Ireland-Brendan Howlin not to run for Labour Party leadership

Brendan Howlin's decision not to run is somewhat surprising. He is on the left wing of the party and yet is seen as close to FF. This is a major disadvantage for aspiring candidates. He is especially remembered for his comments in relation to the Mullingar Accord. He said that he did not wish for Labour to become cheer leaders for Enda. He was nailing his colours to the FF coalition mast.
The decision of Michael D Higgins-also on the left wing of the party- to support Eamon Gilmore was a major blow for Howlin. At this stage there appears to be a groundswell of support towards Eamon Gilmore. Howlin detected this and opted out. A third failure to secure the leadership would be unthinkable.
His position as Leas Ceann Comhairle would be an issue in the course of the campaign if he failed to resign. In such an event he would then be seen as hedging his bets.
Obviously a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Sunday Business Post-McGurk argues for FF-Labour Coalition

Tom McGurk is quite critical of Pat Rabbitte under the heading "Rabbitte's long march has come to an inglorious end".This article is factually incorrect in a number of respects.

• He states that "Since the foundation of the state, Fianna Fail has been seen by the electorate-time after time-as the natural party of government. This is factually incorrect. Cumann na nGaedhael (ancestors of FG) was the natural party of government from 1923-1932. FF was founded in 1926. It attained power in 1932.


• Referring to the Labour party he states that "the result was catastrophic for the party,with Labour barely increasing its vote at all. In fact the ultimate political achievement of Rabbitte' devotion to the pact was to drag FG back from the point of extinction." This is utter nonsense. In the 2002 General Election FG secured 22% of the vote. That was not extinction. It still had a huge organisation after the 2002 General Election. How does McGurk explain the strong FG performance in the Local Elections in 2004? It got within a handful of seats of FF. It won most seats in the 2004 European Elections. This was prior to the Mullingar Accord. In the 2007 General Election there were no huge seat losses for Labour. So how was the election catastrophic for Labour?

Tom's prefererence is for a Drumcondra Accord whereby Labour would prop up Bertie Aherne.

In 1932 Labour propped up the minority FF Government. By so doing it ceded much working class support to FF. It has never recovered this vote.

In coalition with FF under Albert Reynolds Labour agreed to a tax amnesty. This cost Labour dearly. FF is Labour's greatest enemy and competitor for working class support. FF would like to kill Labour with kindness.

Tom McGurk knows that the Greens may be decimated in the 2012 General Election. If this comes to pass FF will need another coalition partner. In Tom's ideal world this will be an FF-Labour coalition. I suspect that he desires an FF led Government in perpetuity.

The Mullingar Accord-the reality

Several journalists have incorrectly claimed that Labours failure to make seat gains in the 2007 General Election sprung from the Mullingar Accord. One of these is Kevin Rafter in today's Sunday Tribune who states:
The one significant difference, however, is that Fine Gael has made it out of the doldrums and, largely thanks to the Mullingar Accord, the seat gap between Labour and Fine Gael has widened once more. The opportunity for Labour after 2002 was to focus not on whether it ever went into government with Fianna Fail but rather on replacing Fine Gael as the second largest party in the state. Fine Gael was in such a mess after 2002 that Labour could have achieved a historic realignment in the Irish party system.....
This analysis is fatally flawed on a number of counts

• When FG bombed in the 2002 General Election it lost 20% of its vote. Much of this scattered to Independents. Some FG voters switched to the PDs to prevent an overall majority for FF. In 2002 Labour adopted a go it alone strategy. Yet the lost FG votes did not go to Labour. These FG votes were largely conservative and were on loan to Independents and PDs. Labours go it alone strategy also failed.
• FG conservative voters would not give first preferences to Labour. If Labour were to replace FG it had its chance in 2002. That was its chance for realignment. It was never on.
• When Enda Kenny assumed the leadership of FG he reorganised the party from top to bottom. The fruits of this reorganisation were seen in the excellent local election results of 2004 where FG got within a handful of seats of FF. FG won most seats in the Euro Elections. This was prior to the Mullingar Accord. The Mullingar Accord evolved from a belief after the 2004 Euro and Local Elections that FG and Labour together could replace the FF-PD coalition. The Mullingar Accord did not exist at the time of the Euro and Local Elections.
• Kevin Rafter and others fail to realise that there is a conservative block of voters which votes FG and will not switch to Labour to facilitate a realignment. It is by ideology conservative. It largely distrusts FF. It may go on loan from time to time to Independents and smaller parties. It eventually returns.
• Labours organisational problems in constituencies such as Tipperary South and South Kerry cost it vital seats. The Mullingar Accord did not prevent the election of new TDs such as Sean Sherlock.
• FF is Labours greatest enemy as it competes strongly and successfully for the working class votes.

To summaries: Labours difficulties stem not from the Mullingar Accord but from the conservative nature of the Irish electorate and organisational difficulties in several constituencies. When Labour adopted a go it alone position in 2002 it also failed to make a big breakthrough.