Thoughts on a Progressive Coaltion
The bookies and pundits are putting Fine Gael and Labour together as the new government. Fair enough, the figures add up.
But, would Labour really be using their political strength to make the required difference. The prospect of partnership must be seductive to the Labour leadership. In previous coalitions they did manage to introduce some good policy. Justin Keating was a good Minister, as was Michael D Higgins.
But we are in extraordinary times. The economic model favoured by successive governments has been shown to be inherently flawed. There can be no argument against the evidence that the gap between rich and poor in Ireland is huge. There had been a consensus in the so-called centre ground that in fact was way to the right of centre.
There is an opportunity for people who came into politics to fight inequality and make the world a fairer place to take a lead in shifting the political paradigm.
For the record and as a matter of interest, I am providing extracts here from a contribution that I made to a debate within Sinn Féin about the merits or otherwise of a coalition with Fianna Fail. As it transpired, the matter didn’t arise, but the arguments still resonate today - just swap party names around a bit and remove some of the time-specific references.
There is the added factor of the banking collapse and the failure of deregulation to consider now and this makes the need for leadership from progressive parties and individuals all the more pressing.
What is political strength? (June 2005)
The recent debate on Coalition options that have manifested in the pages of An Phoblacht have focused on the working out of potential electoral strength and its possible impact on our struggle.
This is an intelligent debate conducted from a left perspective and is therefore particularly welcome. However, I would be worried that the debate has created the premature expectation that we may be in a position where such an option is likely in the short term. By that, I don’t mean that numbers won’t necessarily stack up or that we won’t be asked. It is that I don’t believe that we are ready to be a prominent voice in any possible coalition yet. The nature of the debate so far also gives undue credence, in my opinion, to the notion that electoral strength equates to political strength.
Therefore, the daunting, but necessary task we should set ourselves is to go above, around and under the entrenched and mostly hostile establishment, forge alliances and begin the process of winning hearts and minds towards progressive and revolutionary ideas.
Jim McVeigh, in his recent article, is right to point out that we need to dialogue with the grass roots of the left. For let’s not make any bones about it, it must be the left that we work with. This will entail a process of engagement and yes, it will take time, possibly years, to break down prejudice and circumvent the vested interest of the trade union/Labour Party leaderships.
There is an understandable fear that arguments that break consensus are open to ridicule by the establishment parties and their friends in significant sections of the national media. But it is clear to me that the small number of vociferous political luminaries and their media fellow travellers overestimate their influence on the greater number of people. However much these people try to present a Joe Higgins, George Galloway, Tony Benn or Gerry Adams as marginalised lone voices, there is public empathy and understanding of the anti-establishment positions taken. Many people are actually crying out for public investment at a greater level and greater commitment to plan for social inclusion. In other words, socialism (though that is not the terminology that is finding currency out there, but sin scéal eile). The fact remains many people are up for it.
The translation of this understanding into electoral support presents a challenge and we should, of course, continue to develop the party in this respect, but this, like so much of what we need to do, may take some time. Better that it does take more time than risk losing sight of idealism or principle.
Making a short-term tactical decision to coalesce with Fianna Fail, for example, would be seen by the Irish people as unprincipled and as support for the status quo, whichever way we try to suggest otherwise. Any such move at this stage would entail some acceptance of a system that is inherently failing the people. There is no room for growth there. It’s a crowded field.
There is no political leadership on this island that currently measures up in terms of the absolute need to baulk the system and say what needs to be said about the erosion of the quality of life of the citizens of Ireland/Europe/the World and who are willing to break with the neo-liberal model. Some people argue that dealing in this paradigm is accepting Realpolitik. But if there is something rotten with that political reality, should we lend it credence or work for real change?
There is no way that neo-liberalism will or can deliver on equality. Michael McDowell summed it up succinctly when he stated that inequality was a good thing. Capitalism collapses without inequality.
As a measure of how far back basic advances are undermined by the right, look how the most rudimentary tenets of social democracy are under attack. The recent voting down of the EU Constitution by the French people has been almost universally reported by commentators and political parties here as a peculiar anomaly, where people defiantly and stupidly stood up for a 35-hour week and some understanding of society, rather than economy, as if this is some form of ancient madness.
Strong opposition by a party with a profile like ours to the neo-liberal consensus, which would certainly entail staying away from government with active proponents of it, could offer a significant platform for real opposition. There is a strong sense of the social out there and an understanding that this untrammeled capitalist project is negatively impacting on the quality of life of many and is positively condemning others to perpetual misery. We need to work on how to connect with all of that. The public airing of honest and decent political ideas in that context would have a significant impact.
There has never been a more important time to present a radical alternative vision for the world. Much of the gains made for working people during the 20th Century and taken for granted by our generation are under attack by the Thatcherite policies championed by most political parties under the cover of what passes for the political norm or what is presented as the need to practice ‘realpolitik’. There is a need for real leadership here. …
Discussion
We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.
Comment by: William Wall
Jan 3rd 2011 at 16:01
But what if the Left figures don;t add up? If a LAB+SF+SP+PBP etc coalition doesn;t add up to a majority? That’s the real problem.
Comment by: LeftAtTheCross
Jan 4th 2011 at 12:01
Interesting piece. It would be interesting to see some of the internal Green Party debate on this subject prior to the last general election. What was that saying, political parties often “wrestle with their conscience, and win”.
The inevitability of winning that debate hinges obviously on the balance of power in any party between the grassroots membership and the professional/careerist elected representative group and their backroom advisers and strategists. In that context it still seems only a remote possibility that the LP leadership would chose the radical option of aligning with SF and the ULA. Not that the ULA are open to engaging with the LP either.
SF is more interesting in that sense as their door is open. My suspicion is that the debate within SF may not be as intense given the prospect of coalition with the LP, compared to the previous possibility of getting into bed with FF. The LP offer an easy option for the left-nationalist politics of SF, there will be enough motherhood and apple pie on the table to avoid difficult decisions and ideological compromises. Whereas coalition with FF would open the possibly divisive debate on the primacy of nationalist politics over economics at the heart of the party. At what price all-island rule via the two local assemblies?
Comment by: John Meehan
Jan 4th 2011 at 15:01
Listen here to an in-depth interview with Labour Leader Eamonn Gilmore on coalition options after the next general election - he rules out coalition with either Fianna Fáil or Sinn Féin, and rules in coalition with Fine Gael - suggesting, contrary to recent opinion poll evidence, that Labour could poll better than the party led by Enda Kenny - the only positive spot is a clear commitment to legislation on the Supreme Court X Case to partially legalise abortion following the recent European Court of Human Rights Judgment. Once again, Labour chooses the kamikaze option of coalition with the right - Gilmore’s party heads for the same black hole currently inhabited by the Green Party.
http://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_newsatone.xml