The ultimate political lever that governments can use and oppositions cannot is the power of action. Governments can make things happen; the Opposition can just talk about it.
But that is a double-edged sword. Because the power to do things comes with accountability for when they are done badly, or not at all. Sometimes that can scare ministers off; in government, there are always more reasons not to do things than to do them.
You might hope that when politicians and their parties have been in office for a long time, that they would know their way around the system and understand how to make the great machine work to produce the results they desire. But often the opposite happens: they become bogged down in process, slaves to the natural conservatism of any established clerisy, which sees virtue in how things are, and is suspicious of change.
So instead of action, ministers can take refuge in process – in discussion documents and impact assessments, in expert reports and endless, endless consultations with “stakeholders” – many of whom, incidentally, have a stake in influencing the outcome to their own advantage, and not necessarily the public’s.
READ MORE
“It is the law of Inverse Relevance,” says Sir Humphrey Appleby in Yes, Minister. “The less you intend to do about something, the more you have to keep talking about it.”
Recently there was a series of high-level meetings in Government, among Ministers and advisers, about the year ahead. It was stressed how much 2026 had to be about delivery and action, with warnings of the political dangers in letting implementation deadlines slide and allowing the EU presidency to suck up all their energy. It is to be a year of action, you’ll see.
The duty of a political correspondent is scepticism, not cynicism, and one certainly doesn’t wish to be unduly pessimistic. But I’ll believe it when I see it.
And yet failure to act boldly (and to be seen to do so) would constitute the greatest political danger to this administration. The Ministers perceived as performing best are those who have exhibited a bias towards action, and a willingness to annoy some people, an essential quality without which nothing is ever achieved.
During the period 2011-2016, Enda Kenny used to tell the ministers of that most beleaguered government – one to whose record history will be kinder than voters were – that whatever happened, they had to keep making decisions, to keep getting on with business. He might have added: those decisions need to be implemented. There’s no point making decisions unless they translate into action.
This week’s opinion poll shows that the public are soundly unimpressed with the Government’s performance – but unconvinced too by the available alternative. That is a warning for the Coalition, but should also offer a route to salvation. It is actions, not words, on which this Government will be judged in the end. Insiders tell me that this imperative for action, for measurable progress, is understood from the very top down. Let’s see.
[ The Irish Times-Ipsos B&A poll February 2026: the full results in chartsOpens in new window ]
There are a few areas that we might watch in the coming months to see if this kinetic spirit is actually real, or just more political windbaggery.
Prominent among them is the plan to accelerate infrastructure delivery – perhaps the central “get things done” effort of the Coalition. It promises that a series of measures – including difficult ones like reforming judicial reviews – will be under way in the first quarter of this year.
Part of this will be the “emergency” legislation to speed up critical projects. How emergency will it be? When will it be passed? When will the emergency powers be used? I’m told the legislation is being prepared in the Department of Public Expenditure. That is not a phrase that fills me with confidence.
Meantime, talk to the people of Enniscorthy and elsewhere, whose flood protections have been delayed by interminable planning and legal processes, about what an emergency is.
There’s another area where the Government has done plenty of talking but not much action: clamping down on the activities of social media companies whose platforms harm young people. It’s nearly two years since Micheál Martin told the social media companies – at a Fianna Fáil ardfheis, no less – to “get underage children off your apps or we will make you”. Minister for Communications Patrick O’Donovan is preparing to pilot measures, including a “digital wallet”, that could in the future facilitate efforts to potentially ban social media for under 16s. Maybe.
Meanwhile in Spain, prime minster Pedro Sánchez announced this week that his government will change the law to implement a number of measures, including banning social media for under 16s and – a game-changer, this – making executives in the social media giants personally legally accountable for when their platforms do not comply with the law.
The Spanish have understood what other governments around the world also have – but which the Irish Government seems reluctant to admit to itself: the social media and internet companies care first and foremost about their profits and will not do anything willingly that might affect those profits. They will only do what they are compelled to do. And even then ...
Like the householders sloshing through their livingrooms, many parents of teenagers and younger children, terrified about the effects of social media on their kids, don’t want to be told about the reasons why the Government can’t do this or can’t do that. They want to see action.
Of course, that’s often more complicated that it sounds. But many voters don’t care. They want the Government to fix these things. Or at least try some things that might fix them. If Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael won’t or can’t do that, the voters will find someone who will.
