As a leading figure in Fianna Fail, Cowen would always have been on the fringe of a particular type of gangsterism, but this was the first time any of us had realised that the minister for finance bore a moral responsibility for gangland crime. Or so McDowellian logic would have it anyway. But don't expect the justice minister to comment on Cowen's admissions any time soon. For the moment, and possibly forever more, McDowell is the watchdog that doesn't bark.

Or, if you'll forgive the addiction to canine metaphors, the dog who, next Friday, is put to sleep.

Watching Cowen wave his hands and fists around at a press conference on Tuesday, like a Wicklow hurling fan at the end of a county final, was to conclude that he could still benefit from a few spliffs. He needs to calm down. His, literally, spluttering performances in the course of the campaign have reminded many of us of the kind of Fianna Fail gobshitery we grew up with, but which had mostly disappeared from the cabinet table in recent years. Some people like this kind of stuff, seeing in it a kind of rugged, passionate honesty, and they may well have a point. But when it is directed against the composed competence of somebody like Richard Bruton, Fine Gael's finance spokesman, it starts to look like somebody raging against the dying of the light rather than against ineptitude and inexperience.

For somebody so mild-mannered and calm, Bruton certainly knows how to get under people's skin.

McDowell, remember, once compared him to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, and was forced to apologise, a not insignificant concession from somebody who appears so certain of his innate rightness on just about everything. Bruton, in his understated way, has been one of the stars of the Fine Gael campaign, not just because of the command of his brief, but because of the way he can be used to combat one of the key planks of the Fianna Fail campaign in these last few days.

Because there are no fundamental differences in policies between the alternative coalitions, a key factor in the way many people vote will be the identity, competence and experience of the governments on offer. I suspect that the instinct of many people is to change things around a bit, but before they do so, they need to know that the politicians to whom they will entrust the country for the next five years have something about them. Fianna Fail and the Progessive Ditherers have therefore sought to cast aspersions on the potential ministers in a coalition government.

The approach is twofold and obvious. On the one hand, say PD/Fianna Fail, potential Rainbow ministers are lightweight, gauche, wet around the gills and without experience. On the other, they say, PD/Fianna Fail has 10 years of running a successful country behind it. Why change from wise old dogs to yappy young curs? (I truly am sorry for all this doggy imagery).

Elsewhere in the paper today, political correspondent Shane Coleman makes an educated guess at the make-up of the Rainbow government which could be formed on 14 June, which is just 25 days away. It is worth looking at closely, because it clearly indicates that, whatever these potential ministers might lack in cabinet experience, there are no problems with them in regard to their competence, imagination and intelligence.

If you watched the debate on Thursday night, you'll have your own opinion on whether Enda Kenny has what it takes to be Taoiseach, or whether after 10 years in power, Bertie Ahern deserves another five. If you've watched Irish politics for the last few years, opinions should come easily enough on how Coleman's cabinet members would stack up against the current coalition.

Can Fianna Fail seriously argue, for example, that Martin Cullen would be a better transport minister than Trevor Sargent?

Would Brendan Howlin be a worse minister for justice than Michael McDowell? By what possible calculation could you conclude that Dick Roche would be a more competent minister for the environment than Eamon Gilmore?

Micheal Martin versus Liz McManus? Phil Hogan or Mary Hanafin? Noel Dempsey or John Gormley? Cowen or Bruton?

As to the Enda Kenny versus Bertie Ahern conundrum, all one can say is that Ahern had the slight edge in the debate as he has the edge in experience. It should also be said that before he became Taoiseach, that experience consisted only of a period in the relatively low-profile department of labour, then as chief whip . . . a kind of minister without portfolio . . . and a couple of years in the department of finance when, famously now, he was minister without bank account.

Kenny has promised not to run again if he does not implement fully his election "contract with the people", and if we are prepared to accept Bertie Ahern's quite frankly preposterous explanations of his financial jiggerypokery back in the 1990s, then Kenny is surely entitled to ask us to believe his pledge to sack himself and any malfunctioning ministers. If he doesn't, we can sack them ourselves next time around.

That's the beauty of democracy and the excitement of next Thursday. Enjoy the fun.