If the result of the next general election turns out anything like what the recent polls say are current voting intentions, then the outcome of the next general election in terms of government formation will not be immediately apparent. In this respect Ireland is becoming more like the continental democracies of Europe, with their multi-party systems and often protracted post election negotiations. So if the Lansdowne poll in the Examiner and the TNS/MRBI poll in the Irish Times are any way near the mark, all attention will inevitably turn towards the Labour Party as the key swing party that could decide the composition of the next government. Or it could turn out that Fianna Fáil and the Greens could make up the numbers.
Most pundits will confidently predict that Labour will go into government with Fianna Fáil if that is what is required for a stable coalition, on the assumption that party leaders will always seek office, rather than policy, as their primary goal. That has always been the case in Ireland in the past and election results were almost always clear cut. We now have a much more fragmented party system with the presence of more ideologically motivated parties and this has been grafted on to a basically majoritarian political culture, albeit one that uses a form of proportional representation.
A defining characteristic of Irish politics is the Westminster winner-take-all system which can be reduced down to either holding office and thus having power or being in opposition and having none. It's a different situation in federal systems or in countries where the committees of the national legislatures can function in a way that contributes to policy formation and therefore permits parties not part of the governing majority to play a role. In Ireland power is seen as a zero-sum game and this amplifies the importance of holding office.
In other countries a more strategic approach is taken towards how to balance the goals of holding office, promoting a policy agenda and pursuing votes at the next election. As everybody knows, last Sunday's election in Germany yielded an inconclusive result, although you would bet on a grand coalition of the CDU/CSU and the SPD. It's interesting to observe the deliberations and maneuvering of the the smaller liberal FDP. That party did well at the election and one possible option is a three party coalition of the SPD. Greens and FDP which could form a majority. But the FDP have declared that they're not interested and cite policy incompatibility, especially with the Greens. If a similar situation occurred here, pundits would claim that this was mere posturing for the benefit of the rank-and-file and that a deal would eventually be hammered out by the party leaders. After all, the party membership does have an effective veto on coalition and Labour, for example would have to have any coalition deal ratified by a special party conference.
The leadership of the FDP is in a position to look at things rather differently. They might indeed be tempted by the prospect of office as they have been out of government at federal level since 1998. However they would probably have to concede too much ground on policy for their liking. The party could also decide to defer holding office on the grounds that if a grand coalition was formed they would probably reap a huge vote dividend at the following election as disillusioned CDU voters would probably defect to them in large numbers. The point is that the party is in a position to think strategically, and balance the sometimes conflicting goals of office, policy and votes - For a comparative analysis of this dynamic see here.
The strategic trade-offs made by political parties in Europe might become more common in Ireland. Despite the fact that many electors are inclined to perceive the purpose of their votes is to elect a government, the lack of correspondence between voting intention and government formation may induce a change in the political culture. Also, for some of the parties, it may be more difficult for the party leadership to convince their members, who generally have a more adversarial stance towards other parties than their leaders, of the immediate benefits of holding office and sacrificing some important policies and possible future votes. Even when reasonable programmes of government are put together, rank-and-file members are often sceptical about the likelihood of their favoured policies ever being implemented.
Comments