Fine Gael must make way for a new party that has no Civil War baggage
Tools
By John Crown
Sunday June 10 2007
WHEN the Free State soldiers tied their erstwhile Republican colleagues to a landmine at Ballyseedy, in one of the worst atrocities of the Irish Civil War, little did they realise that their action would affect the health care that their descendants would receive 85 years later.
While treaty ports, oaths of allegiance and border commissions are no longer the mainstay of political pub talk, there is no doubt that the shadow of the Civil War still looms over and perverts our democracy.
All societies are made up of diverse people with differing, and often competitive opinions and ambitions. Democracy is supposed to provide a mechanism to allow these potentially conflicting aspirations to be resolved amicably, and to give us representatives that reflect ourselves.
It is a mirror for society, but also provides the best mechanism for tempering the excesses of its citizens. It is imperfect, but all of the alternatives are gruesome.
We have a broad national consensus about most of the big issues. Most of us grumble about taxes, but understand the need for public services, and a degree of wealth redistribution. Similarly, most would sort of like a united Ireland, but only if they want to unite with us. Approximately 70 per cent of the electorate just voted for parties with virtually identical centrist ideas, and another 10 per cent for a party slightly left of centre.
The only important area where there was a major policy difference between the two main parties was in health, and even here the difference had less to do with ideology than with coalition strategies.
Fianna Fail bought into the Progressive Democrat co-location plan, and Fine Gael adopted Labour's innovative universal insurance scheme. The two big parties, which sometimes resemble skiers slaloming past each other to the right and left, could just as easily have adopted the policy of the other.
Why then were Sinn Fein and the Progressive Democrats, small unrepresentative parties of the right and left, being talked about as power brokers? Is it because we are a fractious, politically divided people? No, our politics are tame. Other nations have car-bombed polling stations, impersonation of the dead, political riots, million-strong eve-of-election rallies in the Revolutionary Square.
We had the tangle in the triangle between Michael McDowell and John Gormley.
Why did so many people vote the way they did? The notion that people voted for economic stability at a time of plenty is undoubtedly partially true, but only partially.
The last Fine Gael-led rainbow was unceremoniously dumped from office by the electorate at a time of plenty and of economic optimism.
Much of the discourse has centred on the core vote phenomenon, presumably congenitally determined along Civil War lines, which each of the major parties can tap into, and which thwarts attempts at political change. Thus Enda Kenny, who led his party to a near-record increase in seat numbers in an election where the Government lost many seats, still finds himself running a minority party, which by common agreement can never achieve government except through coalition.
Of course, if Fine Gael were selecting a coalition partner on the grounds of policy compatibility alone, it would be Fianna Fail.
Less commentary has focused on the core anti-vote. Some people will never ever vote for Fianna Fail. Others will never ever vote for Fine Gael. The latter are more numerous, and the result is that the odds are always stacked against Fine Gael, and give Fianna Fail a near permanent grip on power.
Even though
FG (like
FF) is a centrist party whose policies reflect a centrist electorate, it can only get into power by forging coalitions with parties of different ideologies. Why? Simply put, there is an artificial glass ceiling to its potential vote.
The founders of the Progressive Democrats attempted to break the mould of
'If
FG were selecting a coalition partner on the grounds of compatibility alone, it would be Fianna Fail'
Irish politics, but their efforts were thwarted by the continued survival of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.
In truth, there is only one way to break this mould, and that is for one or both of the Civil War parties to disband.
Fianna Fail won't do this. They are guaranteed to be in power more than half of the time. Fine Gael is different.
FG politicians who are ambitious for themselves, and concerned for the future of democracy in their country, should consider disbanding the party and establishing a new one, a party which would have none of the Civil War baggage that prevents traditional but disenchanted Fianna Failers from joining it.
Some centrist-minded PDs, Greens and Labour folk might join too.
I am reminded of the words of Bill Clinton, uttered also in the aftermath of another inconclusive election, the 2000 US presidential contest.
In his post-election address, Bill stated that "the people have spoken, we just don't know what they have said". While the leaders of our two main parties are each sort of justified in claiming that they have some sort of mandate to form a government, we find ourselves two weeks later still not knowing exactly what our people said. Given the current party structure, will we ever?
John Crown is a consultant oncologist
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Edo
