Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FINE GAEL MEP Seán Kelly has said the way he was put back in his box by his party when seeking the presidential nomination was the lowest point in his political career.
Speaking to The Journal ahead of polling day today, he said he has “mixed emotions” about the party’s campaign over the last number of weeks, stating that clearly he would have liked to be the chosen candidate.
A poll published on Wednesday by The Irish Independent/Ireland Thinks suggests that Catherine Connolly’s support stands at 40%, while Fine Gael’s Heather Humphreys, who ultimately won the party’s nomination, is at 25%.
“I didn’t want to be saying anything during the election, but I have no hesitation in saying, it was by far the lowest point in my political career,” he said.
“I was a bit taken aback,” said Kelly, when asked about how he was forced to withdraw from the presidential race after it became clear to him that he would not receive the necessary 20 votes from the parliamentary party to trigger an internal contest.
Kelly said he was naturally upset about it, “particularly the absolute almost firebrand approach to it”.
“It was almost, ‘Kelly is putting his head above the parapet, cut it off as quickly as you can’. That was kind of the message that was given out there. And that’s actually what happened.
“But I didn’t want to be saying too much about it during the campaign, but certainly, a lot of people have got on to me about it, and it will have to be, obviously, something for the members to discuss in their own time,” he said.
Asked whether he has spoken to Fine Gael leader Simon Harris about how it all played out, he said:
“No, I haven’t spoken to anyone about it since, because I didn’t want to. I wanted to let the campaign [run] and give Heather every chance. I didn’t want to talk about it.”
Given that Kelly topped the poll and exceeded the quota on the first count in the European elections, Kelly said he still questions why that wasn’t given due consideration when he wanted the presidential nomination from the party.
In the Ireland South constituency, Kelly took in 118, 444 votes, just shy of the quota of 119,866. He was followed by Fianna Fáil TD Billy Kelleher on 84,083 votes.
“What I really can’t understand, is looking at the European election last year, which covered the half of Ireland, I was, by far and away, the number one candidate in the entire island. I think I was probably, was I 30,000 votes ahead of number two?
“Why wouldn’t you look at the results of the European elections which I was contesting, and see how I was able to get votes, beyond the party a lot of it. It just didn’t seem to register… I don’t know, the thinking was just strange to me and to many people.”
While Kelly is still sore about how it played out, he said he hasn’t hesitated in getting behind Humphreys’ campaign.
“So I think you have to put, unfortunately, your own problems aside for a particular time, and then when it’s appropriate you can bring them up,” said Kelly.
The MEP said he still doesn’t understand a number of decisions made by the party, firstly, why it didn’t hold a contest between himself and Humphreys for the candidacy.
After the shock announcement that Mairead McGuinness would be stepping away from the presidential contest due to illness, Kelly said there was a rush to put forward another candidate.
“The fact that we had no internal competition, so there was no opportunity to gather up internal enthusiasm, get people motivated and get out there. I think that was a big, big mistake,” he told The Journal.
Kelly said he thought a contest would be facilitated to allow the members to have a vote, “which would have been very good for the party. It would have given us publicity”.
During hustings, each candidate could have laid out their stall about what they would do as president, with Kelly stating that that has not been the focus for much of the election campaign to date.
“You couldn’t be talking about the opposition. You’d have to be saying to your members, ‘if you select me as a candidate, this is what I’m going to do with the presidency’. So that opportunity was lost.
Humphreys got the party nomination after a swift process, whereby the parliamentary party members publicly declared they would back her, putting Kelly on the backfoot from the beginning. While there was an extended period for the nomination process, Humphreys had it sewn up in a matter of hours.
“I think the speed at which that happened took an awful lot of people by surprise. I know that the councillors, the vast majority who were supporting me, were upset. Even the National Executive wasn’t too happy.
“A lot of the membership weren’t too happy either, because what’s the point in being a member of a party if you are denied an opportunity to select that party’s candidates for the major positions that come up,” said Kelly.
When put to him that a contest would have showcased candidates and highlighted any flaws or communication issue that might become an issue on the campaign trail, Kelly said he believed hustings would have been good practice, to any candidate, including himself.
“I felt that [holding a contest] would be vital to kind of prepare me for the campaign. It’s a small bit like someone going to play an All- Ireland final and you don’t do any training or do any trial matches of any sort. So, I think it has worked out as a disadvantage, both to the party and to Heather Humphreys. That opportunity wasn’t there,” he reflected.
How does he think the campaign has gone for Humphreys, in light of Catherine Connolly demanding a strong lead against her in the latest poll?
“Well, obviously, I have mixed emotions about it. Obviously I would have preferred to have been the candidate myself, but I got put back in my box pretty quickly when I said I was interested, because the parliamentary party basically spotted any chance they had.
“At the same time as a party member, you have to row in and accept these things and put your best foot forward. So we have been doing that,” he said, stating that in his view it has been a “tougher campaign” than the party would have expected.
“But it’s not over until it is over,” he added.
One intervention in the election did impact Fine Gael, according to Kelly.
While he said it is easy to be wise in hindsight, Kelly believes the phrase used by political pundit Ivan Yates that the party should “smear the bejesus” out of Connolly given her lead, did knock Fine Gael’s chances.
Because Yates is a former Fine Gael minister, Kelly said he believes it “went down very well” [for Connolly's campaign].
“It was hard to avoid it reflecting on us, particularly because the way the campaign went subsequently,” he said.
“I would say it certainly wasn’t very helpful, because the way I look at it is, and I approach this, I don’t go in for criticising people. I go in and try and put my best foot forward, let people see what I’m like and vote for me. And I think particularly if you’re talking about being president of the country, you have to be kind of avoid as much negativity as you can.
“Now, it isn’t easy, because if you’re attacked, then obviously you’re going to attack back. But often, and I found this with the campaign, and it is no criticism of anybody, but there was less focus on why somebody should be president, and what they would do as a president, as opposed to general topics or something they said or did in the past, which might not be that relevant if they were to get the job.”
Yates has hit back at the criticism in recent days, stating he doesn’t play any role in Fine Gael’s presidential campaign.
Did Yates’ words have a big impact?
“I would think so, but again, they were coming from behind. And when you’re coming from behind, the only way you can get in front I suppose is to attack… so it was probably the nature of the campaign,” said the MEP.
Asked if Fine Gael should follow in Fianna Fáil’s footsteps and carry out a review into the approach taken by the party in the presidential campaign, Kelly said reviews are “grand as long as they are done by the proper people”.
He said there was no point in one being carried out by “someone who was part of the decision-making” process, who can conclude that the “decision-making was perfect, there’s nothing to say here”.
“So, it depends who does the review,” he concluded.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say