Comment: As usual, when a new national agreement has been negotiated, welters of commentators deplore the "democratic deficit" in the process and they either propose its abolition or elaborate institutional solutions, writes Padraig Yeates

In fact, the social partnership model provides the only forum in which large numbers of ordinary people can have a say in vital matters affecting their lives, such as rates of pay, working conditions and social, economic and taxation policies. When else, outside of general elections, does this happen?

There are more than 550,000 trade unionists affiliated to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (Ictu) in the Republic, by far the biggest group involved in the social partnership process. It has even helped democratise affiliates. Initially, executives in most unions decided whether or not to support national agreements, although some unions such as Siptu, the AHCPS and ATGWU always balloted members. Now almost all Ictu affiliates have followed the Siptu model in organising meetings at branch, regional and national level to debate what they want from agreements and whether to accept the negotiated outcome.

Opponents of national agreements, especially on the right, point out that unions only represent a minority of workers and should be scrapped. Rather than have an imperfect democratic process, they would prefer to go back to the good old days when influencing Government policy was the prerogative of a discreet lobbying system where ordinary people had no say whatsoever. The tribunals have long removed any illusions about how this exercise in democracy worked.

It makes more sense to address the democratic deficit by embracing workers outside the current process. Only unions have the capacity to do so. The question is whether they have the will. Resources are also an issue but can be found if the will is there.

Unions are still growing but at a much slower rate than the workforce. Consequently, density has fallen by 30 per cent since the 1970s and, if present trends continue, Ictu will be reduced to a public service vehicle with a private sector rump. Such a model is unsustainable in the long term, even for public sector unions, and is certainly undesirable for society at large.

Like the PDs, unions must become radical or redundant. The traditional service model that dominates the congress will consign affiliates to a lingering death, like so many mediaeval guilds. Resources have to be diverted into recruiting the unorganised. Existing members will have to shift more for themselves and be given the training and autonomy to do so.

Recent research by the Economic and Social Research Institute, the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, and UCD shows there is pent-up demand for representation by unions from unorganised workers. Last year's "Employee Voice Survey" by UCD found that 64 per cent of these disenfranchised employees would join a union if asked and 28 per cent would do so even if their employer objected. On this basis, union density could rise to 71 per cent, compared to the 57 per cent peak achieved in the early 1970s.

The 2004 Industrial Relations Act provides a ready means for expanding union membership, which is why some employers have begun to fight for its repeal and resisted its implementation through the courts.

The stronger enforcement rights contained in the new agreement, "Towards 2016" (T16), are worth more than any pay increase to unions interested in meeting this demand for representation. It is the main reason why one of the fastest growing private sector unions, the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union (TEEU), which has never been a slouch in seeking pay increases and has opposed most national agreements in the past, has recommended support for T16.

Siptu has also recommended acceptance on the usual basis of trading some pay restraint for measures to enhance living standards and employment rights. It is also the only union so far to make a systematic attempt to recruit the tens of thousands of new migrant workers entering the labour market, by recruiting Polish, Russian and Latvian speaking organisers. But Siptu, with 263,000 members, is probably the only Irish union with the resources to do so.

In contrast, unions opposing T16 have tended to be British-based or have a narrow vocational base and members in relatively secure employment where the need to address the longer-term interests of all workers is relatively weak.

Of course, opponents of T16 can argue that it is possible to campaign for more rights and State enforcement of those rights without offering anything in return. Unfortunately, the historical record across Europe suggests that organised workers' movements only prosper with government co-operation. Gains made in Ireland, such as the introduction of the 39-hour week under the Programme for National Recovery, arose from national agreements, the presence of Labour in Government, the need to comply with EU legislation or a combination of all three.

The EU social model is embedded in the collective memory of untrammelled class warfare between 1890 and 1945.

That memory is rapidly receding, which is why Irish unions need to secure institutional reforms in the conduct of industrial relations.

Ideally Ictu should co-ordinate such activities, but the reality is that it does not recruit members directly and affiliates are reluctant to pool scarce resources that might end up boosting membership of a rival.

One option, if the Government is serious about its commitment to social partnership and if it wants to address the democratic deficit in the process, is to help unions rise to the challenge. It could provide funding to improve union expertise and organisational structures in ways that allow them to expand while also becoming more responsive to the competitive pressures employers face in the workplace. Better negotiators mean more effective representation for employees and better change facilitators for employers. Unions not interested need not apply.

The only thing that distinguishes unions from other special interest groups is their sense of social solidarity. If their sole concern becomes maximising pay for existing members, they deserve relegation to the margins of society.

• Padraig Yeates is a media advisor to several trade unions