Having read Michael Taft’s piece on Labour and the two and a half party system last month some thoughts struck me which were underscored in conversation with someone close to the Green Party. They had done a neat little chart which demonstrated that historically it has been smaller fourth parties which have a better chance of participation in government than the Labour Party. Now one might think that is a fairly self-serving thesis from such a source, and one might well be correct. Yet it has considerable implications for our political structure as presently constituted.

Consider the Green Party, the Progressive Democrats, National Labour, Clann na Poblachta, Democratic Left. All fourth parties and all in government during their respective political existences. Chances were that, however small these formations were, they would be central to government formation, even if only briefly (and some of these had the political equivalent of mayfly lifespans). Now, obviously the chart is skewed when we consider the last two decades where the PDs, DL and the Green Party were the beneficiaries of this dynamic. It’s also skewed insofar as the Labour Party has provided a more constant political partner across a longer time period.

Looking further back we see that there was a period when Fine Gael and Labour provided the only route to power for fourth parties in the face of Fianna Fáil dominance. That period has quite comprehensively ended with the fragmentation of the left of centre into competing factions and a single, but extremely important, splintering on the right. The most excessive example of this being 2002 when 14 Independent TDs, the Socialist Party, the Green Party, the Progressive Democrats and Sinn Féin gaining between them 34 seats from 166, up from 14 in 1997. The current tally? 17.

To take some years at random just to show how monolithic the two and a half party system (which Michael Taft referred to last month) was in the 1970s and 1980s we see (in an admittedly smaller D áil of 144) only 2 non FG/FF/Labour TDs in 1973. In the supposedly chaotic elections of November 1982 (with a full complement of 166 TDs) we see 4 non FF/FG/Lab TDs, 2 Independents and 2 Workers’ Party TDs. Arguably it is only in 1987 when the Progressive Democrats took 14 seats, the Workers’ Party jumped to 4 and Jim Kemmy of the DSP and 3 Independents took seats that the ‘mould’ as it were was truly broken. And notably in that year Labour went down to a mere 12 TDs. Even more interestingly is that Fine Gael lost 20 seats to arrive at 50.

But looking at it in the long view, perhaps this wasn’t so much a breaking of the mould - as smaller parties and Independents appeared - as a reassertion of a pre-existing but long muted structural dynamic to Southern politics. Consider the numbers over the 1920s through to the 1960s where the system was characterised by a high level of fragmentation with only Fianna Fáil (from the early 1930s in truth) commanding a truly hegemonic vote share. 1948? 34 non Labour/FF/FG TDs.

The hegemonic vote share led Fianna Fáil into the error of believing that a core ‘principle’ was the idea of single party FF government. Well, that worked a treat as time went on, didn’t it? But then Fianna Fáil being, rather like advanced capitalism, a profoundly adaptable creature, rapidly assimilated the idea that while FF single party government might be optimal, FF participation in government was only slightly less so. Consequently, no more two and a half-party dynamic. Instead a sort of electoral buyers market where both Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil vie for suitors - leading to perhaps the most exotic outcome, our most recent coalition of all the talents.

Of course all this, while an interesting intellectual diversion, may not matter a damn. Except that it does actually. Because, and again following on from what Michael noted, to some degree Labour has - not unjustifiably - come to consider itself the natural half in the two and a half party structure. And that half has been, if not comfortable and rewarding, at least a position which has afforded some degree of political status and space in the polity. That that space has seemed larger perhaps than it actually is precisely because of the psychological import of the term ‘half’. And that in turn may have led to a degree of complacency if not, in some instances, entitlement.

But if there is no two and a half party dynamic, and if Fianna Fáil will poach the smaller fourth parties expected to constitute Rainbow governments led by FG and Labour (and they are, note the wailing and gnashing of teeth as the Green Party slipped over the side of the lifeboat in May/June, a lifeboat that they’d not actually fully sat down in in the preceding months and years) then we’re looking at a form of political redundancy for Labour. It may still retain in seat share the gains of the ‘half’ status, but in vote share it is being caught up with by both the Green Party and Sinn Féin. And, almost inevitably, there will a rebalancing of the seat share back to the lower levels of the low double digits experienced, if not enjoyed, by Labour in the 1970s and 1980s. Which, to some degree, demonstrates that the ‘half’ status was always overstated, and was more a function of a lack of political rivals in a broadly two-party system, than an genuine reflection of their dynamic.

And the consequence of this dynamic? Perhaps it is that in our current party system there is no option for the Labour Party other than coalition with Fine Gael if it wishes to get into government. At least, that is, in a context of a Labour Party with 20 or so TDs. But maybe, following on from that the reality is that there is no option at all with Fine Gael, because Fianna Fáil, or at least the current vastly less contentious version of Fianna Fáil under the incoming regime, will provide an even more attractive suitor than that under Ahern to other smaller parties.

Which makes the Mullingar Accord so inexplicable in political terms. Sure, it would have potentially worked a treat in 1973 (and its equivalent did to some extent)…but in 2007? The only logic for it was one which presupposed that the bloc of Independents would be eviscerated, which did happen, and that FF would be unable to entice the Green Party in, which didn’t. Oh yes, and most importantly that the Accord partners would be able to construct their own coalition of all the talents from what was left. Which, as it happens they could just about have done had they been willing to work with Sinn Féin… and the Progressive Democrats… and gene-pool FF. And the problem there is reciprocity, for would all of those formations have worked with each other?

These thoughts in part follow on from the Green Party convention recently. I was looking at the reports and thinking that the attendance seemed to be a bit sparse. Now in fairness the WP Ard Fheiseanna weren’t exactly swarming with people, but a party with - at its height - seven TDs was able to make a good showing for the high-points of the key-note speeches. Democratic Left had fewer, but that was to be expected. Labour could amass a fair crowd as the need arose, and no doubt still can. But the Green Party, with six TDs and two Senators, well, not quite as many. That may well be revealing about any number of things.

But then it struck me, well, so what? They’re in government, they have two Ministers and a Minister of State. All told, they seem to be functioning on a purely pragmatic and process led level reasonably well, as best one can judge these matters.

John Gormley’s Tibetan nationalism played a treat in front of a crowd who might - and perhaps I’m being a tad unkind here - resile at other nationalisms. The mood was good, despite Paul Gogarty’s unusual decision to position himself against a boycott of the Beijing Olympics, contrary to the majority of delegates. Speaking to some who were there, a good time was had by all and all is well. No doubt aided, as the Irish Times noted recently, by the great good fortune of the party in seeing Bertie off, so to speak, only a couple of weeks ago (and while some might have criticised Gormley for appearing directly behind Ahern at his resignation address, well, who could blame the Minister for just making sure that our beloved near to former leader was actually on his way?).

But what of Labour? It is a large enough party, the proverbial half in that two and a half party system mentioned earlier. It has a solid enough vote. But this isn’t a minor matter. The current government has precisely 8 non FF TDs from parties with Ministerial representation. One might argue that Mary Harney is a legacy issue, her seat warm, so to speak, from years sitting in it. The Greens have two full Ministers and one junior Minister. Beyond that we have Independents safely nestled within ‘agreements’ that ensure they won’t rock the boat overmuch.

And then one wonders is there any possibility of an FF/Labour Coalition? In such an arrangement it would surely have to have x number of cabinet seats. x being a significant number and one that would give pause to thought to any FF would-be-Taoiseach. Why cut a deal with a larger more demanding party which would incense your own ambitious and consequently fractious party when one could quite simply throw out a line to either the Green Party or Sinn Féin, or God knows both? And whatever about 2007, in 2012 Sinn Féin will be a fully compatible prospective partner for coalition building. Perhaps a more difficult sell for Fine Gael, but who knows what four more years of opposition will do to beat down their appetite for confrontation on that issue. And if the Labour Party continues to deal with Sinn Féin what then is the excuse or rationale for Fine Gael not doing so? Is the Labour Party an only slightly constitutional party?

Now this is an argument for potential Fianna Fáil hegemony. Isn’t it? Because it sits in a position where it can pick and choose from numerous prospective partners. Granted, events can and no doubt will intervene, but as things stand at the moment, and in particular as a more technocratic FF leadership assumes control, why should it be substantially otherwise?

As the Irish Left Review argues, it’s long past time that the left worked together to maximise the left, rather than perpetually being the meat, or more accurately the dash of mustard, in the sandwich.

Am I arguing that Labour should lose seats so as to gain power? I’m certainly not. But I am suggesting that the future for that party looks more complex than it did even half a year ago. They may well have cause to wonder if Mullingar was simply the wrong Accord at a time when Ahern clearly was moving towards the end of his shelf life and whether a greater push to government might have assisted their electoral credibility in the long term (consider too that while Ahern is leaving under a cloud it’s rather less dark than that which accompanied Haughey, as even the Irish Times in its editorial about Ahern’s departure noted, and soon enough he’ll be memory - one wonders was that implication thought through in any detail back in 2005-7?). But more importantly in a political ecology where there is no more half, or where being a half may well lead to prospective partners shying away from one then it really is time to construct new alliances and formations. I’d love to think that the recent moves towards an engagement with Sinn Féin mark that, but I suspect it’s only part of the answer, and far from all of it. The only answer, the only serious answer, is for Labour to increase seats, to push back towards the high 20s and early 30s and to simultaneously engage with both SF and the Green party. Which in essence means forgetting about the ‘half’, and the deluding comforts of same. So, the same message really which Michael articulated. That it’s difficult is beyond question, but necessary. Very necessary.

Acknowledgements

Photo of the three chancers from The Chancer.