Being involved in RTÉ television's The Week in Politics, featuring the pollster Frank Luntz, was a fascinating exercise. Some of the larger political parties in this country have put a lot of time and energy into focus groups in recent years. The programme was designed to pull back the veil on that process and give the wider population a direct insight into what may influence the choice of floating voters in next year's election, writes Noel Whelan
To the extent that is possible to do so in 50 minutes of television, the programme reflected the broad findings of the four-hour session Luntz had spent with 32 floating voters a few days earlier. The views of the participants on the individual party leaders was fascinating, but what the session revealed about how Irish voters, or at least this segment of them, view politics generally was also very interesting.
The level of cynicism which flowed from this group was striking. Luntz himself commented that although he has conducted this type of research in 15 different countries, he had never met a collection of participants who were as negative about their elected leaders as the Irish. Even allowing for the fact that floating voters are likely to be those least disposed to either Government or Opposition politicians, Luntz was taken aback at the level of irritation among the Irish floating voters towards all politicians. The process also acted as a reminder of the fact that a large portion of the population enjoys only an occasional exposure to politicians, and most of this is through the broadcast media.
Those of us close to the political world sometimes forget that the majority of voters engage with political debate and the political system only fleetingly. The analysis advanced about the party leaders by some of the programme participants was very sophisticated and, indeed, on most occasions was more complex than that offered by pundits.
However more often than not their view was based on only passing impressions of, or limited exposure to, those politicians.
When, for example, Luntz asked what participants thought of Michael McDowell, many used the adjective "boring". Those of us who are absorbed in the weekly to and fro of Irish politics tend to find the Tánaiste nearly always dramatic and entertaining. To us, the words "boring" and "McDowell" just do not fit in the same sentence.
When, later, the participants were asked by Luntz to turn their dials up or down in reaction to clips of two of McDowell's speeches, it became apparent what they meant when they described him as boring. When they hear him, they tune out.
As soon as each clip began, they turned their dials down sharply and their response then flat-lined. They didn't engage because they were bored, not only by the delivery and the tone, but also by the content.
In their initial response to Enda Kenny and Pat Rabbitte, many of the group also displayed negativity. When pressed by Luntz, they said it was because, in the words of one participant, the Opposition leaders were "always bickering [with the Government] about something".
In their occasional engagement with political coverage this group of voters had a sense that the leaders of the Opposition were seldom positive about anything.
All this emphasised how important the broadcasting of Dáil Éireann has become in shaping the Irish public's view of their politicians.
Like contestants in a Big Brother house who, after the first couple of days begin to forget the presence of the cameras, our politicians often behave in the Dáil chamber as if nobody else can see or hear what they are doing. They seem to have forgotten that the proceedings (or at least a snippet of them) will be broadcast to the electorate on that evening's TV news or on the next morning's radio.
It is from news coverage of Leader's Questions or other high-profile Dáil occasions that much of the electorate gets its impression of the party leaders and, by and large, it is not a good impression.
These snippets of the Dáil proceedings generally show the House descending into a slagging match with none of the participants coming across well. Indeed, it is striking that party leaders who appear to put so much effort into being made-up, selecting the right tie, or ensuring they are appropriately "doughnutted", ie surrounded by party colleagues, for these occasions, often appear to be oblivious to the impression on the viewers which the content or tone of their Dáil contributions leaves. It happened again this week.
Tuesday's news clips of Dáil proceedings showed both Pat Rabbitte and Enda Kenny sounding preachy and bickering with Bertie Ahern when questioning him about the controversial comments which Minister of State Tim O'Malley had made about waiting-lists for psychiatric services. The night after he did this RTÉ programme, Luntz did a similar focus group exercise in London for the Sunday Telegraphto mark the first anniversary of David Cameron's election as leader of the Conservatives.It revealed that one of the reasons why Cameron has established such credibility with Britain's floating voters was because of the strength of his performance against Tony Blair in prime minister's question time. In contrast to the leaders of the Irish Opposition, the leader of the British opposition has benefited from the television exposure given to his parliamentary performance.
When Luntz pressed the participants in The Week in Politicsgroup on their view of Bertie Ahern, the most significant thing to emerge was their irritation at what they felt was the Taoiseach's failure to take responsibility for deficiencies and delays in the delivery of public services. Ahern has a habit during Dáil questioning of detaching himself from responsibility for Government activity - in a way so cleverly captured in Miriam Lord's Dáil sketches of late. It is these Dáil jousts, the occasions involving the party leaders which get most coverage, which all of them could use much more effectively.