Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Is Pat Rabbitte a Fine Gael Mole
Read more about: Fine Gael, Labour Party
The thing I remember most from the 2002 election campaign was Ruari Quinn’s platform. The message was simple Labour were an independent party. They had a set of polices and whoever implemented they would go in power with. It was a brave strategy that many criticised yet due to its honesty lead to Labour gaining 3 seats against a powerful Fianna Fail tide, which was some achievement. However, now instead of an strong dynamic Labour Party we have:
Moles have been used throughout history to infiltrate organisations so that the direction of the organisation can be tilted in a direction that suits another organisation. The IRB did it prior to 1916 to change the direction of the Irish Volunteers to achieve their aims. Is it entirely implausible that ,90 years later, Fine Gael are doing it to Labour?
Fine Gael will never be in power on their own; they will always need Labour in with them. Also, Fine Gael will always be the dominat force in such a coalition. Labour’s power comes from the fact that they are the ultimate king-maker party. In a remotely tight election, they can be the party that dictates which party goes into power. The way this next election is shaping up, it looks very much like a tight election, making Labour, yet again, the king makers. Either side may well be in dire need of the Labour party to be in power and this gives their policy platform a lot greater chance of dominating the government’s policy.
The electorate know this and they look on Labour as a party to voice their own views on how the government is run. Whether they go into government with Fianna Fail or Fine Gael, they know a vote for an independent Labour is a vote for a specific set of policies. This is a big plus for Labour and a loss for Fine Gael as suddenly the opposition is no longer the “opposition”; it is two competing ideas of what the country can be and Fine Gael no longer get as much of the anti-government vote.
So what happens when we have a Labour Gael? When Pat Rabbitte goes up on stage at the Fine Gael “think in”, he is not going up on stage as an independent party leader, he is going up in essence as Enda’s Baldrick, making him look good. For Fine Gael to attract the electorate, they have to set themselves up as the rivals to Fianna Fail and make people believe that they have a very good shot at being in power. With an independent Labour, the shadow of doubt creeps in, people start to think maybe if we are voting for the opposition perhaps our vote is better served by Labour who are more likely to be in power. But with Labour Gael in existence, Fine Gael come far more viable than without.
With Pat abandoning all semblance of independence, Fine Gael look strong and the polls back this view up. Also, Labour looks weak and the polls show this too. It seems many of the grass roots are not digging this new non-independent Labour as much as Pat would like; the last poll from the Irish Examiner showed that 60% of people who voted Labour in 2002 will not do so again. I find it hard to believe that if people were dissatisfied with the government in 2002 they would be satisfied now, with many moving to the Greens looking for a more independent voice.
So why has made Labour moved away from a strategy that resulted in a seat gain in a very difficult election that almost brought a Fianna Fail majority, to a policy of being blatantly Labour Gael? Pat Rabbitte.
Ok, I know it is far fetched and totally stupid. But if Fine Gael were to create a mole in the Labour Party for their own purposes, would the mole do much different then Pat Rabbitte?
with garbage like this is it any wonder you dont get many comments?
yeah mollie, that showed him! enda kenya for taoiseach - my arse!
Thanks Mollie for the comment. I need them all
By the way the point of the post is that Pat being tied to FG is better for Fine Gael then it is for Labour and is in many ways damaging for Labour.
Molly I would love if this were a bit of silly hyperbole but to be honest, I find that there is a real point here. The close mingling that took place at the parties think ins, the policy documents which will in no way contradict each other. We are being presented with one party before the election. simple as that.
While polls are often unreliable there is a real confusion surrounding the status of labour. I worry that they have decided to live up to the ‘half’ in “two and a half party system”.
Also that image is quite funny.
Two and a half? I thought it had been conclusively proven that the number of actual parties in this country approached e?
Doesnt everything approach e?
LOL
once more into the breach
does any one ever accuse Tony Gregory of selling his soul to Charlie Haughey in that coalition
-neverrrrr - two very tough nuts
remember the coalition where 6 independents were in coalition with fianna fail in the previous government ?
seamus brennan met them every monday to make sure the boat was steady in the water
-no rockin’
they got all of their deal
trade unions do a state deal in partnership talks - do ibec loose their identity because of this ? hardly
ever accuse Tony Gregory of selling his soul to Charlie Haughey in that coalition
Funnily enough yes. But anyway. Tony Gregory went into government with haughey after the election not before. So really no relevance to the point above.
As for Seamus Breanan. yet again the independents went into the election independent. Again not relevent to the point.
Actually molly your precise point is also a point against the current plan. Gregory was arguing after the election from a position of undeniable power-he was kingmaker and what he wanted he got.
It is not the case now with Rabbitte that labour are kingmaker and if a third party is needed after next May then the are the de facto king maker and the one who extracts policy commitments from the two allies. Releasing policy now on a unified front makes a mockery of hte suggestion that labour or fine gael are independent parties. Im not arguing on the specific policies which may well be the ones i find most agreeable.
The notion that there are two seperate entities is something where the facts tend to belie the argument. Labour have said that only FIne Gael interest them, in doing so they have decided not to gamble on being king maker and thus get their “meat” into the sandwich after election time.
The parties that stand to gain from this are the greens and the PDs or indeed a labour party under new leadership.
ITs a huge issue for labour -not Fine Gael- to over come. Fine Gael are sweeping up the benefit of being seen as the lead party in a possible alternative government with partners locked in. Labour voters are wondering if they will get what they would like to vote for.
‘Ruairi Quinn…’ is not a plausible retort either, as long as politics is around people have run bad campaigns. The independence of labour is something voters seem to want right now (as evidenced by polls suggesting static or declining numbers). Id be interested to hear what FG heads think from their side?
whether we like it or not a majority vote at a labour party conference voted for this arrangement its called democracy
i have spent my whole life voting for the labour party in some form or other
do i like voting for fine gael - not particularly
would i vote for that other shower ?
i wouldnt give them a fifteenth preference if a gun was held to my head
Actually to state that Gregory was a part of the ‘government’ in any meaningful way would be utterly incorrect, it was simply an agreement regarding the constituency he represented. He wasn’t in cabinet, he had no input on overall ‘national’ issues. So it was hardly a question of FF losing their identity.
But it is valid to ask whether the current pact - which I think Cian or Simon have noted goes beyond even what was agreed at conference - is detrimental to the Labour identity. As someone formerly in the WP and then DL I’m well aware of just how good relations were between DL and FG, I presume that has transferred into Labour amongst a certain circle. I think Simon is well aware that Rabbitte isn’t an FG mole, he says it himself, but there is a closeness which doesn’t bode well IMHO for Labour at the next outing and that is an entirely valid point to raise even in this form.
world storm
i am sick of baring my soul here
now that we are all in confession i too was in wp and dl
and i dont want to put this shower out for the hell of it
i am an unrepentant socialist and feminist and it sickens me to my core to see how watery the whole bloody lot of them are but god i dont want this crowd in power for fifteen years
The labour party has to become more radical in its language and policies and not sound like fg of course it does
but i dont believe Rabbitte is a political wimp
and they do have some damn good spokespersons
i used to read the stuff on these blogs and comment but i got totally pissed off it is so fg and so bloody mundane so i talk to the irish times poll which is marginally better
i am now signing off because i am fuming with the whole bloody lot of it !!!!!!!
i think that if these sites did one bloody thing like raise awaremness about registering your right to vote it would be a good days work
see you at the barricade schmuck
whether we like it or not a majority vote at a labour party conference voted for this arrangement its called democracy
what exactly did they vote for though molly? What did they have in front of them and what did they have in mind as the outcome? A joint policy on all things?
Here is the piece WBS alluded to.
I also have inclinations to vote labour and i think its a bad idea cos now im not sure i want to vote for them.
It’s a new spin Mollie Malone on the old argument that ultimately was one of those that forced me out of DL (amongst other reasons such as their hypocrisy regarding the PIRA ceasefires). Not entering coalition is a principle for some, not for me. But the terms on which a coalition is arrived at is a crucial issue. I thought DL was wrong to go into the Rainbow in the 1990s, the party was too small and government would merely diffuse it’s identity, which it gave me little satisfaction to note was the result. As an outsider I’m astonished by the manner in which the current pact is being managed. It just seems counterintuitive in that it benefits FG seemingly at the expense of Labour and worse again (if one is a Labour supporter, which I wouldn’t really count myself as, but am someone who respects the party and many in it and would hope they would do well) it exposes their left flank to the Greens, the SP, SF and various independents. To me it seems like craziness, particularly since Labour is almost bound then to lose seats and come the following election will lose seats again if historical precedent is any guide. Surely tactically in that instance, in a period where the electorate appears happy to be wilful as regards who it plumps for wouldn’t it make far more sense for Labour to distance itself slightly from FG prior to the election, or even go it alone and then make the decision whether to enter a government after the election. That way they shore up their vote or perhaps even increase it. Your sentiments re the current government shouldn’t stand in the way (however correct or incorrect they may be) of a strategy that could maximise Labour votes and implicitly Labour represntation.
the current gang at the top in labour are notching up the years so the hunger is there to get in and do their stuff - whatever that is — i hear what youre saying - no one wants them there just as a different bunch of faces - i think the opposition think, we the public, see them as cleaner more trustworthy than the current mob - how do we know?
theres not much doubt about it but its very difficult to remember what labour did differently to other parties over the years in government except their education policy pushed through for very young disadvantaged kids at primary level by niamh breathnach
they never seem to leave a decent legacy behind them -pity
i have hopes for the greens this time too
Reading all the comments above, I find a lot of windy, pseudo-philosophical rhetoric.
As the Queen said in Hamlet “More matter, with less art”.
Action, in other words.
some quick comments, if the 60% of those who voted Labour aren’t going to vote Labour again, how come Labour are even on 10%? surely they would be on 5%
Also, if FG are viable and Labour can potentially go in with either FG or FF doesn’t that increase Labour’s leverage with regard to getting their policies in place. Whereas if it is just FF that Labour can do a deal with then FF can push them to the brink. Ever think that Pat’s plan is more about having two competitive bidders looking for Labour’s support rather than it being FF in a buyer’s market? As for Labour’s problems around the age of their candidates that predates Rabbitte and is something for the wider organisation to sort out. Think how many potential young candidates Labour has lost to SF and the Greens in the last ten years.
how come Labour are even on 10%? surely they would be on 5% Fair point they are losing their core and gaining more.
doesn’t that increase Labour’s leverage with regard to getting their policies in place.
No not when they are saying they can’t potentially go in with either.
Ever think that Pat’s plan is more about having two competitive bidders looking for Labour’s support
That is the point of the arguement. Pat is making sure there is not 2 bidders but 1. Ie no market price for their ideas.
Think how many potential young candidates Labour has lost to SF and the Greens in the last ten years.
A hell of a lot I would say.
but if you work on the basis that Pat could turn around to Enda after the election and ditch him then there are 2 bidders. With your model of an ‘independent’ Labout there would only be one bidder next time out, just FF.
With your model of an ‘independent’ Labout there would only be one bidder next time out, just FF
Are you saying Fine gael will only win the 50 odd seats they are after if Labour is in tow. That an independent Fine Gael do not have the ability to do it themselves.
That is very defeatist of you Dan.
I don’t believe that FG would win 60 seats without the current deal with Labour.
Remember the two parties are aiming for 84 seats that means closer 60 than 50 for FG and more than 25 for Labour if FG fall short of the 60 mark. With Labour going on the ‘independent’ route that you sugggest, I think it is obvious that both parties would get less seats and thus the only party Labour could do a deal with would be FF. Fact is in your scenario is it FF that are able to pick and choose between Labour and the PDs and independents or SF. Hardly a good place for Labour to be.