Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Do What You Have To - Just Don’t Do It
Read more about: Fianna Fail, Green Party
One can sympathise with John Gormley’s despair at the prospect of five more years of opposition, especially coming from someone of his political calibre. But coalition-forming and political alignments are about something more than individual skill. Good progress has been made in discussions between the Greens and Fianna Fail according to the Irish Times. Certainly, the Greens are pursuing these negotiations in a serious and competent manner. All that being said, from the perspective of progressive politics, it can only be hoped they don’t enter Government with Fianna Fail.
There are three aspects to this issue. First is the issue of compatibility. As to environmental issues, there are others who can better analyse this area. Certainly on the issue of taxation and expenditure there would be few problems. Both parties campaigned for substantial cuts in PRSI and the Greens’ promise to cut government expenditure will dovetail nicely into Fianna Fail’s low-tax, low-spend conservatism. (On this point I am mystified at the Green’s pledge of cutting expenditure to 33% of GDP – which in 2006 terms would mean slashing the public budget by over a €1billion – especially as members that I know value social solidarity. Are Green Party members aware of the full implications of this proposal?)
On a general level, however, there is no problem with compatibility and this is not just a matter of Greens vis-à-vis Fianna Fail. Given the coalition promiscuity practiced by all parties, it is clear that if parties want to make a deal they will make a deal:
* Employ aspirations that are so commonplace no one would disagree. Example: efficient public services. Well, who wants inefficient public services?
* Advance assertions that sound specific but, on closer examination, aren’t. Example: ‘A properly funded education system.’ Again, who supports an improperly funded system?
* Agree policies that are easily implemented and uncontentious. This gives the veneer of a positive negotiated outcome.
* Where there is a disagreement, fudge. That’s why working parties were invented.
* When all else fails, subject everything to a financial formula: ‘in keeping with sound fiscal policies’, ‘consistent with economic growth,’ etc. This is a great postponer of difficult decisions.
Experienced negotiators can do all this before they sit down for breakfast. So if the Greens and Fianna Fail possess the will (or indeed, any permutation of parties) – there are many ways.
Having negotiated these hurdles, there are more problematic issues for the Greens. While maintaining an ‘independent’ stance, the fact is they campaigned on the basis of removing Fianna Fail from office and joining with Fine Gael and Labour if the opportunity arose. Trevor Sergeant, TD went so far as to state unequivocally that he would step down as Leader in the eventuality of the Greens entering with Fianna Fail. No matter how that is spun, the electorate was certainly of that opinion. An analysis of transfers in the sixteen constituencies where Fianna Fail and Opposition candidates were still in the running, Green voters transferred a mere 11% to Fianna Fail, while 37% opted for Labour and 26% for Fine Gael (a combined 63% for an alternative government). With a near volte face, the Greens may have trouble convincing their own voters of the benefits of coalescing with a party that so many transferred against.
History is littered with the remains of small parties that coalesced with larger parties: Clann na Poblachta was obliterated in 1951; Democratic Left went out of existence shortly after its brief coalition participation. Labour has been continually battered – in 1987 its vote fell by a third while in 1997 it was nearly halved. Even the PDs – they entered Government in 1997 with 4 seats, doubling that number to 8 before collapsing to two with all the questions regarding their long-term viability that entails.
Of course, each of these debacles had their own particular dynamics so to suggest that it’s simply a matter of small vs. big is a bit simplistic. Still, this history should be given serious consideration.
For the Greens, this could be compounded by their current circumstances. Contrast it with Labour in 1992 entering coalition with Fianna Fail. Labour was on a high of 33 seats, more than doubling their Dail representation and entered into a pact that was heralded as truly ground-breaking. It helped that Fianna Fail was rather chastened, having lost 9 seats. By contrast, the Greens are nowhere near that situation and they are hardly dealing with a chastened Fianna Fail.
The Greens nationally polled 4.7%, increasing by less than 1%. In addition to losing Dan Boyle, many of their sitting TDs are in precarious situation. Gormley himself saw his vote fall by over 2% points, scraping into the last seat by 300 votes. Ciaran Cuffe’s vote also fell, surviving on a massive transfer from Fine Gael on the last count. Indeed, of the constituencies they contested in 2002, the Green vote increased by a fractional 0.2%.
For me, however, the overriding consideration to all this is the inestimable loss to progressive politics resulting in coalition with Fianna Fail. We will see progressives divided between Government and Opposition, once again postponing the day when anti-conservative forces can present a united front against the duopoly of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. And politics being politics, there is no doubting that Labour will put the Greens through the parliamentary wringer, in an attempt to win their votes, in the process undermining their seats. This is not a prospect to savour no matter what party allegiance we may hold.
More importantly, in pursuit of building a third progressive block in Irish politics, we will be missing out on the values and insight the Greens could bring to this new project. Instead, they will be fighting to hold what they have, fending off Opposition attacks on many policies which the Greens will reluctantly have to defend.
Maybe I’m misreading all this. Clearly, if the Green negotiators walk out of the talks, stating that they could not ‘reform’ Fianna Fail’s conservative habits, many kudos could result. No one could question the Greens’ integrity or the seriousness with which they applied themselves to the task. And their experience, brief as it may have been, can be drawn upon in many other ways to much better effect. Even if the negotiators are rebuffed at the upcoming Mansion House convention, with the membership refusing to endorse the move into Government, this, too would show a maturity (never mind an unprecedented and refreshing display of democracy) that could be used to show the electorate this is a different kind of party.
However it plays out, hopefully the Greens will show they are ready and willing to play a part in Government. Having proven this, hopefully they won’t do it. Not this time. Not with conservative forces. In response to John Gormley’s lament about another five years of opposition I would suggest this: use those five years to build a real alternative – one in which the Greens won’t be an ‘added-on to make up the numbers’ but rather one in which they will be an integral and indispensable part.
Those would be good years.
if they don’t play ball with FG or FF they will never be in government. “progressives” got about 22% of the total vote. Doubling of that would probably still not bring them into government.
20 seats labour
6 seats green
4 seats Sinn Fein
2 indos.
32 seats. 52 short of a majority. Where are they going to start making them up? How many seats did progressives take in 3 seaters? Not that many. The precentage vote the progressives have is below what is needed to take the third seat in most 3 seaters. When if you want to take government you have to be taking the first if not 2 seats
And many of them came due to people voting thinking they will support a bigger party (or indeed the local canidate) not supporting them due to being progressives themselves.
Simply put there is not enough progressive votes in the country. Spending 5 years in opposition will do nothing to change that. Going into government getting some stuff. Gives them a bit a credibility. FF taunting FG about having no experience hurt them. And will hurt the greens unless they go in.
People have to look at how to achieve their goals with in the “conservative” frame work we exist in and the people continually vote for (about 72% of them). Not dream about what could be.
The way you tot them up, Simon, I’m surprised that you don’t realise that that same alignment, or bloc, had more seats than Fine Gael in the last Dail. No, it wouldn’t need to double to lead a government - this is after all the era of coalitions. All it would have to is, combined and acting in a coherent manner, become the second force in Irish politics. Then the media would be chasing Enda or Bertie around the country asking if they would contemplate supporting a progressive Taoiseach. Is this possible? Shortly after Rabbitte became leader and the anti-war demonstrations, Labour was polling higher than Fine Gael (never mind the combined progressive base). In 1992 Labour more than doubled their Dail representation. Similarly in 1943. History is full of examples of a progressive surge. However, without a strategy this will come to nought (again, witness 1992). Whenever I hear that argument, Simon (and I’m in now way suggesting that this is your intent) I hear conservative commentators saying Irish progressives have no right to play on the big boys’ pitch - except when they let one or two of us come on in the last few minutes for a runabout. And we’re supposed to be grateful?
had more seats than Fine Gael in the last Dail.
Yes but it was not possible that Fine Gael would form a government with that. Or indeed was the thought of Fine Gael could get 20 odd extra seats that impossible. They had the support on the ground to do that. They had the traditional support to come out to them. FG on 32 was not a nutural position for them. 50 is far more natural. 32 for the progressives is pretty much what they always have had. Even with the “spring tide” the number of deputies of left presusaition hardly broke the 40 mark and still behind a weak FG and weakish FF. Also they crashed after 1992.
I have no problem with the progressives playing on the big boys pitch be great to have a proper ding dong debates. But if you wait for it to happen you wouldn’t do anything because it will not happen the numbers are just not there. Also the issues are not there. Quality of life dominated the debate. Which would lend it’s self to a left swing. Yet the left lost seats.
My point is that if the greens want to get something done they have to get into the game as there is no other game in town.
At last Simon. Mr Tafts points are a reiteration of the same garbage written all over tye place, particularly a like minded buffoon on the village website. I agree with Simon completely. After contesting an election - what is the point of not attempting to ‘play the game’. Do you not want to put your policies into place?
deek, why is it garbage for people on the left to argue for a left alternative? If one is playing a long game it’s an issue of how many of your policies can be put into place. Do you think that sufficient Green Party policies will be enacted, or is it that you aren’t of the left and are just projecting?
The Greens have staked their reputation over the past two years on bringing down the very party (ies) they are now negotiating a government programme with. They were to the forefront (and rightly so) in criticisms of Teflon for receiving wads of cash from business men, having no bank account and stating that there was nothing wrong with that. How can they now go into a government led by the same man they tried to convince the country is a crook? It would just shatter all credibility and alienate voters like me who were happy that someone was finally willing to call the crooks ‘crooks’.
The Greens decision will determine whether they are a party of govt, or just a party of protest.
Rubbish. The Greens decision will rather determine whether they are a party of government at any cost or a party of principle, which stands by its commitments.
Deciding not to go into government with Fianna Fail will not mean the Greens are not a party of government, it will just mean that there are far too many insurmountable incompatibilities for them to enter into a Bertie-led government.
I agree with Brian Boru - if the Greens go into coalition with FF they will demonstrate that they have no intention of ever forming a progressive, ecological and sustainable government! They will have confused, as so often happens, conservation with conservatism.
Can you really imagine Messrs Sargeant, Gormley, White and others sipping champagne in the FF tent at Galway races, or cutting the ribbon to open the M3… or are they so hungry for the trappings of power that they are prepared to sacrifice most of their principles.
Gordon
I believe that there won’t be a FF/Green deal and that we are looking at another election inside 18 months.
Being a party of principle is no good if you can never go into government. How will a party survive if they get the opportunity to go in but don’t take it? What chance have a party got in opposition of having any of their policies implemented? Politics is the art of negotiation and parties in a position to do so have an obligation to examine the possibilities. Maybe there will or maybe there won’t be a deal done between the Greens and FF. The membership of the Green Party will decide whether a coalition will be formed if a deal is struck. But the left is a long way off becoming a major player in Irish politics. Simon is right, there is not the votes or support out there for the left block. There are 166 seats in the Dail and 134 of held by center-right and right parties and candidates. (Indeed you could throw some Labour TD’s into that equation too).
Ireland is a center-right country politically. The only chance for the left to influence government or get policies implemented is to do a deal. Government in this country will always be made up of two alternatives - a FF led coalition, or an inter-party government led by FG. That is not just the way it is, it’s the way it always has been and will be for the foreseeable future. Either way, the left parties will have to deal with a bigger center-right party. And I hope the Greens do a deal. I think they would be good in government. And I don’t think they’ll suffer at the next election if they do because I think it would be a successful government. They could be a good watchdog (PD’s not suited as nearly all ex-ff). And would you really like a FF and extended family government on their own? If the Greens get in and can get some of their policies implemented, that I believe will only be of benefit to them. Bertie isn’t going to do the full term and Cowen may be more palatable to the Greens in the long run. This is a chance for the Greens to get into government, and if it proves successful, then I think they will be staying in government.
As long as the Left continue insisting that they will go in with FG and not FF, they are (99% of the time) ruling themselves out of govt. The electorate do not share the political-left’s fixation with ‘getting FF’. Until they realise that they will languish in Opposition.