Eamon Gilmore – Fifty seats well within his grasp?
Read more about: Uncategorized 
Shortly after he was made leader of the Labour Party in 2007, Eamon Gilmore promised to increase his party’s Dail representation to 48 seats or more in the next general election. Refusing to bow to the ‘two and a half party’ political culture, with Labour permanently designated as the half party, he vowed to change the face of Irish politics.
Pundits may have raised their eyebrows and privately scoffed at such delusions of political grandeur, but the surge in support to Labour in recent polls has caused them pause for thought.
The strategy of positioning Labour as a viable alternative to permanent political dominance of this State by either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael paid dividends for Labour in the 2009 local and European elections.
Since then the public have been flocking increasingly to Labour as a representative alternative to the traditional Tweedledum Tweedledee formation of Irish politics. The electorate are waiting in the long grass for Fianna Fail, blamed for destroying the economy. With the implosion of its recent heave, a bitterly divided Fine Gael, sporting an ‘Up Mayo!’ leadership badge, is failing to impress. At last, there is a political leader of a united party that never offends anyone, except bankers and developers and other popular ‘hate’ figures, who purports to provide the electorate with genuine ’change’.
Labour’s ambition to win 50 seats in the next general election, reiterated by Gilmore in his Irish Times interview this week, may well be within its grasp, according to analysis of current opinion poll trends by political scientists. Over on the excellent www.politicalreform.ie site, they’ve been beavering away at the figures and blogging their results.
Adrian Kavanagh’s analysis of the Red C polls suggests that “on these figures, Fine Gael would win 65 seats, Labour would win 48 seats, Fianna Fail would win 46 seats, Sinn Fein would win 5 seats, while 2 seats would be won by independents and other small parties. On these figures, the Green Party would fail to win a seat.”
Labour would win over half the seats in Dublin, though Fine Gael and Fianna Fail would hold on better to their traditional support bases in rural constituencies, Kavanagh suggests. He surmises that Labour might possibly also land two ’surprise’ wins, in Mayo and Roscommon-South Leitrim respectively, bringing the grand national total to 50 seats. Thus Eamon Gimore’s current prediction would be fulfilled, even without the Party winning the one seat in every constituency that he believes it will.
Further analysis by Liam Weeks yields a similar overall result for Labour, though he is more circumspect than his colleague. Weeks excludes eight constituencies where Labour polled less than 5% in the 2007 election. Using Adrian Kavanagh’s analysis he estimates Labour can win a seat in the remaining 35 constituencies and two in 15 of those constituencies. But the question he poses is what Labour needs to do to achieve these results. It would require some remarkable swings in its vote, he concludes.
In those Dublin constituencies which the party has earmarked to gain second seats Labour, for instance, would have to record a 155% increase in its vote in Dublin Central, followed by “233% in Dublin North, 193% in Dublin MidWest, 175% in Dublin NorthCentral, 161% in Dublin South, 92% in Dublin SouthEast and 134% in Dublin West.”
To win back the old Spring seat in Kerry North would require an 83% increase in the party vote; 212% to regain a seat once held by Michael Bell in Louth and for Jerry Cowley to make the grade in Mayo, an increase of 1072% in the Labour vote in that constituency.
Weeks concludes:
“Of course, since many of the polls are suggesting that Labour’s national vote will increase by 150%, perhaps some of these victories are possible, particularly in Dublin. The opinion polls suggest this is certainly a feasible target, but an increase of 150% would only suffice if (1) the gains stated below were achieved evenly across each constituency, (2) if the vote was divided evenly between Labour candidates and (3) if they manage to pick up enough transfers to move from 0.8 of a quota per candidate to a full one. The occurrence of all three is an unlikely scenario as the surge in the Labour vote per constituency will be very much related to the strength of its local organisation. Taking this into account Labour needs well over 500,000 voters to cast a first preference for one of its candidates in 2012 if the 50 seat target is to be realised (with a stronger organisation Fine Gael won 51 seats from 564,000 votes in 2007). It would be more a hurricane than a gale if such a swing was to occur.”
Thus Weeks puts the euphoria about recent poll gains into perspective. In the 2007 General Election, Labour won about 206,000 first preference votes, so it’s a tall order to expect the party to achieve over half a million votes in 2012 and even at that, translate those votes into 50 actual Dail seats.
The most intriguing aspect of Kavanagh’s and Weeks’ analyses, though, is how commentators with direct and intimate knowledge of individual constituencies may feel it squares with their own experience on the ground. In Dublin West, for example, expanded from a three seater to a four seater for the next election and with a chunk of what was formerly Dublin North added in, it feels more likely that MEP Joe Higgins will be returned to the Dail than a second Labour candidate. Does anyone seriously believe that the Green Party will be wiped out in its entirety? Or that Fianna Fail will sink as low as 46 seats, in their terms the equivalent of an electoral wipeout? Or that the next Dail will have only two independents, on these predictions Maureen O’Sullivan in Dublin Central and Michael Lowry in Tipperary North?
Finally, polls can, and do, change and, as shown by the experience of 2007, change more dramatically during an actual election campaign than anyone anticipates. As things stand, Labour is riding high. If it can continue to increase its poll ratings and consolidate its current favour with the electorate, come the next election we may be looking at a sea-change in Irish politics.
Fear created by the Neo-Con, Right-wing or Centre-right ideology seems to have taken over completely. Subtle vilification of the Left is now definitely the name of the game. With vast sums going to keep the most wealthy in the lap of luxury and the privatisation of public assets about to begin in earnest there will soon be little left for anyone to improve the lot of a down-trodden people.
good post veronica
Eddie,
What ’subtle vilification ofthe left’ are you referring to? Far from it, I would have thought Eamon Gilmore is the political toast of the town these days!
Veronica: I wouldn’t regard Eamon Gilmore as a representative of the left.
He supported the Lisbon treaty which provides for the free movement of people, goods and services and the privatisation of social services, all the things which have created economic chaos and the race to the bottom in workers pay and conditions.
The left I am thinking of are represented by the Socialist Party,Joe Higgins, Clare Daly etc. These are the people who used to be called the “looney left” and who are now portrayed as too stupid and irresponsible to be let near the reins of power by those who have bankrupt the country in a short period of ten years, and the thing I find extraordinary is that people still believe it.
Has my comment on your question been censored? If so I would be grateful if you would withdraw the question.
Eddie,
For some unknown reason your earlier comment was automatically consigned to ‘pending’ status. I can’t see why – maybe use of a particular word or something! I’ve unblocked it now.
One thing Labour has going for it is the constitutional-requirement with respect to the ratio of population-to-number-of-TDs. Immigrants are disproportionately urban as are Labour’s traditional strongholds. Hence Labour has historically been over-represented in Dail Eireann since the Celtic Tiger began. Examples: 12% of the seats compared to 10% of the vote in 2002 and 2007. Imho, the massive influx of people from the Accession States since 2004 will further the disparity between the party’s share of the vote and share of the seats. Another example can be seen in the Euro elections last year where the party won just 13.5-14% in the Euro and Local Elections, respectively but won 25% of the seats. In 1987, the party won 5% of the first-preference vote but 12 seats (over 13% of the seats in Dail Eireann). To some extent, this tendency will counterbalance Labour’s weak organisation in rural-Ireland.
Even so, the 2004 and 2007 elections are a cautionary tale in reading too much into local/euro election results. Fianna Fáil were also ‘certain’ to lose power until the last week in the 2007 GE campaign. At the end of the day, the granny-vote will return to the party to some extent and even though I regard a return to government in 2012 as unlikely, past form suggests it cannot be ruled out – particularly given the huge chasm between Fine Gael and Labour on public-sector reform (which Labour appear to have no policy on other than condemning cuts while avoiding a position before the ICTU endorsement of the Croke Park Agreement), the role of private-medicine in the health-care system (e.g. privatisation of VHI), criminal-justice legislation such as increased surveillance powers for the Gardai, corporate-donations etc.
Correction: Labour’s 12 seats were approximately 8% of Dail Eireann in 1987 and the 25% of seats in 2009 refers to the Euro elections.
FT,
Unless you are a resident Irish or UK citizen, there is no right to vote in Irish general elections.
Veronica: Sorry for doubting you.
I agree with FT that we should not read too much into opiion polls. It is no good just putting yourself forward for election any more no matter how godd or essential your policies are. When the crunch comes FF and FG hold all the cards including the media, the spin doctors, the finance to be able discover what will go down with the majority etc.
That has been the case now for a long time and I can only it changing very slowly. But there is always hope. Maybe Labour should join FF and change it from within.
Veronica you misunderstand my point in bringing foreign-nationals into this discussion. Namely – that although most cannot vote in General Elections, the Constitution still makes them relevant as a factor in determining the number of seats in a given region by imposing a ratio of population-to-seat. This benefits Labour because their heartlands are urban and immigrants disproportionately live there. Hope I have suitably clarified my point.
FT, you’d have to have a much higher % of foreigners in particular constituencies than is the case for it to skew the number of seats allocated to urban areas and you’re incorrect to suggest this has lead to a direct benefit for Labour. FG, FF and Labour get a seat bonus because of how PR-STV works for bigger parties and it is not as you suggest exclusive to Labour. And you’re ignoring the tendency for rural based Labour votes which are mostly personally based even if they don’t always lead to seats in places like Westmeath for Penrose, Cork East for Sherlock, Kerry North for the Springs, Tipp South, Wexford, Stagg in Kildare etc.
Dan,
Yes. The bigger the party, the bigger the seat bounce, so FF and FG tend to reap more benefit from this phenomenon of PR STV than Labour. The personal vote phenomenon also tends to be stronger in Labour (and other small parties) because of the ’single candidate’ per constituency strategy. Not only do the voters come to identify the party locally with a particular personality, party loyalists and activists do as well. So when a long standing TD retires, much of the local organisation may disappear with him/her and a ‘new’ candidate coming in has to start building from scratch.
That is the reason why Labour has traditionally found it very difficult to retain seats, especially in rural constituencies, when its local stalwart retires. The single candidate strategy also prevents competition emerging from potential rivals within the constituency organisation. Less secure about their hold on their seats than big names in FG or FF, well established Labour representatives exercise a grip over their constituency organisations that would put the average feudal baron to shame. Of course it happens in the bigger parties too, but not quite to the same extent as in Labour. Also, when there’s a fair wind blowing for Labour nationally it tends to do very well in Dublin. Conversely, when the national profile is negative, as in 1997, their main seat losses are in urban areas.
On the basis of current opinion poll trends, Labour looks set to have a very good day out at the next election, particularly in Dublin where it could, on these figures, win two seats in ten of the twelve Dublin constituencies. Local organisation weaknesses and ‘quota squatting’ by incumbents may combine to prevent this; but the party that stands to lose most from a surge to Labour in Dublin is FG, which would make no seat gains in the capital as a result of it. If the autumn polls continue to favour a Labour surge, I think the question of the Fine Gael leadership will come onto the political radar screen again although it is probably too late for FG to resolve this issue now without inflicting further ‘divided party’ image damage on itself.
Erm, not to be a tiresome pedant, but I seem to recall that Gilmore promised/offered/opined in late 2007 that Labour could get 30 seats, not 48.
http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2007/08/31/setting-out-the-electoral-stall-eamon-gilmore-and-30-labour-seats/
WByS,
You’re right, of course! 30 seats it was. Mea culpa. Gilmore has upped it to 48 now, though, as the surge in the polls has strengthened. I think there could be an interesting discussion around which of his predictions, 30 or 48, will turn out to be closest to the mark, and why.