Socialists waning in European cabinets

Press, 19 August 1982, Page 20

Socialists waning in European cabinets

From “The Economist,” London

Nearly' seven years ago, "The Economist" published a survey of long-term electoral trends in Europe. This showed that Socialists had been remarkably successful in establishing themselves as the main government party in a clear majority of west European states.

Some 54.1 per cent of cabinet ministers, in the 15 countries which have enjoyed democratic rule ever since 1945. were Socialist (or Social Democratic or Labour).

This was a considerable achievement, since these parties had polled no more than 31.2 per cent of the votes cast in the most recent elections in the same 15 countries.

Since then the predominance of Socialists in the governments of Europe has been heavily eroded, despite the Socialists’ landslide victory in France last year. The proportion of Socialists among cabinet ministers is well down, to . 36.4 per cent.

Whereas in 1975 there were more than twice as many Socialist ministers as the combined total of Christian Democratic and Conservative ministers, there are. now slightly fewer — 94 compared with 97. The era of Socialist strength seems to be passing. Why? It is only partly a question of declining electoral support. Despite the large swing to the Socialists in France, there has been an over-all drop in Socialist support across Europe. Yet for the most part this has been marginal and far from uniform (in nine countries the Socialist vote has gone down, but in six it has increased). In some countries Socialists have clearly left government at the behest of the voters. (Sweden in 1976, Britain in 1979), Norway in 1981, arguably Luxemburg in 1979). In several countries they have been excluded (or have excluded themselves) from coalitions which would have commanded a firm basis of electoral support (notably Belgium and the Netherlands).

In two countries — Ireland and West Germany — Socialists have not actually excluded themselves from government, but they have put their future as reliable coalition partners in doubt.

The Irish Labour Party was split on whether to continue its coalition with Fine Gael if the two parties had together won a majority in February’s general election. The party is still divided on this issue, so for the moment there is no credible alternative to Mr Charles Haughey’s Fianna Fail government. Fine Gael has never won an over-all majority on its own.

In West Germany it is only the prestige of Mr Helmut Schmidt that has so far prevented his Social Democrats’ coalition partners, the Free Democratic party, abandoning ship and combining with the opposition Christian Democrats. The Social Democrats have become highly unattractive coalition partners, partly because of their unpopularity but mainly because of their left-wing party activists, who oppose many of the present coalition’s policies. The party is almost certain to go into opposition before, or immediately after, the 1984 election.

The Socialists have not become less government-minded in every country. In Italy, Socialists re-entered government, after a five-year break, in 1980, and they are likely to stay there whatever the result of the election expected soon. Nobody following the career of Mr Bettino Craxi, the leader of the Socialist party, can doubt his personal appetite to hold office, preferably as Prime Minister. In two Nordic countries — Denmark and Finland — it is the Social Democrats who have shouldered the major responsibility of government in splintered multi-party parliaments, but these are the exceptions to the rule.

In Sweden and Norway, long Europe’s Social Democratic strongholds, Socialists have adopted an all-or-nothing approach, preferring to see minority governments fbrmed by weaker right-wing parties rather than explore the centre ground themselves for coalition partners. It is arguable that exploration would have been fruitless in the past few years, despite the fact that the Liberals, who now govern Sweden, are nearer to the Social Democrats in their ideology than to the. Con-

servatives, and that in Norway the Labour party has some common ground with both the Centre (farmers') and the Christian People's parties. These three parties together have more seats than the Conservatives who now rule the country. Yet not only have no feelers’ been put out; the possibility seems hardly to have been considered. It was not always so. The Swedish Social Democrats twice formed coalitions with the Agrarian (now the Centre) party, in 1936-39 and 1951-57. In Norway minority Labour governments have often been sustained by the votes of the smaller parties. In both countries, however, the Socialists no longer seem willing to engage in the compromises necessary for coalition government. In Sweden, Mr Olof Palme's Social Democrats hope to resume power in the general election on September 19 after six unaccustomed years in opposition. Although they have a good lead in the polls, they will probably need the support of the Communists to form a government The polls suggest that the Communists may not pass the 4 per cent threshold needed to win seats in parliament. The Social Democrats do not seem prepared to consider a coalition with anybody else. Some compromises should, of course, be avoided like the plague; but a self-righteous refusal to accept any compromise is incompatible with democratic principles. Apart from the left-lurching British Labour Party (which is a particular, and very sick, case), it is the Dutch Labour party which is the worst offender in this respect. The roots of its present dilemma go back to the late 19605, which saw the beginnings of a long process of radicalisation of its leaders and its activists.

Increasingly, power and influence were assumed by younger party members who, by virtue of their jobs (typically as educational administrators, civil servants, welfare workers, academics and journalists), were able to devote the greater part of their time to political activity.

Yet because none of them worked in business or in trade

unions, their knowledge of the economic facts of life was minimal. This generation abandoned the traditional socialist belief in research, and substituted sloganising for analysis. The policies adopted’ by these young Dutch left-wingers were based on giving more to the electors (particularly to public-sector employees and welfare beneficiaries who, together with their families, are rapidly becoming a majority of the electorate). The leftwingers called for higher social benefits, a higher minimum wage, a shorter working week, ambitious job-creation programmes and more public spending all round. Admirable, and just about believable, so long as the Dutch economy was roaring ahead, fuelled by seemingly inexhaustible reserves of natural gas. In the econoiriic doldrums of the late 1970 s the programme began to look impractical, even to its authors. Small wonder that, rather than being shown up as having advocated policies that would not work, the Dutch Socialists have preferred to stand aside and let their opponents deal

with low growth and the pub-lic-spending problem. Mr Joop Den Uyl, the Dutch Labour leader, has struggled against the prevailing trend in his party, buut he has been unable to halt it, or to prevent the party sliding in a few years from firm support of N.A.T.O. into a quasi-neutralist position. In the Dutch general election on September 8, the Labour party is expected to do much worse than its main rival, the Christian Democrats (although it has recovered a little ground after its disastrous performance in the provincial elections in March, when it fell into third place behind the Liberals).

As a result the odds are that the next Dutch government will be a centre-right coalition between the Christian Democrats and the Liberals. The Labour party has now acquired a reputation for being an awkward partner in coalitions, and none of the other Dutch parties is keen to co-operate with it. The message which Dutch Socialists are now unwittingly sending to their electors is that they are essentially politicians for the good times. When the

going gets rough, they no longer have the appetite to face the harsh decisions which need to be taken. Some other European Socialist parties — in neighbouring Belgium, for example — have been travelling down the same road as their Dutch comrades, though they have not yet gone so far. The Belgian Socialist party has been in' opposition since the end of 1981, after a long spell in successive coalition governments.

If this process is not soon reversed, the consequences could be serious, and not just for the Socialist parties themselves.

Most European countries have a system of proportional representation which cannot function properly unless' there is a responsible left-of-centre party ready and willing to take its share in governing the country.

If these parties opt out, the result is likely to be either prolonged instability or lopsided governments pursuing policies which do not truly reflect the wishes of their electorates.