That ‘Labour/Social Democrats merger’ June 12, 2024
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.trackback
Quite a bit of talk about a merger of the two parties in the media and offline but I can’t see it – not any time soon.
Labour can point to its solid 5.27% of the poll in the local elections, a bit ahead of the Social Democrats on 3.45%. And put their combined totals together for that vote and what does one see, still not at 10%. I grew up in a world where Labour was around or about 12%. Long time since then. A lot has happened. Now both parties can’t together reach that.
Then there’s the European elections and, yes, bear in mind candidates and their personalities and their appeal. (As a side note what possesses some people to give up their careers to run for the European elections? I’m genuinely surprised at some who ran this time around in highly competitive and difficult contests.)
Be that as it may, in the EU elections, the news was more mixed. Labour on 3.38% and Social Democrats on 2.95%. John Waters (remember him?) received more than Labour’s Fergal Landy in MNW. Rory Hearne was a stronger candidate for the SDs but still not making much hay. Aodhán Ó Ríordáin was a more prominent candidate in Dublin, coming in fourth on first-preferences and gaining a seat. Sinéad Gibney of the SDs came in ahead of Sinn Féin’s excellent Daithí Doolin but remained somewhat underpowered. In South, Labour’s Niamh Hourigan received 3.09% but was way down the field. The Social Democrats were on 2.94% and further back again.
The General Election will be different but the thought did strike me that the SDs seemed a little muted during the contest. Perhaps the emphasis was on local candidates rather than making a big splash at the Europeans which makes sense.
By the way, Harry McGee in the Irish Times argued that both smaller left-of-centre parties, Labour and the Social Democrats, have done exceedingly well.
Not sure I’d put it quite like that. But they’ve both reasons to be fairly cheerful. A question arises, that being the case: does a merger actually help either party as matters stand? Consider this from the perspective of the Europeans in Dublin. How would a joint candidacy have worked out? Or even two SD/LP candidates? Isn’t it possible that, separately, they reach different parts of an admittedly, small enough part of the electoral spectrum? I often think of the DL/LP experience. That merger didn’t seem to particularly strengthen the LP. Why would it be different this time?
The Cedar Lounge Revolution 
A useful test of whether a candidate or party should have run, in the server of being a potential MEP, is whether they get their deposit back. Gibney missed that (by 40 votes). But another reason for running, of course, is to create a profile for the next Dáil election.
On the question of a merger, the first question that has to be asked is what the leadership thinks. Three SD TDs left Labour at different stages and for different reasons. Unless those reasons are sufficiently in the past (does Catherine Murphy think that?) or now overcome (Shortall?, O’Callaghan?), will they go back?
And ‘go back’ is what is meant. Although the language used is a merger, it really means the SDs going back to Labour, not Labour transferring its assets to SDs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The voters for Labour, SDs and maybe surprisingly the Greens seem to be transfer friendly. All three are not totally opposed to coalitions, though the SDs have more of a bottom line. Maybe a soft, undeclared pact.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Probably can’t include the Greens while they’re still committed to their current coalition, but Labour and the Soc Dems should be able to assess how many centre-left TDs each constituency can support (knowing said Greens are the biggest current target in that regard) and tailor their candidate selection strategy accordingly.
LikeLike
Looking at Local Elections results, The Social Democrats seem to be strong in certain areas and Labour in others. There’s not a huge crossover.
I don’t think a merger would be any use as undoubtedly not everyone would go along with it and the sum is rarely bigger than the two parts.
I don’t think they need an alliance either. If I am voting SD or indeed Green, likelihood is that I’d be transferring to Labour at some point anyhow.
LikeLiked by 3 people
An interesting case in my own electoral area, where between the Green, the Soc Dem and the second Labour candidate, there were 1,200 FPVs, which might have secured a second centre-left seat, but as the Green vote was much the same as in 2019, it seems the SD served more to complement the vote rather than take from the former’s tally, so hard to say that their entry acted as a “spoiler”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Other than style, the individuals involved and the fact that the SDs don’t have the history Labour has, can anyone outline a substantive difference between the parties?
I suspect not because there is none other than Labour have been in coalition and SDs want to be in coalition.
LikeLike
“a substantive difference”
Labour need the SDs, the SDs don’t need Labour.
LikeLiked by 1 person
SDs also haven’t so far p****d on us in govt and told us it’s raining. Not hearing any ‘we were wrong’ from the ILP electeds and the associated backroom lanyards either.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You’re right re the lack of apology but my sense of the LP is that on the personnel front it’s very very different from 2011 on. Sure there’s no money to have back room anything let alone lanyards. They’re at six or seven TDs and have been since 2016. That’s not going to change any time soon, if they hold their own that’d be a miracle (though a bit more likely if SF is weaker – which is true across soft to further left).
LikeLike
but my sense of the LP is that on the personnel front it’s very very different from 2011 on. Sure there’s no money to have back room anything let alone lanyards.
As with the BLP and the Dems in the US, agree that the third-way apparatchiks of the 90s and 2000s have largely decamped to corporate lobbyist positions and the like by this stage (the smoking ruins stage). But there are a lot of long-haul Labour activists still in place in the unions and NGOs, waiting on those pensions to kick in
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah and to be clear not a fan of many in those areas you mention but that’s a different coterie in my experience anyhow to the layer who arrived largely but not exclusively with Quinn/Rabbitte (chef de cabinets etc and all that nonsense) and grew and grew subsequently. The union crew are a little different long predating the back roomers and some of the ngo layer headed to the SDs. The big shift was 2016 post election when the apparatus seemed to thin out rapidly.
LikeLike
Yep, no argument there but it’s not a substantive, policy, strategy or ideological difference.
The SDs have made it very clear that they are willing to enter a coalition gov and they have not ruled out coalition with FFG. They don’t make any claim to wish to replace, or transform away, from a capitalist socio-economic system. They do propose some significant reforms but none that might be called transformational. To me, it just looks like old red wine in a new purple bottle.
Also, just like Labour today, there’s no discernible left faction or current in the SDs which might at least act as a brake re joining gov with FFG or push them to take radical action in gov.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I oppose a merger myself. I have said so in public. It will not happen.
LikeLike
Labour can point to its solid 5.27% of the poll in the local elections, a bit ahead of the Social Democrats on 3.45%
Legacy names and legacy grassroots holding up that ILP vote, but for how much longer?
LikeLike
Good question
LikeLike
Sherlock, Howlin not running next time, Aodhan in Europe. That only leaves Alan Kelly as a legacy TD from the 2011 coalition. So maybe less of the legacy ‘do you know who we are?’ from them and a bit of realism?
LikeLiked by 1 person