Election promises - Be wary of auction politics

THE general election auction has already begun in earnest, with the Progressive Democrats going one better than the Labour Party over the weekend.

Labour had already promised to cut the lower rate of tax from 20% to 18%, if it were returned to Government.

Both of the present coalition’s partners promptly denounced the Labour proposal. Finance Minister Brian Cowen promised that Fianna Fáil would not get involved in auction politics, while Tánaiste Michael McDowell, the leader of the Progressive Democrats, denounced the Labour leader’s sudden conversion to tax cuts.

It would seem, however, that Mr McDowell was primarily annoyed over being upstaged a week ahead of his own party conference at which he announced an identical cut, and upped the stakes by promising an even bigger 3% cut to those paying the top rate of tax.

Moreover, he pledged another range of give-aways over the next five years, including significantly increased pensions, a new style SSIA-type account and a major reduction in stamp duty.

The PD package would cost an estimated €5.5bn extra in 2112. This is not just auction politics; it is hypocritical auction politics.

Having dominated the headlines recently Mr McDowell’s reaction towards the Labour proposal was like the behaviour of a spoiled schoolgirl, upset because somebody had dared to upstage her. He should have welcomed the Labour proposal in as far as it went, if he was motivated by the conviction politics that he espouses.

People who remember the auction election of 1977 “in which Fianna Fáil effectively bribed the electorate with extravagant promises that bought the largest overall majority since independence” are likely to be wary of auction politics.

Indeed, for some it will raise haunting memories of a time when Fianna Fáil and most of the Progressive Democrats were within the same party, united by a reckless desire for power at any cost. Those politics look almost responsible in comparison with the €5.5bn of the people’s money that the PDs are promising to spend to keep their party in power.

The whole thing seems to be more about headline grabbing than conviction. Mr McDowell seized the headlines last week by complaining about the fees of tribunal lawyers.

Ironically, today’s Irish Examiner has a report detailing his efforts to double the fees of solicitors at the tribunals while he was attorney general in 1999.

Of course, solicitors may not have been paid nearly as much as barristers, but why has the correspondence in relation to barristers’ fees not been released under the Freedom of Information Act?

The people have a right to know what is being done with their money, especially in the light of last week’s controversy.

People should be suspicious of the soft politics of the easy promise, as Mr Cowen warned. But they should not be deceived by scare mongering.

The Government has been enjoying a massive surplus in tax revenue and it is only fitting that, instead of taking money that it does not need and then squandering that on ill-considered schemes, it should allow taxpayers to keep more of their own money, to spend it as they see fit.

This is both fair and practical.