Tomás Ó Flatharta

Looking at Things from the Left

Archive for the ‘Financial Crisis (September 2008 onwards)’ Category

Gregor Kerr: an enlightening Facebook discussion on Lansdowne Road

leave a comment »

4th November
Gregor Kerr post:
LRA is now officially in tatters. All trade union leaders should recognise that fact, full pay equalisation and restoration for all should be demanded NOW
Comments and debate:
Michael O’Reilly All well and good, personally I’d prefer to see the country stop borrowing for daily expenditure and a proper health service. It’s nonsense for unions to expect z return to Celtic tiger.
Gregor Kerr Maybe we should stop borrowing to pay off the debts of international financial gamblers and speculators – which thanks to decisions made by politicians and facilitated by a compliant trade union movement we will be doing for many many years
Michael O’Reilly Certainly I agree we should have burned them all, but that’s a separate issue!!
Michael O’Reilly You think you can win INTO election??

Gregor Kerr Burning or not burning the bondholders, tackling or not tackling the evasion and avoidance tax by corporations and Vulture Funds, controlling or not controlling the percentage of economy being sucked up by profits – – – these are not things that can be treated as separate issues.
Gregor Kerr In relation to the election, the objective of taking part is to encourage participation, to empower members to become more involved, to develop the thinking behind We Are The Union and to initiate a real discussion about how members are facilitated in or prevented from using the union structures to organise and campaign on the issues that affect them.
Can I win? Absolutely. Getting a very good response from branches and members that I have been engaging with. And that discussion about how members relate to the union and vice versa is certainly taking place.
As I see it, policies pursued by the current leadership have brought us to where we are. I think a change is needed and hopefully enough members will agree with me, vote for me but also step up their own involvement.
Glen Brennan Celtic Tiger?? LOL had no effect on my living… I have same house, same car. Could never afford second properties and will never. ASTI are not looking for increases but pay for work carried out and equalisation.
Larry Molloy  Exactly. If the government actually were free market capitalists the housing bubble wouldnt have happened. The government ,the bondholders, the high street banks (owned by the bondholders ) colluded to enslave the citizens of this state in a criminal ponzi scheme. The amalgamation of state and corporate power is called fascism. The only solution is citizen initiated referenda.

Laura Seoighe As a teacher who started during the Celtic Tiger, Michael could you explain to me what the teachers gained during the Celtic Tiger compared to what they were getting pre Celtic Tiger please?

Michael O’Reilly About trice the salary that we had prior to it!

Michael O’Reilly Sorry, that should have said twice! If you don’t believe me check the public records…..or even a few into annual diaries!!!

Mairéad De Búrca I didn’t get twice my salary but my current salary is lower than about the year 2,000. Benchmarking that gave 1% here and 0.5% there has been well wiped out.

Michael O’Reilly salary levels…. These were unrealistic always and further you are intelligent enough to realise that increasing salaries all round simply leads to inflation!

Gregor Kerr Perhaps if they introduced rent controls, built public housing, did something to control the price of car insurance, made access to health services available, controlled the spiralling cost of third level (indeed all levels of) education…. Perhaps if all this was done then the necessity to increases wages/salaries would not be so great.
Another reason why we need a trade union movement that has a bigger vision of how society should be run.

 Michael O’Reilly Can’t disagree with those but realistically “they” won’t do them so I think the point I made stands?

Michael O’Reilly Anyway I shouldn’t be wasting your holiday time. Hope you’re having a good break.
Keith Burke Michael, so you think we should continue to “take one for the good of everyone”? Fine Gael are happy to let the rich get rich again and the poor return to being poor. They would be happy to pay teachers nothing if they could get away with it. They certainly will never put pay parity in place if they aren’t forced to.
Des Derwin They won’t curb their prices (leading to inflation), but we must (in case it leads to inflation!) 🙂

Written by tomasoflatharta

November 5, 2016 at 3:16 pm

Gregor Kerr: Lansdowne Road effectively torn up.

leave a comment »

27th October rally a missed opportunity Threat of Garda dispute won huge gains Strategy to achieve Pay Equalisation urgently needed

I wrote this article in the immediate aftermath of the INTO/TUI Pay Equalisation Rally.  Since then the gains won by the threat of strike action by gardaí have effectively torn up the Lansdowne Road Agreement.  The formulation of a strategy for gaining full Pay Equalisation and Restoration has just got more urgent.

Approximately 1,500 teachers – mostly members of INTO with a small number of TUI members – attended the Pay Equalisation rally outside the Dáil on 27th October.  It was great to see such support for LPTs, but how many people left that Rally feeling energised, empowered and with a feeling that our unions are ready for the next stage of the battle for Pay Equalisation??

The answer is very few indeed.  In fact most people left with the feeling that in holding the rally the union leadership were mainly just going through the motions, holding a rally so that they could say they held one, and treating the members of the union as extras to turn up, wave flags for half an hour and go home again,

Where were the plans for what is going to happen next?  Where was the outline of the next phase of the campaign?  Where was the ‘ask’ of union members – the tasks they should have been asked to do to step up the fight?  Other than asking attendees to turn towards the Dáil and chant a slogan or two, what did our union leadership ask us to do in the coming weeks and months??……

Dual Purpose

A rally such as that held outside the Dáil has a dual purpose.  By bringing large numbers of people together we demonstrate to the government that we are capable of mobilising large numbers against them and in support of our demands.  We give them the message that they will have to meet our demands or we are capable of stepping up our protests.  But also – and just as importantly – its purpose is to Educate, Agitate and Organise.  People should go home from it more informed, more ‘agitated’ (ie with more motivation/ fire in their belly) and more organised (ie with a plan as to how each of them will contribute to the campaign over the next few weeks and months).

On both of these fronts – warning the government and motivating the membership – the Rally failed miserably.  In relation to the first of these, the failure to even acknowledge the fact that our ASTI colleagues had just spent the day on the picketlines in pursuit of the same goal of Pay Equalisation was shocking.  We don’t have to agree with the ASTI tactics or strategy (which I do!) to realise that basic trade union solidarity should have ensured that we acknowledged their stance and gave them a shout-out of support!

Failure to acknowledge ASTI, however, demonstrated an even more fundamental flaw in our strategy.  Does anyone seriously believe that the progress (limited as it is) that has been made by INTO and TUI on the pay equalisation issue would have been achieved if ASTI was also inside the confines of the Lansdowne Road Agreement?  Without doubt the talks that have thus far taken place on pay equalisation had as one of their prime motivations attempts to isolate ASTI and force ASTI members into LRA…..

Rushed ballot

INTO members, by contrast to ASTI, were first to sign up to LRA following a rushed ballot in June 2015 – a ballot in which, in common with many recent ballots in INTO, information presented was one-sided and not always correct (For example, ‘gains’ presented for LPTs included gains already available in HRA).  There was huge pressure placed on members to vote Yes, with a barrage of leaflets, texts and emails coming from head office.

By remaining outside LRA and by being willing to take action for immediate Full Pay Equalisation, ASTI have done us a huge favour.  If all 3 unions were inside LRA, why would the government be making any concessions?  On the other hand, of course, if we were all outside it and were all taking the brave stance of ASTI wouldn’t the government have to concede even more??  So at the very least at the 27th October Rally we should have acknowledged the contribution of ASTI and should have warned the government that unless they want to see us leave the LRA and join with our colleagues on the picketlines an immediate timeline for full pay equalisation and restoration must be given.

Instead, a government member looking at our rally would have drawn the conclusion that we posed no threat.  And a union that poses no threat will receive very little in negotiations…

Educate, Agitate, Organise

This leads me to the second point.  The other reason for holding a Rally is to Educate, Agitate and Organise the membership.  If you see the union members as a group of people who have a contribution to make to building a campaign that is… But more and more it seems that our union leaders see the members as consumers, as people who should be looking to ‘the union’ to deliver a service.  They see us as people who can be called on to send emails to government before the budget, to turn up and wave flags at the odd rally…  They are content enough with a relatively passive membership who they can ‘represent’.

My vision of trade unionism, however, is one in which the members are the union, and the role of the leadership should be to motivate and organise us, to facilitate us in using the union structures to campaign on issues that affect us.  In relation to Pay Equalisation, and in particular in relation to the Rally, the very least that should have happened is that people who were there should have been encouraged to go home from it seeing themselves as Organisers of the next phase of the campaign – in their own schools and staffrooms, in their own branches and districts.

1,500 people at the Rally was impressive enough but we have a membership in the greater Dublin and Leinster area of over 14,000 (plus students) so there were clearly a lot of members not there.  We should have been asking everyone going away from the rally to see themselves as key organisers and motivators of fellow staff members, to talk about the issue in staffrooms, to engage in debate at their local branches……

Debate and Strategy

Because we do need a debate about how Pay Equalisation is going to be achieved, and a strategy to achieve it.  The union leadership are content enough with slow incremental progress, with moving towards Equalisation.  But they do not have any strategy for where we go next.  Others argue that given the changed circumstances, and in particular given the stance of the ASTI, we should be holding a ballot on whether to withdraw from LRA.

In a leaflet distributed at the Rally, I called for

  • “ Pay restoration promised in LRA should be brought forward and paid immediately
  • INTO should demand immediate talks with government for a new deal to replace the LRA with a deal that gives:

– full pay equalisation

– full pay restoration

– the payment of money owed to us such as the Principals’ benchmarking award

– return to the ONE 2010 pay scale

– back pay owed to post 2012 graduates due to their qualification allowance cuts”

I outlined what I thought union members should do –

“To achieve those demands we each need to

  • Contact CEC reps and the union leadership with this demand
  • Contact our branch secretaries and ask that this demand be discussed at the next branch committee meeting and be forwarded to CEC and head office
  • Start now to build momentum behind this demand for January AGMs and towards Congress 2017
  • Use social media and other fora to make the case for these demands”

And I pointed out that “In both of the last paydeals the government looked for early talks because they wanted to impose more cuts.  We don’t need to wait for end of LRA to demand talks.”

Options

So there are 3 options

Continue with the CEC strategy (although what plans they have to move things along are rather vague)

Look for a ballot to withdraw from LRA

Demand that pay restoration elements in LRA are fast-tracked and that new talks begin on a deal to replace it

What is clear is that a discussion on our strategy needs to happen immediately.   It should be led by the CEC and full-time officials, but it won’t be.  They went through the motions and held the rally, they’ve ticked the box and hope that the ticked box will be sufficient to keep us quiet for now.  So it is up to every one of us to initiate the discussion – In your staffroom ask your colleagues what they think.  If you’re on a branch committee raise it at the next meeting.  If you’re not, why not get your staff (or as many of them as will do so) to write to your branch secretary asking that the issue be discussed. Similarly write to your CEC rep and to the general secretary.

We, the members, have to take control of the discussion and of the campaign.  We have to assert that the INTO is our union and we have to use its structures to fight on our behalf and on behalf of our lesser paid colleagues.

Gregor Kerr

From ‘Gregor Kerr for INTO President’ blog

5th November 2016

Written by tomasoflatharta

November 5, 2016 at 2:55 pm

Gerry Adams: G8 will advertise County Fermanagh

leave a comment »

http://www.impartialreporter.com/news/g8-lough-erne/articles/2013/04/21/400658-adams-g8-will-advertise-county/

Lords and Ladies of Austerity from the G 8 – Obama of the USA; Cameron of Britain; Merkel of Germany; Lagarde of the International Monetary Fund; assorted other “Masters of the Universe”: all heading for the “dreary steeples” of Fermanagh in July 2013.  The local police have promised to have extra prison cells ready for protestors.  Politicians practice the ancient Irish art of “tugging the forelock” – Gerry Adams leads the way!

Future Left: ‘Beyond Capitalsm? The Future of Radical Politics’ reviewed by Phil Hearse

leave a comment »

Future Left

  • March 29, 2013 11:02 p

Phil Hearse reviews Beyond Capitalism? by Luke Cooper and Simon Hardy (Zero Books 2012).

This review of an important new book on the erupting question of the future of the left and of socialist organisation is from the website of the the British group Socialist Resistance: http://socialistresistance.org/5019/future-left#comment-48309

jhp509a2b36ddf1e

There could hardly be a more timely book for the socialist left, facing in most countries a dual crisis. On the one hand since 2008 the working class has faced a brutal austerity offensive which has not been thrown back. On the other, partially as a result of the austerity offensive and working class defeats, the socialist left has suffered a series of political defeats which have seen organisations in several countries decay, split or go into crisis. Closely connected with the far left crisis is the fate of the global justice, ‘anti-capitalist’, movement which announced itself spectacularly at the November 1999 anti-WTO demonstrations in Seattle.

When I heard about the Seattle demonstrations I rashly predicted “Now the American left is going to grow spectacularly”.  At a big London conference the next year a speaker from Global Exchange in the US said to huge enthusiasm from the audience “We’re winning”. In July 2001 the huge demonstrations at the Genoa G8 summit were politically dominated by Italian Communist Refoundation with a significant input from the Fourth International – Fausto Bertinotti and Olivier Besancenot were the key speakers at the main rally. The global justice movement was on the offensive and the militant left seemed to have a significant role in it.

Twelve years on the situation seems very different, despite the Occupy movement and despite the Arab Spring. Obviously the main objective factors that changed were the post-9/11 situation which enabled the huge new military-political offensive of American imperialism and its allies; and the financial collapse of 2008 and the utterly ruthless offensive against working class living standards that followed.

For Luke Cooper and Simon Hardy, two young militants of the Anti-Capitalist Initiative, the thing to be explained is this:

“The capitalist crisis poses profound questions about the future of left wing politics because of its sheer depth and severity…After all, in these conditions radical political ideas should be striking a major chord amongst millions of workers. If they are not we have to look hard at ourselves.” (1)

Part of the problem, obviously is the relative weakness of anti-capitalist ideas in most parts of the world:

“In most countries in the world not only is acceptance of capitalism fundamental to the assumptions of the major political parties, but a specific variant of neoliberal ideology has come to be seen as the exclusive road down which politics must travel.” (2)

Contemporary mass movement

This reflects itself in the weakness of anti-capitalist mass consciousness. But more than this, there seems like a perennial problem in the existing revolutionary left linking up with major movements of resistance and in particular with the young rebels who emerged in the global justice movement, going through the anti-war movement, the various Social Forums and into such contemporary mass movement as the Indignados and Occupy!

That doesn’t mean, they point out, that militant leftists don’t play leading roles in the movements and protests, indeed they do especially in labour movement based campaigns, but their leading roles are often quite separate from their identity as political militants. This problem seems particularly obvious during the anti-war movement of 2002-3, when in Britain the Socialist Workers Party led a coalition which mobilised two million on the streets but failed to grow at all. By contrast the Vietnam movement in the late 1960s, much smaller in numbers, saw every left organisation grow.

Luke and Simon explain that thy were themselves radicalised during the upsurge of the anti-capitalist movement, and the failure to effect a junction between the existing revolutionary left and the anti-capitalist movement is a theme to which they continually return. Their argument on this is quite nuanced but it is the pivot on which much of their basic position relies. Briefly summed up it goes like this:

  1. Resistance movements are themselves pressured by ‘capitalist realism’ and “still largely remain within the assumptions of liberal democratic ideology” (3).
  2. The way that this is expressed among many youthful protestors is a disastrous rejection of ‘politics’.
  3. BUT the strength of these movements has been their democratic and participatory ethos and practice, their rejection of rigid hierarchies and bureaucratic procedures and their capacity for rapid initiative from below – in other words the things that precisely differentiate them from much of the existing revolutionary left.
  4. By contrast, the existing revolutionary left is dogmatic, wedded to routinist, uninspiring and non-participatory events, and above all cleaves to a form of ‘democratic centralism’ that is top heavy and (at the very least) outdated.

They say:

“The positive side of the current political conjuncture is that it exposes the limitations in the political practices and philosophy of the organised left and the libertarian activist milieu simultaneously. A growing number of activists, who might be labeled ‘libertarians’ or ‘Trots’, depending which side of the divide you are on, are starting to question the limitations of their preferred form of organisation. If activists from the libertarian left are starting to see the social power of organised working class action is crucial to the resistance to austerity, then new organisational forms can also start to overcome other differences. For the ‘old left’ far less dogmatism in their organisational and ideological assumptions coupled with genuine attempts to build organic unity among socialists would go a long way to reach a situation where we no longer  ‘old and ‘new’ as dichotomies.” (4)

The authors then temper this with an insistence that this does not mean an attempt at eclectically muddling irreconcilable positions and quite rightly they take aim at people who dodge the question of government and political power with the pipe dream “that we can create a prefigurative space within capital that has a liberating function somehow outside the power relations of the system”(5).

Zinoviev’s legacy

Now we come to the $64,000 question, or rather series of $64,000 questions for the existing far left. Is it really true that the style, practices and hierarchies of the existing ‘Leninist’ organisations repel young rebels and indeed militants in the workers and other movements? Of course not all these organisations are the same, but in Britain the major far left organisations (the SWP and SP) have a hierarchical conception of Leninism that has been pressurised by Stalinism and is at least ‘Zinovievist’ – having features of the top-down version of Leninism imposed on the Comintern by Zinoviev in the early 1920s. The trade union movement and campaign organisations are littered with ex-members of the different  far left organisations whose basic politics hasn’t changed but whose ability to cope with this version of ‘the party’ has. Typically these organisations express extreme factional hostility to members of other organisations, have a highly manipulative attitude to the movements in which they participate, severely limit rights of internal discussion not minutely led from above, operate a more-or-less complete ban on public discussion of differences and have leaderships that preserve enormous privileges of private discussion and self-renewal by proposing themselves on the leadership slate.

In the Zinovievist sects there is a tremendous pressure towards conformity and obedience, and a huge price to be paid for dissidence, even on quite secondary questions. For Luke Cooper and Simon Hardy this cuts against the spirit of the times, which is towards greater personal freedom.

I think there’s a good deal of truth in that and young people naturally bristle against artificially imposed authority. On the other hand the zeitgeist of the times is not just the desire for individual freedom but a spirit of individualism promoted by neoliberalism. Rejection of all forms of collectivism, majority votes and disciplined action will disable any form of politics. And of course there are still plenty of radical intellectuals who don’t want to be beholden to anyone or anything, least of all a political organisation.

One other caveat here is that all the organisations that referred to the tradition of Trotsky and the Left Opposition cannot be tarred with the same brush. In particular there are many sections of the Fourth International (FI) who wouldn’t recognise this picture at all and the FI’s tradition is generally one of valuing differences and debate  – and often expressing these in public. But it has to be said that some of the more restrictive ‘norms’ of ersatz Leninism have their origin in the US Socialist Workers Party, a long-time key component of the Fourth International,  under James P. Cannon, codified in a document published in 1965 but stretching way back before that (6).

Rebels, socialists, revolutionaries are bound to make plenty of enemies. It is not to the discredit of the existing far left organisations that right-wingers hate them; on the other hand the snarling factionalism of the ‘combat party’ automatically creates disabling and usually  pointless disunity. ‘Everybody hates us, we don’t care!’ may suffice for Millwall football fans, but should not be a guiding principle for a revolutionary organisation.

Now what?

So what is to be done? The authors have a wide-ranging discussion of the experience of the left, particularly in Europe, in the last decade which ranges over the question of politics and the movements, as well as the experience of trying to form new left parties – experiences that have been extremely diverse. In making proposals for the future inevitably there are as many questions as precise answers. The framework however is perhaps contained in their assessment of the experience of the ‘Social Forum’ movement, perhaps the main institutional expression of the global justice movement:

“The post-1999 social movements have shown that potentially millions can be thrown into struggle and resistance to capitalism and for a fundamental social change. But for all the ideological impetus that drove many of these movements, they also paradoxically gave expression to the post-political logic that engulfed the world after 1989, because the social forums were consciously limited to the task of aggregating together diverse campaigns in a manner that retained their social movement as opposed to political movement character. It was not that the forums weren’t highly political – they were. These events bore witness to a vast outpouring of discussion on an array of themes. But they ultimately lacked a strategic perspective for social transformation; a strategy to move from protest to a real challenge for power. And it is the latter that would have necessitated a discussion around new political formations as part of a process of attempting to cohere together what Marxists have traditionally referred to as an ‘international – ie a global political party that seeks to overcome national antagonisms and move towards the transcendence of capital. ” (7)

In the section ‘Drawing Conclusions’ the authors note that the situation is becoming more conducive to overcoming ‘capitalist realism’ – the idea that there is no alternative. While expressing caution towards Paul Mason’s idea that “the age of capitalist realism is over” (8) they argue that the common idea of a decade ago that the market, democracy and modernity go together is taking a severe battering. Rampant corruption and declining living standards are going hand in hand swingeing attacks on democracy. How can the left take advantage of this situation? Simply summed up, Luke and Simon suggest:

  • The crisis of the left is still the crisis of the sect
  • This fuels a drive towards new political formations
  • New programmatic definitions will gradually over time through practice
  • A pluralistic Marxism is needed
  • The left needs to reclaim the idea of democracy
  • Electoral and trade activity needs to be linked with grassroots activity ‘from below’ and community struggles.

This of course is a huge agenda to be worked out in detail and practice. Of course it is impossible for anyone to suck the solutions to the problems of the left out of their thumbs. These will only emerge over time through struggle. But it is essential to know “where to begin”. The authors identify key problems with eloquence and go a long way to establishing a practical agenda for a refounded Marxist left. I will just stress two final points.

  1. The book is evidently weak on the issues of feminism and the environment but these will be vital in establishing the parameters of a future left.
  2. The whole argument  about unity points in the direction of the creation of a new anti-capitalist party  – and this has to be out front and upfront. There will be those who will want to interpret the critique of sect functioning as being a rejection of the party form tout court, in favour of the endless circular networking of campaigns and initiatives, with no overall political coherence or direction. A long term war of position that can go ‘beyond capitalism’ requires the building of a party that can strike the political blows to the left of Labour that UKIP does to the right of the Tories. Simultaneously it is inevitable that there will be a pressure towards the co-ordination in a more coherent and structured way of a refounded centre of pluralistic Marxism.

It is through these processes that we can build a Future Left in the true spirit of the founder of Marxism:

“Hence, nothing prevents us from making criticism of politics, participation in politics, and therefore real struggles, the starting point of our criticism, and from identifying our criticism with them. In that case we do not confront the world in a doctrinaire way with a new principle: Here is the truth, kneel down before it! We develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles. We do not say to the world: Cease your struggles, they are foolish; we will give you the true slogan of struggle. We merely show the world what it is really fighting for, and consciousness is something that it has to acquire, even if it does not want to.” (Marx to Ruge, September 1843).

Notes:

  1. Beyond Capitalism p2
  2. Beyond Capitalism p3
  3. Ibid  p11, see also p99ff
  4. Ibid p96
  5. Ibid p97
  6. See for example  James P. Cannon,  The History of American Trotskyism and The Struggle for  a Proletarian Party.
  7. Op Cit pp140-141
  8. Op Cit p153

Dail Rushes Property Tax on to Statute Book – PickPocket Law Ridiculed by Clare Daly TD

leave a comment »

Mr Gilmore’s Labour Party To Lose 27 of its 37 Seats?

leave a comment »

This analysis fits in very comfortably with the assessment published on this blog last Saturday February 9 following the publication of an Irish Times Opinion Poll.

A different related question which deserves attention is what to do about the construction of an anti-capitalist/anti-coalition akternative, both inside and outside the Dail.

The Cedar Lounge Revolution

I know we’re probably a few years away from an election but ….. with Labour now sliding in the polls , Paddy Healy made an interesting Comment on the recent Sunday Business Post Red C poll stating

When the Labour party vote declined to 10.4% in the 1997 GE following the Spring/Bruton/De Rossa government , it retained 17 of 33 seats. I believe that if Labour polled 11% in a general election to-day that it would retain far less seats. Traditionally, many Labour candidates were elected on transfers from independents and minor parties (in addition to benefitting from the surplus of coalition partner Fine Gael). The current poll indicates that Sinn Fein will be above the Labour Party on first counts in a large number of constituencies. Sinn Fein transfers will be unavailable in far more constituencies than was the case in the 2011 General Election. The decline in the…

View original post 1,519 more words

Written by tomasoflatharta

February 13, 2013 at 9:40 am

Ireland’s Banking Fiasco, Midnight Parliamentary Madness, A Government in Free Fall…..and Mass Media Self-Delusion

with 4 comments

Many media commentators predicted a popularity boost for a struggling Government because of extraordinary events this week.

They seem to be singing from this Labour Party Leadership Circular to its councillors :

“Farewell to Anglo!
Last night’s legislation brings an end to Anglo Irish Bank and the Irish Nationwide Building Society. These two institutions, names that will live on in ignominy, are forever associated with the recklessness and greed of a tiny clique that brought this country to the edge of financial ruin. These banks, the people who ran them and the golden circle around them were at the very roots of the crisis that has caused so much distress to the Irish people.

In liquidating this institution, we are doing what should have been done on the night of the blanket bank guarantee.

This is another step forward towards the day when we can finally face forward as a people, when the past can finally recede into the distance and when Ireland and the Irish people can see the future that they truly deserve”

This text was apparently put into the public domain by Labour Party Fingal Councillor Cian Ó Ceallacháin, who dissents from the austerity dogma promoted by his party leadership.

Opinion Polls in the last few months have been grim reading for the parties leading the current coalition government, Fine Gael and Labour.

Labour Pains in 2013 Opinion Polls

There is one fundamental reason for the fall in Fine Gael and Labour Party ratings : Mssrs Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore are continuing to carry out the policies of the previous Fianna Fáil / Green Party Coalition.

The scale of the FF/GP fall between the General Elections of 2007 and 2011 was spectacular :  the two parties won 84 seats in 2007 but collapsed to 20 in 2011 – a staggering loss of 64 TD’s, reducing the Green Party Dáil delegation from Six to Nil.

Opinion Polls began to register this electoral earthquake after a 2008 all-night Dáil session which gave birth to the Brian Lenihan inspired “bail-out”, shoring up the Bust Anglo-Irish Bank and ushering in a programme of austerity, cuts to public services, privatisation, and tax increases.

Fine Gael and Labour this week staged a re-run of Brian Lenihan’s all-night Leinster House Show, once again rushing through a complex piece of financial legislation connected with the financial crisis.

Will these parties follow the electoral example of Fianna Fáil and the Green Party?

Since the Savita Halappanavar Scandal, the opinion poll ratings of the government parties have gone into free fall.

An opinion poll published in today’s Irish Times confirms the trend,with major losses predicted for Fine Gael and the Labour Party.

Adrian Kavanagh has done his usual excellent number-crunching giving this predicted result if a General Election was held tomorrow :

STATE  FG 42  FF 51  LP 15 SF 26 Others 24

Compare this with the 2011 result

STATE  FG 76
 FF 20
 LP 37
SF 14
Others 19

In other words, Fine Gael and Labour will lose a staggering 56 seats if these numbers are right.

In fact losses for the Labour Party will very probably exceed the catastrophic defeat predicted above :

Adrian Kavanagh says that “actual Labour seat numbers could well be lower than the numbers predicted here” :

Labour’s declining support levels (down eight percentage points on the party’s support levels in the 2011 election) translate in a further significant drop in the seat estimates allocated to the party in these latest poll analyses. The party’s support levels are now on a par with the levels earned by the party in the 2002 and 2007 general elections though its seat estimates here are lower than the seats won by that party in those contests due to (i) the increase competition levels offer by Sinn Fein and other left-of-centre political groupings and (ii) the impact of the boundary changes associated with the 2012 Constituency Commission report which are seen to more adversely effect Labour than another of the other parties or political groupings. It is interesting to note also that, with the exception of Galway East, most of the rebel Labour TDs would appear to be based in constituencies that this analysis suggests the party would hold seats in at an election based on national figures akin to these poll support levels. If these deputies were to remain outside the party fold to the point of running as independents the actual Labour seat numbers could well be lower than the numbers predicted here.

Web Link :

actual Labour seat numbers could well be lower than the numbers predicted here

Going into the detail, the following words jump out at readers interested in boosting the electoral fortunes of an anti-capitalist / anti-coalition alternative :

Boost for small parties

However, the appeal of other small parties and Independents has grown considerably since the last Irish Times poll, with a fifth of all voters now supporting this category.

The level of support for this group is particularly pronounced in Dublin, where 32 per cent of voters say they would support this category.

This is a far higher level of support than any of the political parties managed to attract and indicates that there could be many more Independents and representatives of small parties in the Dáil after the next election.

Web Link :

Support for Others at 32 Per Cent in Dublin

The others group is a mix of left and right, but in Dublin it is primarily an anti-coalition left vote.  When that vote came together in 2009, Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party won one of the three Dublin Euro-Parliament Seats.

The trials and tribulations of the faltering United Left Alliance project are being exhaustively discussed on this blog and other places.

The events of this week, and the electoral and opinion poll data above, show very decisively that, the anti-coalition anti-capitalist left must get its act together – or – in Bernadette McAliskey’s recent words at the 2013 Bloody Sunday Commemoration in Derry – “we are in for one hell of a hiding”.