What the country needs is an effective, stable government, capable of dealing with vested interests and building on the economic recovery that is underway. During recent weeks, however, what was on offer amounted to disjointed, minority administrations, dependent for survival on their fiercest critics. The lowest common denominators in politics – those of party-interest and self-interest – directed the course of events while the needs of the general public were ignored. Finally, it seems, Fine Gael is limping towards an arrangement with disparate Independent TDs, underpinned by Fianna Fáil.
In his determination to deny Sinn Féin any political advantage, Micheál Martin elevated a pre-election undertaking not to support Fine Gael in government into official dogma. But he was prepared to facilitate a return of the Fine Gael and Labour Party to government, in spite of campaigning for their removal and their outright rejection by the electorate. The terms on which support may now be offered to a minority, Fine Gael-led government are unclear. There will be no agreed government programme, because Fianna Fáil does not want any direct linkage to Fine Gael. Approval may be on an issue-by-issue basis.
Fianna Fáil says this approach is similar to the Tallaght strategy. Not so. The Tallaght strategy of 1987 did not involve any prior negotiations, agreed terms or conditions. The country was in financial distress and Fianna Fáil, with 44 per cent of the vote and 81 seats, was within touching distance of an overall majority. Fine Gael leader Alan Dukes simply undertook "not to oppose economic reforms that were in the national interest". As a result, public spending was drastically reduced and the government continued for two years until Fianna Fáil itself sought a dissolution.
Contrast that with the present situation. Immediately after the election, when it became clear that a Fine Gael/Fianna Fáil arrangement could provide the only majority government, Mr Martin proposed a minority administration and quoted his party’s position on water charges as the reason why a deal could not be done. Seriously? Is this what the “national interest” has been reduced to? In that context, how can a new minority government be expected to deal with an expected wave of public sector wage demands?
The effects of the 2008 crash will persist for decades because of a huge national debt and constrained public finances. Those circumstances will contribute to industrial and social unrest and inadequate public services. Reforms to Dáil procedures may moderate confrontational-style politics but parties and their leaders have additional responsibilities. In that regard, the emergence of a fragile, minority government with multiple agendas represents a risky development. The capacity of all concerned to look beyond narrow self-interest will be fully tested.