The Emerging Green Strategy for Remaining in Government
Read more about: Coalition, Feature Gallery, Features, Fianna Fail, Government, Green Party 
With a week to digest the election results, the Green Party might be credited with an emerging strategy to take into their negotiations for a renewed programme for government and, in theory at least, the second part of the process of government for however long it lasts. It was assessed here and elsewhere that the dynamic since 2007 for the party was that the frontline ministers kept strictly to their portfolios and the mantra of programme for government (that as a party of six seats they were not able to direct all policy in every brief).
The hope on their part was the voters would see and approve of the Green ministers working on climate change, pollution, green energy and transport while the rest of the government did its own thing. This is perhaps the first error, that government might be thought of as a series of hermetically sealed portfolios which voters assess on their individual merits. That assumption meant that others in the party – most of Ciaran Cuffe and occasionally Dan Boyle – were charged with acting as the ‘conscience of the party’ those who raised concerns with policy announcements across the other portfolios.
The strategy was strictly adhered to even as things began to turn sour, yes Minister Gormley was told about the September decision to guarantee banks but one assumes it was as a courtesy. The mutterings of discontent were growing however, as the emergency budget cut the cervical cancer vaccine and hit school teacher numbers, issues of core interest to the Green party voter, the party was sticking to its effort on the core area.
In effect the ministers were narrowing the definition and scope of the Green party just as people were seeking them to be more active in the area of social justice, education and health. The reason for many votes to support the party – its stance on ethics and the morals which it brought to bear on public policy – were slowly being corroded by a split approach to governing. The resignation of Paul Gogarty from his spokesperson position on education sent a signal that things weren’t going according to plan, the hope that Green ministers would keep the toxicity of Fianna Fail at bay by focussing on core green issues seemed to be failing.
Hence when John Gormley made a big address at the Green conference it made reference to the cuts to the Equality authority, suggesting he has had budget reinstated a suggestion ignored by our Minister for Justice. As a signal of things to come it was telling, the party had to widen its focus and interest at the cabinet table. It didn’t wash for members of the parliamentary party to wring hands about cuts as if they didn’t have ministers at the cabinet table. People stopped believing it.
Too many people. They were punished horribly at the local elections – a pity indeed becuase we reach a vital point in climate change negotiations at Copenhagen where a semi-confident Green party would in fact be a value to the nation. However the strategic difficulty of living in government with Fianna Fail saw them punished by voters for whom Climate change is not the #1 issue in marking the ballot paper. I am sure this was picked up by Dan Boyle and the reason behind his call for a renegotiation of the programme for government.
The Greens were cruising for a precipice if they didn’t get themselves stuck into all the issues around the cabinet table and take the fight to every portfolio. That process was not enough to save sitting councillors but when it begins at the end of June it will – they hope – save some sitting TDs in time for the next General Election. That is why the quotes in an extended article in the business post today are insightful. It is quotes from Cuffe and Boyle, hitherto operating as the one-foot-out part of the one-foot-in-one-foot-out approach to governing with Fianna Fail.
They were always talking about the wider policy issues as Ministers kept studiously to their brief (“six seats…..”). Now the new programme for government must see the Greens extend their remit in government beyond the green agenda. Here are some quotes from Ciaran Cuffe in that article mentioned above (links to come after 6.00 when it goes online):
“I think we need to ramp up the policy delivery, that’s worth staying in, but we need clear timeframes on policy issues”
“My view would be to sit down with the candidates and members and tease out the issues: does the party want to see us leave or not? Does the party want to see significant changes or not?”
…
“I think it’s very clear from talking to local group meetings in Dun Laoghaire that we’re more interested in policy than in power, and if we don’t see that policy coming forward we’re happy to walk.”
The Civil Partnership Bill “should have been published by now in my book. It should have been out before the local elections and is symptomatic of the concerns we have to push through”
The party must move into other portfolios and take positions publicly that might cause friction at cabinet. To get wins out of the issue of civil partnership, education cuts or health spending is a major plank of the newly emerging strategy. The problem with the old one is highlight in this quote from Boyle in the same article:
“Our attachment to power is not what people think it is. We feel unhappy about how the government is operating at the moment.”
Who is the we? What are the we unhappy about? Why aren’t your front line ministers articulating such unease? Why not ensure that the Green party ministers are knee-deep in the debate on those issues which make you unhappy? In other words, are you in the government or not? If you are make your presence felt. Talking like the green ministers are merely bystanders in a large number of policy debates makes the party look emasculated to voters and disheartens your core vote and plays down your capacity to get your way – the entire premise for going in in the first place. Here is what Boyle has to say about that ongoing programme for government renewal:
“Instead of going after bigger cuts that would make a difference, the government has made smaller cuts to areas such as special needs, education and library services.”
The party wants to see savings to quangos and administrative costs, “which have emerged over the years through the social partnership process. At a time of savings, they should have been the first cuts”.
And what of Gogarty?
“This annihilation has been so bad that, in a perverse way, it gives us plenty of leverage because you’ve nothing left to lose, especially if your going to be annihilated anyway in three years time.”
“This is a case of ‘I’ve nothing left: give me what I want or I’ll take us both down’. If Fianna Fail think that just becuase we’ve been wiped out, we’re not going to do something about it, they’d be wrong”.
So the plan is get Greens into policy debates, all or nothing. The one foot in and one foot out strategy didn’t cut it at the polls this month, they have two options: a voice on policy issues outside of Ministerial briefs or the long walk across the floor.
A measure of how successful they can be is whether they get the civil partnership bill from Dermot Blasphemy Bill Ahern.
I think the impact of Dan Boyle’s call for a renegotiation of the program of government has been misinterpreted by many commentators.
For the average voter on the street it was obvious that this was a last ditch ploy to save green cllrs around the country by putting distance btw themselves and FF, but was seen for the two faced stunt that it was. Nearly two years in government, the Greens had been willing participants and signed off on many decisions, signified often by their silence or impotency to change them. They would take the perks of office but not the overall responsibilities. Same goes for Gogarty, he resigns as party spokesperson but retains his Oireachtas committee position with generous renumeration. A stunt.
You can use all kinds of subtle arguements about their strategy to take core ownership of just their ministers briefs but only journalists and politicos care about that kind of stuff.
Voters understand collective cabinet responsibility and the Greens have been and will continue to be associated with every bad decision because their very presence makes those decisions possible.
Further, like all small parties, best example being the PDs, the Greens rely completely on transfers for their seats. In the local elections transfers down the ballot deserted the Greens as the floating voter, plus FG and Labour core voters deserted the GP candidates
This is what will signify the end of the parliamentary Green party. Before entry into government with FF, Green candidates atracted transfers from all over, now FG and Labour voters will not give them the necessary transfers which will lead to the loss of all their seats so delivering on their agenda, or anything else that they suddenly decide to be critical will not change this future outcome.
TO win seats in the next general election Green TDs will require upto 4/5 of a quota I reckon to be safe. On top of this they will have to battle with Labour and FG hopefuls who will be odds on to form the next government. Not a good position to be in.
I think you are missing a very big reason people voted the Greens in the last election. And that was they were not Fianna Fail. For many people after FG they were the party least likely to go into power with FF. Now that that has happened. They have totally lost the anti-FF vote. Coupled together with the fact green policy was more a fashion then vocation and really it is snot surprising they are going down hill.
The Greens getting their say and their way with FF ministries will not be easy. Dermot Ahern has already made that clear with his put-down of an answer to a parliamentary question that sought to get details of the changes John Gormley claimed credit for at the Green Party Conference.
And they can expect FF Ministers to reciprocate. Would Miniter Ryan be happy to see collective government broadband priorities determine that improvements occur first in areas with FF marginal seats or FF ministers keen “to deliver”?
gogerty and boyle both with ’screw our voters’ we’re in now.
the greens are suggesting that people didn’t vote for them cos they don’t care about the environment, and that while there in they’ll do their best for it, despite us wasters, they save the earth, but that isn’t the case, we didn’t vote for them now because of their abandonment of social justice.