The results of the general election were a disappointment for the Labour Party, though one that was not entirely unforeseen. It was hoped that if the cards fell right there would be a slight improvement on the seven seats held in 2016, itself a vertiginous drop from the 37 won in 2011. But the cards were not kind and Labour limped in with six seats.

A sharp decline over a relatively short period is dramatic enough, but the longer-term perspective is equally depressing. Traditionally, Ireland was characterised as having a “2½-party system”, Labour being the “half-party”. At no election between 1969 and 2016 did it win fewer than 15 seats; twice, in 1992 and 2011, it topped 30. Now it is no longer even a half-party. One of the two current leadership contenders, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, has pointed out that on February 8th Labour won the support of only 2 per cent of voters under 24. In such circumstances one might ask if there is any future.

The two contenders, Ó Ríordáin and Tipperary deputy Alan Kelly, have set out their initial stalls, the former on a platform of “change”, the latter with the slogan “back to basics”. Party members have the right to expect a good deal more flesh to be put on these stances before voting closes.

On the theme of change, Ó Ríordáin asks, perhaps rather plaintively: “Who else but the Labour Party have changed Ireland? Who else . . . have campaigned for rights for workers, for the LGBT community, for women, for gender equality?” Labour has certainly in recent years been strongly identified with what is called the liberal agenda. Progressive positions on individual freedom have always been a natural fit for the left, from the French Revolution onward. In 1960s Britain, Labour home secretary Roy Jenkins introduced a huge raft of humane reforms, from the decriminalisation of homosexual acts to the abolition of flogging in prisons. In 1980s France, President François Mitterrand also decriminalised homosexual acts and abolished the death penalty. Related SF claim of ‘meat barons’ hold over Government parties a ‘paranoid fantasy’

‘Sickening’ negativity within Fianna Fáil must stop, party meeting hears

Funding pledged to ensure ‘fit for purpose’ health service this winter

Policy matters Liberalism was for a long time thin on the ground in Ireland at a time when the Catholic Church wielded considerable power and politicians took special care to inform themselves of its opinions on policy matters. On the left, what courage and radicalism there was tended to come from somewhat peripheral figures, like Noël Browne, Trinity senator Mary Robinson and Limerick TD Jim Kemmy, with mainstream Labour figures remaining much more cautious. Indeed when Kemmy, whose small Democratic Socialist Party championed access to contraception and gay rights, lost his Dáil seat in 1982 over his support for abortion in limited circumstances, the beneficiary was Labour, whose candidate had campaigned stridently against him on the issue.

While support for individual freedoms is part of the DNA of any left-wing party it should also be clear it is neither sufficient nor the main purpose of its existence If Labour was initially slow to locate its liberal conscience it has made up for its tardiness over the last decade with increasing public enthusiasm for a number of causes. With the recession hitting families hard and the party embedded in government, it campaigned in the 2013 Meath East byelection largely on the issues of same-sex marriage and abortion. Its candidate came in fifth. This did not seem to dampen support for the liberal agenda, and indeed the very strong public backing for the 34th and 36th Amendments indicated that most people favoured liberal reform. What is equally clear, however, is that Labour has never derived much political dividend from the leading role it has taken in sponsoring such reform.

Social justice While support for individual freedoms is part of the DNA of any left-wing party it should also be clear that it is neither sufficient nor the main purpose of its existence. In government after 2011, Labour’s room for manoeuvre on economic policy, largely dictated in Brussels and Frankfurt, was certainly limited. It may feel it played an honourable role at this time, and it may even be right, but the electorate judged otherwise and back in opposition after 2016 it was surely time for the party to rediscover its social justice voice.

While our economy has recovered from 2008, the election results suggest voters do not feel our society has While our economy has recovered from 2008, the election results suggest voters do not feel our society has. In particular there was huge dissatisfaction with the government’s performance in housing and health, with even some of the well-off – those admirable early-rising people – wondering where their children were going to live. It also seemed that citizens were prepared to be taxed so that the State would be free to spend, a policy formula traditionally associated with Labour parties. One party convinced the electorate that it vigorously backed such a formula and was amply rewarded. Unfortunately this was not the Labour Party.

If the new Labour leadership wants to rebuild, it must surely now embark on a different path, reconnect with traditional social democratic politics, prioritise the interests of working people and promote policies of fairness and redistribution. If, however, it doesn’t wish to put economic issues and social equality first it might be an idea to consider changing its name to the Liberal Party.