Labour has taken quite a hit in the recent opinion polls. When Pat Rabbitte was elected leader I was pleased that the party would be led by someone who was capable of devising the kind of political strategy that might take the party beyond the limits of traditional labourism. While the party quickly dispensed with the sitting on the fence strategy of the previous leadership, there was no bold follow up in terms of recasting the party's identity and political strategy. Everything has been sacrificed to the strategy of aligning with Fine Gael. Rabbitte genuinely believes that removing Fianna Fail for a couple of terms is for the good of the body politic. It's hard to disagree with that, given the entrenched cronyism and soft corruption associated with the ruling party.
There are few who would argue the case for staying out of government until the left wins a majority - the position held be many Labour left wingers in the 1970s and 1980s. The dynamics of our winner-take-all Westminster system inevitably makes political leaders choose office holding over policy and votes. So, given that Irish political leaders will never refuse office when the opportunity is presented, how do we reconcile the imperatives of office holding with the pursuit of political and ideological goals which is what drove us into politics in the first place? There is no contradiction here in principle but, in practise, the parties of the left have never emerged strengthened after serving in government as the junior partner in a coalition inevitably dominated by a much larger party of the centre-right.
Let us suppose that the current polling boost for the governing coalition proves to be temporary and that the fortunes of the Rainbow are restored (the next Red C monthly tracking poll should be interesting). The question is can Labour emerge from another spell in government without the damage and demoralisation that usually ensues? Again, there's no reason in principle why not but I'm sceptical and not very optimistic. This is partly to do with the likely numbers; Labour will do well to hold its current total of seats in the Dail seats or add a couple at best. The big winners are likely to be Fine Gael and, possibly, the Greens. Maybe one or two leftie independents will be required as well. So Labour will not have much extra traction in the post election negotiations over policy programmes and who occupies what cabinet post. Still, with a little luck, the party may find itself back in government and with some highly capable individuals appointed to ministerial office, they might make a decent fist of it.
There's still every chance for a competent, clean and moderately reforming alternative government taking office after the next election. But a real opportunity for Labour has been lost. Rabbitte's leadership could have started a process of political and ideological renewal that would have been based on a conviction-driven determination to strengthen the party's position vis-a-vis Fine Gael. This never happened and many people in and around the Labour Party are baffled as to why. I put it down to an ageing and tired generation of political leaders who have the sense that this is their last chance to achieve anything in politics and have chosen the least risky means of doing so. The theme of a "strong society and a weak economy" makes sense if you're trying to minimise differences with your future coalition partner but it abdicates responsibility for developing a critical view of the Irish economy that should be at the core of the party's message.
Instead we have the reassuring promises that taxes won't go up under Labour. It would appear that the party has decided to attract the floating middle strata who might have voted FF last time. Focus groups delivered the message that there was nervousness about Labour's ability to maintain current economic prosperity. This sort of approach may appeal to a risk-averse leadership but I'm convinced that a more honest and critical approach would appeal to many. The trouble with Rabbitte is that he's only half right on some some of the key questions; he's right to want to remove FF from office but wrong in his approach. The Mullingar Accord provides clarity of choice for the electorate but weakens Labour's identity and distinctiveness. He's right about the weak society but wrong about the strong economy. The old Workers' Party, for all it myriad faults, argued that the economy was central to the concerns of a left party. Yes it produced some policies that were barmy but at least the focus was in the right place.
Comments