Every time Gilmore is in a corner he returns to the mantra that 'regaining soveregnity is our priority' or 'we were elected to regain sovereignity'. This is always conceded as if it were transparently obvious by his interlocutors -but is it?
The sovereignity argument is clearly favoured by Labour's spin doctors, because it is the pathway to the TINA - there is no alternative - (invented by Maggie's spin doctors 30 years ago) defence, which closes down all discussion.
While those of the Republican tradition are exercised by the fear of not being sovereign for the centenary of 1916, why should the Labour prioritise sovereignity before reducing unemployment? Is it a trace of Gilmore's origins in Official Sinn Fein that he cares more about 'Ireland' than its people (Connolly cited his concern for the people over abstract concepts like nationality as the very definition of his socialism).
When the governement incurs 100 millions in extra debt so as to put its toe in the waters of the market, surely it is putting some abstract national pride before the unemployed? Why suffer higher interest rates and possible instability so as to hasten the regaining of 'sovereignity'?
Do we really want to be back to the tender mercies of our corrupt and hopelessly incompetent ruling elite? At least the Trioika is rational and has some political constraints on the damage it can inflict. Do we really think a FG or FG dominated government would be better for the unemloyed than the Troika?