For a moment I wondered was I about to be head-butted by Michael Noonan. That is, after all, the popular perception of the man. Wasn’t it Gerry Stembridge, creator of the Scrap Saturday caricature, who once said on The Late Late Show, “I wouldn’t want to bump into Noonan in a laneway”?

In fact, my moment of potential collision took place in Noonan’s office in Leinster House moments before this interview began. His press assistant, seated at our table, turned on a dictaphone, obviously intending to sit in on proceedings. I said I’d prefer if he didn’t. The press assistant looked at his boss, who froze for a moment, as if contemplating the options, paused, then almost whispered “if that’s what the man wants” in a decidedly tense tone of voice.

But if that’s how the Hotpress interview with Michael Noonan began, he was soon showing his more affable, humorous and human side, even joking about participating in a head-butting competition with the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern. Which, in effect, is what Michael Noonan, as leader of the Fine Gael Party, is about to do, in the forthcoming general election.

Joe Jackson: Opinion polls say Fine Gael hasn’t a hope in hell of winning the General election.

Michael Noonan: That’s not what the opinion polls say. There are national opinion polls and Fine Gael hasn’t been scoring very high. But there have been a series of local opinion polls where we did quite well. And none of those are showing us losing any seats. And four of them have shown Fianna Fail losing seats.

JJ: So let’s look at some of the Fine Gael policies that might apply to people reading hotpress. Senator David Norris says he’s going to present to the Seanaid a Bill recognising the rights of non-married couples, gay or otherwise. Would Fine Gael support that Bill, in terms of visitation rights, joint mortgage, inheritance and so on?

MN: Yeah. If elected to Government, Fine Gael would be supportive of moves to recognise partnerships of same sex couples. Through changes in the law, the government could institute partnerships that would give gay people tax, property and inheritance right they currently don’t have. And we believe the Irish people are now open to such moves.

JJ: Would Fine Gael support the right of gays to marry?

MN: Yeah. But a Fine Gael Government would not seek a change in the Constitution, which would be necessary to term these partnerships marriages, because we believe that would create a level of controversy and stimulate homophobic tendencies in society. But we would introduce legislation for partnership arrangements.

JJ: I mentioned joint mortgages – did you get a joint from Ming the Merciless?

MN: (Laughs) I did, yes! But I think it was one of the ones that was intercepted. I never actually got possession of it. But I understand there was one addressed to me!

JJ: Would you have smoked it?

MN: No.

JJ: Did you ever?

MN: I never smoked cannabis, no.

JJ: Dope seems set to be given out by the NHS in Britain, for patients who suffer from post-operative pain or MS. Would you do that here?

MN: Yeah. I’ve changed my view on this because I have read material which suggests it is a good palliative for MS in particular.

JJ: So you were against the idea previously?

MN: Yeah. The Irish Medicines Board has a provision, in law, which allows medical practitioners to bring in a particular drug that isn’t fully licensed. To supply to a particular patient with a particular need. I think that should be done.

JJ: There also seems to be a softer approach taken by British police in relation to Ecstasy.

MN: I think Ecstasy is a gateway drug and I would be hard on it. We’re very big users of Ecstasy in Ireland. It’s moved out of the cities into the rural areas, into the villages.

JJ: Any familial experience of, say, your children using Ecstasy?

MN: No. And I have three sons and two daughters.

JJ: Would they have told you?

MN: I think they’d have told me. I mean they never disguised the fact that they were having a drink. It’s that kind of household.

JJ: Would they have told you if they were approached by anyone offering Ecstasy to them?

MN: Yeah. We often had conversations about it being freely available.

JJ: Do your children have the freedom to choose to use drugs if they want?

MN: They’re adults. The youngest is 17. The next person is 27 and so they run their own lives. We’ve only the 17-year-old at home so we’ve still some control over him. But three of my family are married. Two married women and a married man. He lives in California and the second one lives in Paris. My writ doesn’t run that far! (laughs).

JJ: You said in Hotpress that one of the worst moments in your life was when you learned your son had a tumour. Was that the 17-year-old?

MN: Yes. But it was benign, thank God. That was two years ago, in the Mater Hospital. He had a problem at PE in school. After intense bouts of physical exercise he used to get nauseous. So we couldn’t place it. So he went for a battery of tests. It was supposed to be food allergies and stuff. So after all the tests a doctor said “sure we might as well give him a scan.” This came up in the scan the Friday and he was in the Mater the following Tuesday getting ready for an operation.

JJ: That weekend must have been hell for everybody concerned.

MN: His mother was actually with my daughter in France.

JJ: So you had to tell her on the phone?

MN: Yeah, that there was something there. But I suppose it was only in retrospect we realised the full implications of it. Because the pace of the weekend was to try and get things organised.

JJ: Does something like that make you pull back from the pace of political life and ask yourself “am I paying full attention to my private life?”

MN: You do it alright.

JJ: But there are many politicians who don’t get the balance right between their political and their home lives.

MN: Who know who gets the balance right in the end? But at least Flora and I had five children. There’s four of them on their way and this guy seems to be well adjusted! He’s in Fifth year and doing his Leaving Cert next year. So God is good!

JJ: And you must have gotten something right!

MN: I’m not claiming any particular expertise!

JJ: Do you agree with the ideal of introducing ID cards, in part, to curb teenage drinking?

MN: I agree with the introduction of ID cards and they could be used to curb teenage drinking.

JJ: Do you see teenage drinking as a major problem?

MN: I think it’s massive. In my time in Health there was 25,000 admissions into Irish psychiatric hospitals each year. 6,000 of them were alcohol related. And, now, there’s Garda reports here, saying 80% of assaults are drink-related. 60% of crimes against property. Then there’s depression, unwanted pregnancies, a whole social list running from drink. People are drinking to excess.

JJ: So in Government, what can you do about that?

MN: It’s a free society. I don’t think there is any heavy-handed way of doing it. But I think a lot more resources could be put into health promotion and health education programmes. And young people were never smarter nor better educated – so if they are provided with the information patterns could change. I’m not saying we’d have prohibition! I drink, like everybody else. But I don’t like to see young people falling down drunk in the middle of the town and vomiting all over the place.

JJ: You must have fallen down drunk during your teenage years.

MN: I don’t think I fell down drunk, no.

JJ: In your last Hotpress interview, nearly a decade ago, you were asked about Bertie’s claim that he could down a gallon of Bass and still walk a straight line. And you said you’d been known to drink a gallon of beer.

MN: (Laughs) I don’t recall that! But I like to drink. I often drank too much.

JJ: During your youth or throughout life?

MN: Principally in my youth.

JJ: As a young person, did you drink to escape from shadows or purely for enjoyment?

MN: For enjoyment. But you know the way, you always have the additional drink when it’s time to go home.

JJ: Describe Michael Noonan drunk. Do you get aggressive, soppy, sing songs?

MN: It goes through various phases.

JJ: Like what? Phase one, I punch someone; phase two, I sing to him!

MN: (Laughs) No. Happy, talkative, excited.

JJ: Wht are you like in the last phase? Tense, aggressive?

MN: No. I go the other way.

JJ: Start off edgy?

MN: Yeah. And I get a bit maudlin then.

JJ: Do you sing?

MN: I’m not a singer but I have been noted to attempt singing. Any oul’ thing. I’ll give you a blast of ‘Delilah’ after six pints! Clear a pub!

JJ: Onto public matters: was your apology over your handling of the Hepatitis C scandal categoric?

MN: For my part in it, yes. And I did it at the Ard Fheis.

JJ: Did you see the RTE drama No Tears?

MN: No.

JJ: Were you afraid to confront Brenda Fricker on The Late Late Show?

MN: That never happened. I was simply asked to go on The Late Late Show. I had no idea there was an offer made to Brenda Fricker, if there was an offer made to Brenda Fricker.

JJ: One commentator – before your Ard Fheis – said you should state that you were totally wrong. And that your original treatment of the case meant you had betrayed the core values of the Just Society you now are espousing. Was your apology, in contrast with all that, tentative, guarded?

MN: No. I have dealt with it on several occasions but it was my first Ard Fheis and because of the attention the issue got again when No Tears was broadcast in January, I felt that at the first national conference of the party I should repeat what I said previously. And I did it. And I meant it.

JJ: So was that a heartfelt apology for screwing up?

MN: Yeah. I made a mistake.

JJ: By being insensitive?

MN: I made a mistake.

JJ: Gerry Stembridge on a Late Late Show joked about your image as a head-butter from Limerick…

MN: (Cuts across) He’s from Limerick as well!

JJ: Well, he said he wouldn’t like to bump into you in a laneway.

MN: I wouldn’t like to bump into Gerry either (laughs).

JJ: But Eoghan Harris also said you’ll never be “touchy-feely”, that you are a bruiser. And there is this image of you lacking humanity or warmth. Is that the public perception of Michael Noonan?

MN: I think Harris is a poor enough witness.

JJ: So you’re not going to take him on as an adviser, like Bruton did?

MN: No. Harris got it up his nose with me because I said Fine Gael was a nationalist party. And that John Bruton’s position was misunderstood. And I went down and made a speech at the commemoration of Michael Collins setting out our nationalist credentials. And he doesn’t like that from the perspective he is now taking.

JJ: Looking ahead to the election: would you envisage Sinn Fein becoming part of a rainbow coalition with Fine Gael?

MN: No.

JJ: Why?

MN: Because they have an army. You can’t recognise one army under the constitution and have a private army in your back yard at the same time. So as long as the IRA is there I don’t envisage Fine Gael having any contact with Sinn Fein.

JJ: If the IRA gave up all their arms would that change things?

MN: There was an IRA before. We stood down our end of it in 1922. Fianna Fail stood down their end of it in 1926. Sean McBride stood down his end of it in 1948 and the people who were in the Worker’s Party and became the Democratic Left, disassociated from the Official IRA. So there is a long tradition of nationalist movements with military wings abolishing the military wings and becoming fully democratic parties. That’s the road Sinn Fein should go. And until they do I won’t have anything to do with them.

JJ: So Sinn Fein are good enough for government in the North but not here?

MN: The North is a special case. First of all, it’s a failed political entity. And there was no possibility of putting any kind of an administration in place in the North which didn’t have representatives of all communities. Including republicans. As well as that it’s a local administration not a sovereign government. So it doesn’t have control over an army, for example, And it doesn’t have a foreign policy function. It’s a devolved administration not a sovereign government so the thing is not comparable.

JJ: Would you go head to head with Gerry Adams in a debate on these issues?

MN: In southern politics Sinn Fein have one seat. Out of 166. Now I think they get sufficient publicity where the media elevates them into a major force. So I don’t see any reason for me to debate with Gerry Adams on the issue of the IRA on the basis of their one seat and my fifty four, y’know.

JJ: How many seats would they need to have before you’d go head-to-head with Gerry Adams?

MN: It’s an issue of principle. They can have half of them and I won’t talk to them.

JJ: You really stand that strongly against him?

MN: Yeah, I stand that strongly against the IRA. And I think anybody should. You can’t have a country with secret armies in a normal democracy. But I do think that the process of decommissioning should continue until there is full decommissioning. And then I would question why an army without arms needs continue. If there is full decommissioning then they don’t have arms and an army without arms is a contradiction in terms.

JJ: Would Fine Gael then consider going into a coalition with Sinn Fein?

MN: If they became a normal political party it would be like the relationships we had with Clann Na Publachta when we took them into government in 1948. Or Democratic Left when we took them into the rainbow government. but it would be up to policies. And a lot of Sinn Fein’s policies seem to be off-the-wall.

JJ: What policies?

MN: Their economic policies are off-the-wall.

JJ: Why?

MN: Because you couldn’t run a country on the basis of most of their policies, that are kind of quasi-Marxist policies that went through the laboratory tests in 1989. And anyone who saw the rubble of the Berlin Wall – and the real situation in Eastern Europe – realises that it shows that, whatever about Marxism as a historical exercise, as a way of running a country it wasn’t a blinding success.

JJ: Moving on to other election issues: will Fine Gael go ahead with plans for a National Stadium?

MN: No. It costs too much, at a billion pounds. But the main difference between us and the Fianna Fail position is that I think people should be encouraged to participate in sport and that the facilities for participation should be put in place. Rather than facilities for spectators. So if you take a billion pounds and divide it up among the 26 counties you’d have about forty million pounds per county to put into multi-purpose facilities. And I also think volunteerism is going out of sport. So as well as putting in facilities you have to pay full or part-time coaches.

And another wing to our policy is that I’d like to see every community having an alternative lifestyle to the pub. So I see this as a cultural thing as well. Look at the facilities in the Dublin suburbs even, and around the rest of the country – they are appalling. Nearly 60% of primary schools have no sports halls! And we’re talking about this thing outside Abbotstown?

JJ: Do you think Croke Park should be available for all form of sports?

MN: I do. But that’s up to the GAA. The latest report from the GAA has vested the decision in their Executive Council. So that signifies movement. And the IRFU will make their own decision as well. And I would think whatever happens in Croke Park, Lansdowne Road needs an upgrade. And if we had to have a stadium why not do it like they are doing in Germany and the UK? Premier League clubs are putting stadiums in place for one hundred and forty million euro. Why 1.2 billion euro?

JJ: What is your answer to that question?

MN: The Taoiseach, first of all, has a genuine interest in sport. As a spectator. He sees things through the perspective of a spectator. And I think he wanted a monument to himself, which is fair enough. But then what happened was that it was badly planned. It was planned on an amateur basis and the costs have gone totally out of hand. It just shouldn’t go ahead at this stage.

JJ: Do you think Charlie McCreevy’s decision to give tax relief to sports people is justified. Would Fine Gael go along with?

MN: It’s a bad decision because it encourages an elite. It’s for professional sportsmen rather than amateurs and it cuts the ground from under amateur sport. And the GAA stars will have particular difficulty with it. If it was motivated by jockeys on the Curragh who have a short life in their sport and then don’t have much out of it, then I’d rather put a fund together to directly assist them. There is a hospital up in County Louth, for example, where there are retired jockeys who’ve had a hard time. And I’ve no problem grant-aiding that situation. Or if someone comes out of rugby after ten years and after having innumerable national caps they are injured, they can’t work, I would like to see some kind of trust in place for those, to which the government contributes. But not to do it through the tax net. Why should we? This idea that, regardless of how well or badly you did, that you should get all your tax back for ten years? What about the schoolteacher who takes the kids for sports every evening after school wet or dry? Doesn’t he pay every last penny of his tax?

JJ: Do you think the Abbey should stay in the Taoiseach’s constituency?

MN: I think the question of the location of the Abbey should be a matter for the Abbey board. And I think there was political interference to keep it North of the Liffey because I think they had a site on the Southside which was the choice of the board.

JJ: On Charlotte Quay?

MN: That’s right. So my objection is not whether it is north or south. Or where it is. My objection is that there was political interference. And all the agencies and state companies are bedevilled by political interference. And I don’t think the decision of the Board should have been overridden by the Taoiseach. Frank McDonald was saying, today, that the old Carlton cinema in O’ Connell Street is up for redevelopment and that would make a better site. That sounds sensible.

JJ: If you had a choice of locations for the National Theatre where would you want it to be?

MN: I’d have gone ahead with the decision to put it in Charlotte Quay. That was the first decision of the Board. Made on good grounds.

JJ: What is your view of America’s war on terror.

MN: I believe the attack on New York on the eleventh of September was an act of war and America, like any country, has the right to defend itself. And if, in the defence of itself it had to go after the Al Quaida organisation, then I’d support that.

JJ: Support bombing villages in Afghanistan, in the hope that at least some of the people killed were members of Al Quaida? Have you no moral qualms about that?

MN: First of all, obviously, I don’t like war situations. We’re in a country that has suffered a lot from war. But, at a level of principle, I would defend the right of the Americans to defend themselves against such an outrageous attack. They made war on a particular group in Afghanistan and they seem to have pursued that war pretty successfully. I’d be uneasy about what Mr. Bush has been saying in the past few days.

JJ: About targeting Iraq?

MN: I’m not sure what he is saying.

JJ: Would a US attack be justificable?

MN:There’s nothing in the public domain so far that I can see to justify it. So I’ll watch it with some concern.

JJ: And what would you do if you disapprove?

MN: I’d indicate my disapproval to the American Ambassador. I didn’t like what they were doing in Cuba (in relation to Afghanistan prisoners) and I indicated my disapproval to the American Ambassador about the camp in Cuba.

JJ: Would you do that as Taoiseach, even if it had negative repercussions in terms of American interests in Northern Ireland?

MN: I think America is a very mature country. They don’t need their friends to be sycophants. Generally speaking I’m reasonably pro-American. And I can see that they were justified in what they did in Afghanistan. And I would support that stand. I didn’t like the treatment of prisoners in Cuba and I objected to that. We’ll see how it develops now.

JJ: I know you’re not anti-American because you once said Clinton was your hero!

MN: Where did I say that?

JJ: In a Hotpress Annual.

MN: I think I said Clinton was a good politician. ‘Hero’ is a very strong word.

JJ: You said he was your hero-of-the-year! So is Clinton your hero or not?

MN: I never had Clinton as a hero but I thought he was a very good politician. A very successful politician.

JJ: Would you feel his position as a politician was undermined by the Lewinsky scandal?

MN: He certainly went out with high approval ratings. And there is the view in America that if he was allowed a third term he’d have won it.

JJ: Have you read Alan Shatter’s novel about sexual shenanigans in Leinster House?

MN: No.

JJ: He depicts instances much the same as the Lewinsky scenario, between politicians and their secretaries.

MN: I must discuss it with him! Ask him for the beginner’s guide!

JJ: You are pushing Fine Gael – and the public – to vote “no” on the abortion referendum. Do you think that “no” reflects the general consensus within the party?

MN: I do. And when I put it to them at the Ard Fheis they rose spontaneously to their feet. It was the biggest standing ovation of the night. That, tied in with the challenge to the Taoiseach to debate the issue.

JJ: Were you surprised he wouldn’t?

MN: I thought he might go for it, yeah.

JJ: Why do you think he didn’t? Because of your reputation as a head-butter from Limerick!

MN: (Laughs) I suppose you’d have to ask him!

JJ: Bertie’s a “Dub”; he should have been able to take you on. He let down all of us “Dubs” in that sense!

MN: If we had a serious head-butting contest he might qualify for that tax relief that Charlie McCreevy is bringing in! (laughs)

JJ: More seriously, on the issue of abortion would you have had any experience of even knowing a woman who had to go through the added trauma of travelling to Britain to have an abortion?

MN: Not in family or friends. But I’ve come across it in my political work.

JJ: So have you talked with a woman and empathised with the additional pain caused by having to travel abroad to have an abortion.

MN: Yes. And I think that the issue of seven thousand women going across is something we should treat very sensitively and with compassion. Because I have met people in my political work and some women feel they have no other choice. So I’m a very strong supporter of this new agency to help women in crisis pregnancy.

JJ: So your core position against this referendum is what, exactly?

MN: That you can change the law, change the constitution, and it doesn’t make a blind bit of difference to what’s actually happening. And if this goes through will it stop anyone going to the United Kingdom? I don’t think so. So I don’t think there is a reality in what’s going on. And it puts into the Constitution an act of parliament with seven sections and the Constitution will be interpreted by the Supreme Court as an organic document. They interpret it in accordance with the mores of the times. So their interpretation today is not necessarily their interpretation in five years’ time. So there is a lot of uncertainty being put into the Constitution and nobody can accurately predict what the Supreme Court, in the short term, might do.

JJ: Finally, on the subject of the General Election, a lot of voters may feel that “we never had it so good, so let’s stick with what we know.” If any of our readers are thinking of voting along those lines do you want to tell them why that would be a wrong decision?

MN: The successes of the economy have been private sector successes. What the government is actually responsible for is in dreadful shape. The public services, health, education, traffic management, housing policy. And we have so many State companies – after the seven most prosperous years we ever had – in financial difficulties. RTE, CIE, Aer Lingus. So where the government are directly responsible they have been an appalling government and they deserve the gate.