In five years the new Government can resolve our crisis; in 10, it can build a fairer society
WEDNESDAY WAS an impressive day in the Dáil, and I greatly enjoyed the hours I spent there, greeting old friends and meeting new TDs of all parties. I thought Enda Kenny was most impressive – both in the warmth and genuine feeling he conveyed in his two speeches, and also in his brisk handling of his exchanges with Micheál Martin. While everyone will have his or her own view on the portfolio allocation, in conjunction with Eamon Gilmore he has put together an impressive Cabinet, blending experience with youth, in the form of Simon Coveney and Leo Varadkar.
The outgoing government fell because of a national crisis of its own making. But even if it hadn’t dug its own grave, as a third-term government it would anyway have faced problems. It is nowadays very difficult for governments to remain effective for more than two terms, simply because the physical and psychological strains of public office are so great.
This is especially the case with our electoral system, because of the triple burden that it imposes on ministers. For, in addition to their heavy duties as members of a cabinet, Irish ministers, unlike those of some other European democracies, must also attend parliament throughout much of their working week. And, on top of this, they are unique in having also to undertake a considerable volume of constituency work so as to protect themselves from losing their seats.
This is because they could lose their seats not just to candidates of opposition parties, as in many countries, but more particularly to colleagues of their own party in their multi-seat constituency. In the last half-century two-thirds of the seats lost by Fianna Fáil were lost to fellow-members of the party.
Given this triple strain on ministers, which does not seem to have any equivalent in other democracies, even a single term of office in an Irish government can be very draining for those involved and two full terms is as much as most human beings can sustain effectively.
This has been especially the case in recent years because between 1997 and 2007 two successive governments have chosen to remain in office for the full constitutional period of five years. This has introduced a new and onerous element into our political system, for in our 27 parliaments prior to 1997 only one government remained in office for its full five-year term, and only two others lasted for more than four and a quarter years.
This phenomenon of five-year terms looks like enduring for at least one more parliament – for, in order to restore our economy to reasonable health, this Dáil will need to run for its full five years.
Given the scale of the proposed changes in our whole system of government (some of them requiring constitutional amendments), the case for a second term of office by this government is also strong. Leaving aside the fact that Fianna Fáil may need more than the next five years to recover both its capacity to play a part in government and its acceptability in that role, this Government may achieve significant economic growth and largely resolve our financial crisis within the next five years. In that event a second term in office might be desirable for another reason.
It would then be necessary to restore elements of social equity that will have been damaged by the current absolute imperative to balance our budget, for in this crisis some socially regressive measures have unhappily been unavoidable. Accepting responsibility for such measures has been especially difficult for a social democratic party such as Labour. Its leaders and members deserve full credit for their willingness in this way to accept their share of responsibility.
Labour does not deserve the ungenerous comments from parties to the left of them and from some Independents, as well as from elements in the media, who most unfairly present that party’s willingness to participate in this new Government as being motivated solely by a desire for office, rather than by a sense of public responsibility.
This accusation of cynicism on the part of Labour seems to me to be much more applicable to Sinn Féin and to some of the left-wing Independents who, standing on a grossly irresponsible “debt default” platform, have repeatedly failed to respond to the simple question: “If, as you propose, we default on part of our debt, who then would lend us the money required to continue to pay public servants and to finance social welfare?”
If our economy starts to emerge from this crisis within a five-year time-scale, Labour will understandably wish to use the following quinquennium (the years 2016-2021) to restore as much as possible of our damaged social fabric. The two parties now in government together will then face a choice between, on the one hand, fostering the emergence of an ideological right-left divide in our political system – a societal division devoutly (but in my view unwisely) championed by some commentators – or on the other hand re-engaging together in a further round of partnership; turning their attention from economic stabilisation to rebuilding a just society.
That was, of course, the objective that inspired Fine Gael from the mid-1960s onwards, and in five years’ time it will be primarily for the members of that party to choose which path our political system will follow. That choice will be between engaging our political system in serious ideological conflict for the first time in our history, or remaining together to rebuild a successful economy and also a much more fair and just society.