Victory on pact with Fine Gael personal triumph for Rabbitte

Pat Rabbitte won a major victory at the weekend over strategy and must now turn it to his and Labour's advantage, writes Mark…

Pat Rabbitte won a major victory at the weekend over strategy and must now turn it to his and Labour's advantage, writes Mark Brennock.

'From this point on we are in general election mode,' said Pat Rabbitte on Friday night. The next day he received a three to one endorsement for the electoral strategy he has campaigned for since becoming party leader: a pre-election pact with Fine Gael.

The margin was somewhat deceptive. A significant number of delegates supporting the party leader's strategy said privately that they did not feel enthusiastic about it.

Some of these felt Labour should fight the next election independent of any alliance, others that this decision should not be taken until close to the next election.

READ MORE

A significant group of senior party figures spoke against Mr Rabbitte's strategy, including former deputy leader Brendan Howlin, Senator Derek McDowell, deputies Tommy Broughan, Kathleen Lynch and Brian O'Shea, former attorney general John Rogers and national executive members Henry Haughton and David Leach.

But the debate is truly over now. Opponents of Mr Rabbitte's strategy emphasised afterwards that they fully accepted the decision, and would try to make it work.

As Mr Rabbitte prepares to spend possibly two years seeking to define a distinctive Labour identity as well as forging a coherent alternative with Fine Gael, he is unlikely to be distracted by fresh rows over coalition. His opponents have folded up their tents until after the next general election. As with past Labour debates on coalition, the contributions were passionate. But unlike those past debates, they were not bitter. The only discordant note came when Declan Bree suggested that some of those supporting the pre-election pact were open to a merger with Fine Gael, and delegate Paul Bell made the equally implausible suggestion that the other side wanted to go into coalition with Sinn Féin.

The difference this time was that the debate was confined to the narrow tactical issue of whether or not it is wise to forge a pre-election deal with Fine Gael.

Past debates on coalition have been seen as battles for the soul of the Labour Party, with alternative leaders waiting in the wings to exploit the leader's difficulty.

There was none of that at the weekend. Several speakers referred to the fact that when Mr Rabbitte became party leader - in an election in which all party members could vote - they knew exactly what they were getting.

Apart from the merits of his case, this argument that Mr Rabbitte had a higher mandate of sorts for his position influenced a lot of delegates. Mr Rabbitte's own approach at the weekend will have helped the cause of unity. In the debate in recent months he has sometimes failed to resist opportunities to personally criticise some of his opponents. On Saturday he was in a different mode, being careful to show respect for the opposing argument and those who made it.

The electoral strategy favoured by his opponents - of leaving options open until after an election - is known in the party as "the Cluskey compromise" after the man who devised it in an attempt to heal divisions. Mr Rabbitte approvingly quoted the late Mr Cluskey on the issue, saying "the Labour Party is not for sale".

He addressed several of the fears of the sceptics about his strategy. They fear it will lead to growth for Fine Gael but not necessarily for Labour. They fear Labour's identity will be compromised during an election campaign, while Enda Kenny and Fine Gael get most of the attention. But Mr Rabbitte promised "a strong coherent radical manifesto. Written by the party and no-one else. Representing the party's bedrock values and nothing else. Committed to the interest of the people and no-one else's. Focused on winning seats for Labour and for no-one else".

The unveiling of a major €1 billion per annum childcare strategy on Friday night was to make the point that Labour is now going to come up with distinctive policies to appeal to voters. And the insistence that this is a precondition for any programme for government is designed to show that despite Labour's commitment to the Fine Gael pact concept, they intend to drive a hard bargain on policy.

In his speech on Saturday night Mr Rabbitte showed a keen desire to capture the mood of voters and take on the issues currently enjoying a high profile.

He devoted considerable time to detailing the examples of wasteful Government spending that had been set out in an RTÉ Prime Time programme last week.

He said Labour did not rule out supporting the introduction of the controversial Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbos), saying society had been "beset by a new plague of crime and anti-social behaviour".

The new childcare package comes as all parties have moved to be seen to address an issue of concern to huge numbers of working parents.

He put forward again Labour's proposal for a universal health insurance system with the State paying the premiums of the less well off.

He sought to dismiss the expected Government attacks on the party before they are made. His concern over anti-social behaviour was designed to counter traditional charges that Labour is "soft on crime". His commitment not to introduce personal taxation increases was to counter the Fianna Fáil/PD mantra that Labour is a "tax and spend" party.

His victory on electoral strategy is a major personal triumph, giving him an overwhelming personal endorsement on an issue which divides Labour like no other. Now comes the hard bit: Defining a Labour policy platform and election campaign that will grab the imagination of voters, and be noticed amid the din over whether Bertie or Enda should be Taoiseach.

The sceptics over his strategy hold their views and will not change their minds - unless the next election produces a dramatic triumph. But as Pat Rabbitte now turns away from the internal debate and towards the task of engaging the voters, the internal discussion may have strengthened him in the eyes of the public.

Because, firstly, he has been seen to stand for something he clearly believes in and secondly, he has been seen to be consistent over a considerable period of time.

Voters like to see such traits in a political leader and Pat Rabbitte now has an opportunity to turn this to his advantage.