Green Party Internal Democracy and Intersting Aspect of Negotiation

The discussions are likely to recommence today between Greens and Fianna Fail but a really interesting question (the answer to which may never come out in the wash) is who has to do the most moving to get it done? The Green party’s internal structure has been a major factor in the negotiations for government. Not alone do the negotiators have to please the upper echelons of the party, those who might be most marked by a desire to get into government and accompanying ‘pragmatism’, they have an eye on the 66% of their members who might attend the conference needed to approve a programme for government.

Whereas other parties are marked by the traditional centralisation of power in the centre with members increasingly left to flounder around Ard Fheiseanna the Greens, like their European sister parties, have attempted to implement a system of internal party democracy as part of their wider ideas. Political Scientists are divided over the viability of internal party democracy and the negotiations between Fianna Fail and the Greens give an indication as to why. Those parties like FF with strong internal centralisation are far more flexible at delivering decisions and heading into government, internal democracy slows that process and alters the complexion of negotiation to a great extent. Dan Boyle et. al. are not negotiating on Trevor Sargent’s behalf, as Cowen and Brennan are on Bertie Ahern’s rather they are operating with an eye on their party members.

The delivery of a deal later on today is inextricably linked to this facet of the negotiation, no matter how willing the Green party are to come to a deal their members are the ones who will need to approve a deal. As such their has had to be complete answers on certain issues (such as climate change) which can be given to members and enable the TDs to answer any questions arising from the deal. The old kick it to a committee practice of neogtiating government runs aground since the members are entitled to ask awkward questions of the agreed programme.

This poses the question which is most important over the coming days, who has to move the farthest to deliver a Fianna Fail/Green government. The Green party as the much smaller party in a coalition are expected to be the ones who have to compromise most, which will almost certainly be the case. Yet Fianna Fail, if they want the negotiations to succeed, need to give in on a number of issues which will get a programme passed at the conference. The Green party via internal democracy have actually increased to some extent the leverage which they may be able to bring to bear on negotiations. It could be said that it is incumbent on Fianna Fail if talks continue to cooperate to ensure a 2/3 victory at conference for the Greens.

This pressure led to the break-down of talks on Friday, where Trevor arguably felt the conference couldn’t endorse any emerging deal, however what does that mean for today and tomorrow? If they didn’t agree on Friday, why and how will they agree today or tomorrow? Is it the Greens who must move closer or do Fianna Fail need to move in order to deliver a 2/3 majority at Green party conference. This is very interesting as it seems clear that the nature of internal Green politics has reshaped the nature of coalition negotiations. The extent to which this is translated in the final deal, if their is one, is a matter of conjecture since leaks are few and far between from the negotiations, but surely one of the more interesting aspects of the post-election period.