LEADERS IN WAITING: With a month at most to go before the calling of the general election, Mark Brennock, Political Correspondent, talks to the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, in the first of a series of major interviews with the main party leaders.
MB: What broad vision of society are you offering going into this election?
MN: I set out an over-arching vision at the ardfheis that we would plan the future and deliver it, and using a private sector management model, looking at the country as one would look at a company with a chief executive and line managers who would deliver particular objectives on time and on budget.
We are talking in terms of a more compassionate society. We'll be negotiating with the social partners to ask them to moderate wages in return for improved, targeted public services. While we will be making some tax changes, the basis of the negotiation will be the moderation of pay in return for proper health services, equality in education, care of the elderly and so on.
We would set the European agenda centre stage. There are different currents within the Government. Some of them are quite chauvinistic and nationalistic like the grandchildren of Eamon de Valera, other people's attitude to Europe like Brian Cowen wouldn't be a lot different from mine, and then you'd have the McCreevy-Harney axis who would see things more in terms of the 53rd State of the Union being attached to the European Union as well. We'd have a more cohesive view.
MB: Looking at the capital and current spending figures in your economic policy framework document and the Government's figures, they seem remarkably similar?
MN: We are talking about a ten per cent growth in public spending. The public spending increase was 22 per cent in 2001, and they are saying now it will be 14.6 per cent for 2002. So you are looking at 36.6 per cent over two years. I think that will be over 40, and a lot of the private sector economists are already predicting a very significant overall budget deficit . . . So there is this feel of the control being gone on Government expenditure . . .
MB: On capital spending, you have said the Government is behind on the National Development Plan and you would borrow to put this right?
MN: They are about 18 months behind target. We will be saying we will go ahead with the original programme with 25 per cent coming from Public Private Partnership and 17 per cent from the EU over the next five years, 29 per cent would come from the current budget surpluses we will be running, so in arithmetic terms we would be borrowing 29 per cent of the public capital programme.
While we are saying we would deliver public services the envy of Europe, obviously we would have to do something on income tax as well without increasing the overall take. My priorities will be to take those on the minimum wage out of the tax net.
The second objective would be that when individualisation was brought in and widened in two subsequent budgets, single income families were seriously disadvantaged against double income families.
And double income families are better off by and large. I would, as an objective, increase the tax credits for single income families to bridge that gap, because I think they are getting a raw deal at the moment. Now that brings in a different philosophy of society. I believe in society. I'm not like Thatcher who says there is no such thing as society, only individuals.
MB: Is this basically a partial reversal of individualisation?
MN: Those who benefited from individualisation would maintain their benefits. I would give single income families extra tax credits to bridge that gap because it is quite unfair at present.
MB: Would you fully bridge that gap over time?
MN: No I wouldn't. I wouldn't bring it to 100 per cent because there are additional costs associated with going to work. When two people are going to work there are additional costs so I wouldn't fully bridge the gap but it's far too wide now.
The third thing is I would like a middle rate band. I'd like to have a tax system where there was a 30 per cent band which applied to some of the income which is now taxed at 42 per cent. I think the jump from 20 per cent to 42 per cent is too steep. The Government health strategy theoretically commits them to a €10 billion programme over 10 years between current and capital spending.
MB: Have you a commitment to any particular spending level on health?
MN: We have a well developed health policy which we have published already. We will be refining it for the manifesto and it has been costed by the Department of Finance. So I know the costs but I don't want to reveal my hand at this point - but it will be costed in the manifesto.
There will be specifics. We are talking about free GP services for every child in the country, including those children over 18 who continue in education. We are talking about free GP services for the over-65s. We are talking about doubling the means test limit for the medical card. We are talking about all asthma sufferers having a medical card to give them not only GP services but drugs. We have issues like that already published and costed.
MB: Labour are saying they are willing to divert some of the money earmarked for the pre-funding of pensions to capital projects . . .
MN: We're not, no. We would stick to the one per cent commitment [a commitment to put one per cent of GNP into a fund to pay for future pensions] and if growth is over 5 per cent we will increase that to one and a half . . . From about 2020 on, dependency ratios are going to be very adverse. So we need to make provision for pensions going forward.
MB: Is the commitment to the one per cent a bottom line? Supposing someone said you should divert half of it for five years?
MN: Oh no. It's a bottom line. I think it would send a very bad signal out. In times when the macro management of the economy needs control on public expenditure it would send out an extremely bad signal to start taking money from the pension fund to make ends meet. That's exactly the wrong signal at the moment.
MB: Why is your party's poll rating so low?
MN: Well the national opinion polls are low. Our poll ratings have been low historically. Fine Gael always went into elections with much lower national polls than we actually achieved on election day.
If you look at the constituency polls . . . the figures are not consistent with polling at 20 or 21 per cent. They are consistent in polling somewhere between 26 and 30. It's all to play for, it will be a close run thing, I think it will be a photo finish.
MB: Is there now cross-party consensus on Northern Ireland? During John Bruton's time there was a very noticeable difference between the parties?
MN: Everybody is fully committed to the Good Friday agreement. Everybody is very committed to making the Good Friday agreement the Good Friday settlement. To that degree there is unanimity. I don't favour a Border poll. I think a Border poll now would only redivide a community that is beginning on the margins to knit.
MB: An issue that was very live when John Bruton was Taoiseach was whether the Irish Government should be seen as neutral in relation to taking sides in disputes between the political representatives of the two communities, or seen as basically representing the nationalist view in these things. Where do you think the Irish Government should position itself?
MN: I think the situation has changed and a different set of questions arise now. The side to take now is the side of the agreement. And whichever side is offside, both sovereign governments should be saying, look this is what the agreement says, this is where you should be and this is the way to carry it forward.
MB: How much money will you have to spend in the election campaign?
MN: We have had a very successful national draw. There is about a million to be spent during the election [the figure allowed to the party based on the number of candidates it is running]. We might be a little shy of that. We will probably get some personal contributions during the campaign.
MB: Has your ban on corporate donations and your limitation of personal donations to £1,000 had an impact on your fundraising?
MN: It hasn't, because we put a very strong push into out national draw and we had an extremely successful national draw. Also, when the Government brought in the limits on donations they also introduced compensation by giving extensive State money to all political parties. So we can fund our day to day funding from the Exchequer, so all the money we generate ourselves, whether just membership fees and the affiliation of branches, that's available for spending.
MB: In ballpark terms how much will come from reasonably large donations within the £1,000 limit?
MN: 97 or 98 per cent of it is £50 donations from members and their families. You'd get a few people who might buy five tickets - they cost £50 each.
MB: Presuming you get to choose a Cabinet shortly?
MN: Please God.
MB: Will you be going beyond your current front bench to fill it?
MN: What I've said to the front bench and the parliamentary party is that I have reserved the right to pull from the parliamentary party post election. Wherever the talent is. I have no commitment to select a Cabinet exclusively from the front bench.
MB: Could John Bruton end up in the Cabinet?
MN: I wouldn't rule anyone out. I put John Bruton on the European Convention because as a former Prime Minister he was the best man for it.
MB: Will Michael Lowry ever be back in the party?
MN: I can't see it, you know.
MB: Why do you think Bertie Ahern is so popular in the polls?
MN: It's something I don't have an answer to.
MB: Presumably whoever gets into Government will run another referendum on the Nice Treaty in the autumn. What will you do to get it through?
MN: I'm a good referendum campaigner. I think I did well in the last referendum. I did particularly well in the divorce referendum. I'm a good campaigner.
Whoever is in Government, the way to get this through is to mobilise the social partners. Congress has to be involved. If you go to Leixlip to one of those factories where there are 3,000 people working, they have to be told that the only reason that plant is in Leixlip is that we are the American gateway to the European Union, and that if we lose our connection to the European Union jobs are at risk.
The campaigning this time will have to be done on the level of principle rather than the level of detail. The question will have to be put bluntly to the Irish people. They'll have to be asked do you want to continue in the forefront of the European movement? All pro-Europe forces have to be mobilised, and the campaign is not to convert No's to Yes's. The campaign is to get the people who stayed at home to come out and vote.
MB: Would you consider a constitutional amendment on neutrality?
MN: I wouldn't.
MB: Why not?
MN: Because I think it would be impossible to take any stand on any international forum on anything. For example say Brian Cowen as Ireland's representative on the Security Council, anything he would participate in which would involve taking a side on anything would be challengeable in the Supreme Court in Ireland. So I don't think it is possible to operate a foreign policy if you had it in the Constitution.
MB: Speaking of not putting things into the Constitution, would you legislate for abortion?
MN: The logic of the referendum result is the status quo now prevails. I don't think a future Government will go a third time back to the people on a referendum to row back the X case.
It seems to me to legislate to accommodate Article 40.3.3. as interpreted in the X case is the way forward. It's very narrow. It's only where the mother's life is at risk through the pregnancy that there can be a termination. The origin of the pregnancy can't be looked at. So it would be unconstitutional to attempt to legislate for cases of rape or incest. So the scope for legislation is very narrow and it would need very precise drafting.
MB: Would it need time limits [after which an abortion could not take place]?
MN: Maybe not. If you look at the Bill which was produced by the Government which was going to be put into the Constitution which allowed a practitioner to intervene to terminate the life of the unborn where the mother's life is threatened from, say, cancer, the issue of time limits didn't come up.
MB: How many seats can you get on a good day?
MN: I don't want to put a figure on it, but we can certainly beat 60 on a good day.