Greens have won talks battle – we’ll find out if they have the stomach to win the war
HAVING spent six weeks negotiating a programme for government, one would have expected a modicum of enthusiasm from chief negotiator Catherine Martin for the agreed deal. Instead, the statement released by the Green Party deputy leader to mark the auspicious occasion had a funereal quality.
Nestled in the middle of an 11-line press release was just one sentence that could charitably be construed as tepid support. Ms Martin conceded “the deal negotiated was the best achievable” and included “some worthwhile and transformative policies”.
However, the value of that marginal endorsement was greatly diluted by the fact it was immediately preceded with an acknowledgement the party “clearly did not get everything we sought” and bookended with a relatively lengthy paragraph devoted to the dangers of the “party’s independence and core values” being “undermined or weakened by participation in government”.
Ms Martin’s statement didn’t exactly scream “run for your lives” but that was the subliminal message. It was certainly novel that one of the chief architects of the deal damned it with such faint praise she left some of the party rebels and mavericks sounding conciliatory by contrast.
The sense of foreboding about dissent in the Green Party ranks was heightened by the fact three of their 12 TDs, one of whom helped negotiate the agreement, abstained on the deal – Neasa Hourigan, Patrick Costello and Francis Noel Duffy, Ms Martin’s husband.
It should be noted that back in early May, Ms Martin, Mr Duffy and Ms Hourigan all voted against even entering talks with Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, while Mr Costello abstained. That three of these sceptics could not be convinced of the merits of the plan, while Ms Martin’s support appears decidedly lacklustre, is an ominous sign.
The significance of the marked unease within the Green Party is also magnified by party rules which state two-thirds of its members must back the programme for government before it can enter government.
So is the deal as bad as the naysayers suggest? In a word, no.
Even outspoken party activist Saoirse McHugh – who slated it on RTÉ’s ‘Today with Sarah McInerney’ yesterday – admitted: “I’m not objecting to a lot in it, a lot of it does sound good.”
When it comes to environmental policies, the proposed deal represents a seismic shift in attitude, placing climate change centre stage. Funding for cycling and pedestrian projects would receive €360m a year – 20pc of the total transport capital budget. Currently, cycling receives only 2pc and pedestrian projects a negligible amount.
Planned fossil fuel development, including the planned liquified natural gas terminal on the Shannon estuary, would be stopped and the importation of fracked gas halted. The carbon tax would be increased and revenue ring-fenced to spend on measures to reduce fuel poverty, fund a retrofitting programme and invest in sustainable farming.
The commitment to reduce Ireland’s emissions by an average of 7pc per annum for the next 10 years represents a doubling of the 3.5pc per annum commitment contained in the existing Climate Action Plan.
Ms McHugh said she was dubious about these targets as they were “woolly” with
“no concrete emissions targets at all in the lifetime” of the government.
However, a new Climate Action Bill which would enshrine five-year carbon budgets would provide a legal imperative for these targets to be met. That bill would be the responsibility, presumably, of a Green Party environment minister to draft and oversee.
Ultimately, Green Party members must examine the programme for government and determine if the party could have got more concessions in an alternate universe in which they had entered negotiations with Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin.
Given the party has just 12 TDs, onethird the number of the bigger parties – none of which have particularly impressive environmental credentials – that seems extremely doubtful. That arithmetic doesn’t change, no matter which party it enters negotiations with.
On its face, the deal is a huge win for the Green Party.
The difficulty will be in implementing the plan, ensuring Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael adhere to the commitments that are contained in the deal.
Demanding two of their three cabinet portfolios are environment and transport, with junior ministries in agriculture and housing, will give the party huge power and influence in driving the green agenda.
The other alternative to the deal is a period of instability, followed by another election in which a resurgent Fine Gael could emerge with a near majority, propped up by rural independents, to form a government that stymies any progress on climate justice for the next five years.
In fact, a Green rejection of the deal would provide Fine Gael with excellent cover to go back to the people and campaign on the basis that ingrates in the Green Party rejected its genuine efforts to share power and form a stable government in the public interest at a time of national crisis.
The risks of entering government are huge. The experience of smaller parties in coalition governments has not been a pleasant one, as the Green Party knows too well.
A reinvigorated Sinn Féin, leading the opposition, will also be a rapacious and potentially deadly opponent.
The question for the Greens is, having emerged victorious in the battle at the negotiating table after winning major concessions, do they have the political acumen and drive to win the war in government and implement their policies?
FG would have cover to campaign on the basis those Green ingrates had rejected its efforts to form a stable government