Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Independent Representatives
Read more about: Independents, Irish Politics
I hate to bring Finian McGrath into the equation again, but there an issue has arisen in my mind which I feel should be discussed. That is, what do we make of Independent TDs - or, for that matter, Independent MPs in general? The wider issue is particularly pertinent to Ireland, because I’m led to believe that, at 10%, we have the highst proportion of Independent representatives.
You may be surprised to read that the internet doesn’t offer much in the way of information concerning the history of, nor the philosophy behind the idea of running for parliament without the sponsorship of a political machine in the form of a party. Alas, we’re going to try to patch together the content. From my own knowledge of history, I’m aware that the Irish Home Rule Party under Parnell was the first efficiently organised, reliably disciplined political machine and has come to represent the birth of party politics. Based on this, we can assume that up until then, there was no need for somebody to run as an Independent, because even within a political party they had almost complete sovereignty over their decisions. So, we’re talking 1870 onwards in which we have the possibility of Independents. In my search to find the first Independent MP(s), I’ve struggled to pre-date 1947 - a year in which two or three Scottish MPs resigned from the Independent Labour Party to sit as Independents. In terms of Irish politics, the 1982 election of Tony Gregory to the Dáil is the earliest I can find. Anyway, this brief history isn’t that necessary for this piece, whatever this piece actually is.
While I’ll patch together the content of the former with snippets of information I’ve located, I think we can pretty much guess the reasons behind it - disillusionment with a party line, expulsion from a party, inability to get onto their party ticket or to maintain campaigns based on a single-issue. Furthermore, there always exists the argument that Independents are loyal to nobody but their respective constituencies and therefore they are more committed to their electorate’s well-being. This, at least, is the claim made by Finian McGrath in this month’s Magill:
People vote for us because they believe that an Independent is loyal to them and no one else. And there’s a huge percentage of people out there who have lost faith in party politics.
He might have a point, but I see a few flaws in this concept. Firstly, it’s an extremey local justification. If you look at parliamentry politics, representatives vote on all sorts of issues. Can any one person understand and deal with each issue discussed by the respective Parliament? Perhaps from an ideological and politically tactical point of view, yes - but is that what we want? Concerning the latter, perhaps. A person is elected in order to get the best deal for a constituency, if voting certain with the government - or opposition, as the case may be - allows that representative to win a few favours concerning a more local issue, then what’s the problem? Well, it’s hardly good for the country as a whole. Anyway, that’s a considerably moot and wideranging point; my second one is less so.
During the course of the interview, McGrath suggests that because he feels neither of the big parties are going to come out of the next election with enough seats to form any sort of stable government, “we should have an alliance of Independents running on a common platform that’s agreed on before the election.” We’re later told that there is a gang of 9 Independents who meet every Tuesday, before finally we’re informed “Tony Gregory is our whip.(!)” Now, far be it from me to gainsay a teacher, but how could this prove anyway consistent with the quote above, in particular, the segment emphasised?
Finally - at least on the topic of Independents - McGrath claims, “we [Independents] have more of a mandate than the PDs.” Such is, for me, to fundamentally misunderstand the concept of an Independent. Firstly, they aren’t - or shouldn’t be - a “we”. Secondly, they do not have more of a mandate than the Progressive Democrats because, although in total Independents have 10% to the PDs’ 4%, the elected Progressive Democrats were elected in a collective manner. In other words, the PDs set a common agenda which, no matter how you feel about it, candidates ran under and people voted for. This is not true of the Independents who are, by their very nature, disjointed.
No Responses to “Independent Representatives”
Post a comment below: