience that the bigger parties have add to their ability to run the country?

Behind the partisan lines, they're almost all perfectly cordial and sound to each other. I've heard Stephen Donnelly (now of the Social Democrats, but an independent at the time) tell a story of how he was due out in RTE one night to do a radio debate against someone from Fine Gael - the two of them went for dinner first, one gave the other a lift to RTE, they went inside and tore strips off each other on air, and then happily shared the car back to the city centre where their hotels were. And that's perfectly routine! Even the party leaders are totally cordial to each other when they're 'off duty'.

You'd often find that TDs from the same/neighbouring constituencies, from rival parties, will work together on certain projects (getting a new school built, for example) and become quite friendly though doing so.

I might add as well - because it seems like a good point to do it - that the huge, huge majority of people in Leinster House get into politics for the right reasons. A few are made crooked by the trappings of power and the relative luxury of it all but fundamentally, being a TD is a full-time, all-consuming and seriously tiring job, and nobody would volunteer themselves for it (even though it's very handsomely paid) unless their deepest motivation was for a sense of civic duty and public service.

As regards whether larger parties should be more pragmatic - it's definitely a valid point. Certainly there are constitutional rules and EU factors that would make some idealistic promises utterly unenforceable - like, for example, a promise to scrap upward-only rent reviews (unconstitutional) or to introduce another special VAT rate for particular industries (against the EU VAT directive).

Ultimately though that's really a question that every voter should consider themselves - is 'having experience in power' something they value, or is it a byword for 'why didn't they implement that idea last time?'...

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Weirdest experience you have had as Political Correspondent?

Not so much 'weird' as 'surreal' - I was in Washington last March to cover Enda's tour of the United States around St Patrick's Day, and I thought we were lining up for a quick soundbite and photo-op when in fact we were lining up to get into the Oval Office for a joint press-conference-of-sorts. It was a tightly packed queue and I was four or five people from the front so when the queue moved forward I thought it was because Enda and Obama had materialised before us. But suddenly the queue moved forward another step, and another... and suddenly you find yourself in a room where all you can see is a curved ceiling and you realise there's no corners and holycrapitstheOvalOfficeandIhopeIvealreadystartedmyrecorder...

So, no, sadly the answer is not 'a 7-way'...

panda100 wrote: »

I thought you cut your journalistic teeth on the UCD Forum of Boards.ie

Really interesting insight into the world of a political journalist so far.

In all honesty, it was actually taking minutes of meetings when I was secretary of UCD Students' Union! Though my exploits over on 470 didn't hurt... :cool:

blue5000

Thanks Gav for coming on here.

How many seats do you reckon Labour will have after this election?

TodayFM: Gav

blue5000 wrote: »

Thanks Gav for coming on here.

How many seats do you reckon Labour will have after this election?

It's always dangerous to make a prediction this far out but I reckon Labour is currently set to revert back to its usual 'home' of 10% of the vote, and around 10% of the seats in the Dáil.

It won't be the national bloodbath many of the scale many are expecting - I'd suggest 12-15 seats.

Mrs Shrek

Would or could you ever be tempted to throw your hat at politics yourself?

TodayFM: Gav

Mrs Shrek wrote: »

Would or could you ever be tempted to throw your hat at politics yourself?

There are days where I'd say I'm tempted and other days where I'm not at all. The way the Irish system is set up, it's virtually impossible to make an electoral breakthrough without having slaved your way through the funeral circuit for a few years beforehand and any interest I'd have in the policy side of things would be totally removed by having to do a parochial slog first. The alternative to this is to go for the Seanad which, as it stands, is far less powerful and a difficult place to do anything seriously meaningful.

Another part of me has the same level of fascination as spin-doctoring as someone else asked. Much as I'd be piqued by doing it for a while, could I feasibly go back to journalism after it? Probably not.

This might sound lofty but in my own way I'd like to think I'm contributing in some way. There are many vital cogs in a democracy and a decent media is one of them - what's the point of democracy if nobody pays attention to what your leaders do between elections? The last bit is my job and right now it's one I'm perfectly happy to stick with!

Boards.ie: Niamh

We're going to close this up now as Gav has very generously given far more of his time than we expected!

Don't forget to check out the Election Daily Podcast linked in the OP. Thank you all for your questions and most especially to Gav for your insightful answers