Michael McDowell Declines to Nominate Maria Steen for Presidency

Michael McDowell, a prominent figure in Irish politics, has publicly stated his reasons for not nominating Maria Steen for the presidency, suggesting that her election would represent a “step backwards” for Ireland. In an opinion piece published in the Irish Times, McDowell emphasized his commitment to a “consistently liberal” agenda, in contrast to Steen’s perceived conservative values.

McDowell disclosed that he was approached by a “pro-life” caucus, which included members from the party Aontú, but he expressed no interest in joining their ranks. He noted that had Steen received his nomination, her election could have occurred, which he deemed “divisive” for the vision of Ireland he supports.

Nominations for the presidential election can be secured through the backing of four local authorities or the signatures of twenty members of the Oireachtas. Steen initially failed to garner support from any local authority and subsequently sought the backing of Oireachtas members. Despite receiving support from eighteen members, the deadline for nominations loomed, placing pressure on McDowell to lend his influence to her campaign.

On September 4, McDowell revealed that he was approached by Peadar Tóibín, the leader of Aontú, who expressed concern over the absence of a candidate representing pro-life values. McDowell was asked to support a “nominating caucus” intended to select candidates through a secret ballot. However, he rejected this proposal, viewing it as a means to endorse a pro-life candidate.

In his detailed account, McDowell highlighted that he had been informed in July about plans by pro-life Oireachtas members to interview potential candidates, which included Steen and Declan Ganley, both known for their conservative views. He made it clear that he would not nominate anyone whose election he opposed, stating, “An Oireachtas member should be willing to support the subsequent election of anyone they nominate.”

Despite Steen’s outreach on September 1 to arrange a discussion, McDowell maintained that he would not make any decisions until the local authority nominations were clearer and until Sinn Féin confirmed whether it would field its own candidate or support Catherine Connolly. As it became apparent that no local authority nominations would materialize and Sinn Féin chose to back Connolly, McDowell informed Michael Collins, leader of Independent Ireland, that he would not support Steen’s candidacy.

Two days before the nomination deadline, Steen’s team requested a meeting with McDowell, but he reiterated his stance against nominating her. He noted that at least eight senators had independently decided against supporting her for various reasons. “I was in no sense ‘gatekeeper’ for her nomination,” he stated, emphasizing the autonomy of the other senators involved.

McDowell firmly rejected suggestions that his decision stemmed from personal motivations such as jealousy or misogyny, calling such claims “simply untrue.” He concluded by asserting that his stance on the nomination was well-known, rendering any further discussion with Steen unnecessary.

This unfolding political drama highlights the complexities of candidate nominations within Ireland’s political landscape and the significant implications of individual political philosophies in shaping the nation’s future.