Big boys will still call the shots

It hardly makes a single bit of difference to what will happen in this country over the next five years whether the Green Party goes into government with Fianna Fáil or not. A Fianna Fáil-Green government might be marginally more environmentally-friendly than a Fianna Fáil-PD government. It might be marginally more progressive.

But there will be no essential difference to power relations. No change in the reality that the big boys will still call the shots. That the under-class will remain the under-class. That the criminal justice system will be mean, vindictive and punitive. That minorities will be victimised.

Governments don't change these realities, irrespective of the composition of governments. Unless . . .

Unless a mandate for change is won from the electorate. Won from the change in the mindsets of the electorate, an electorate persuaded of the imperative of social justice, the demands of equality, of fairness in the world, of just relations between peoples.

Many years ago as a student, and briefly afterwards, I was a member of Fine Gael. I believed then that the likes of Declan Costello and, later, Garret FitzGerald, could hijack Fine Gael, form a left-wing alliance with Labour and, in power, implement socially-just radical policies.

It was a naive belief. Naive not just because Fine Gael was not for hijacking. Not because Costello and Garret were not sincere. But because that is not how politics works, and it is good that politics does not work that way.

Politics is about persuading people to a viewpoint. Politics by subterfuge works briefly, if at all, and then collapses.

The Greens will find out this when they get into office. And that is the way it should be.

There was no mandate for a "green" agenda in this election, certainly not an agenda that is radically different from what Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael stand for. Between them these two parties won nearly 70 per cent of the first-preference vote.

The vast majority of the people don't want radical environmental initiatives, don't want a significant reordering of power, wealth and social relations, don't want to disturb our subservience to America in foreign policy.

They want, essentially, more of the same, with some improvements in public services, provided these improvements do not result in higher taxes.

The idea that a party that commands the support of less than 5 per cent of the popular vote could, or should, hijack government to bend the agenda towards even the mild schema of the Green Party is illusory.

The lure of office is powerful, a lure reinforced by a political culture that regards politics as "all about" what they call "power". What's the point of politics if one cannot implement one's policies and you can implement one's policies only in office, it is argued.

But you can't implement your policies if the vast majority of the people don't want those policies, haven't been persuaded of the need for such policies. It cannot be done particularly in coalition with a much larger party that is far more in tune with the will and mood of the electorate than you are. That's the way it is. There are still a few around who remember the high hopes of a radical shift in politics when Fine Gael and Labour came to office in March 1973. This was a government of all the talents: Garret FitzGerald, Declan Costello, Richie Ryan, Peter Barry, Brendan Corish, Justin Keating, Conor Cruise O'Brien, Patrick Cooney. It turned out to be one of the worst governments we ever had. Repressive, regressive.

There was a resolve amid the electorate in the election of June 1977 to get rid of that crowd, a resolve that was palpable, although, incidentally, the establishment political commentators all failed to notice. But there were two incidents - no more than that - in the life of that government that were telling.

The famous Kenny report on the appropriation of land for development was published, and it recommended that the State could acquire such land at only a margin above the agricultural value of the land. Leave aside for a moment the issue of whether that would have been found by the Supreme Court at the time to be constitutional, just focus on what happened in the cabinet when the report was published.

It was mentioned. The minister for finance, Richie Ryan, said "I am against". The taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave, said "I agree". And that was that.

Nobody said: "Hang on a minute." Nobody wanted to argue the issue. Not Garret, not anybody in the Labour Party. Nobody.

Some years later, Garret was agitated over reports he had received from senior gardaí about the behaviour of a "heavy gang" in the Garda Síochána - first reported on by The Irish Times. Garret wanted to make an issue of it but got no support from anybody. He told colleagues he was going to resign but was persuaded not to by Labour ministers.

There was no "constituency" for the appropriation of private property, no constituency for taking on the Garda.

That's the way with governments, and a pity the Greens don't realise that.