When the Coalition hit the slippery slope

What a difference a budget can make! A fairly level economic playing pitch, with broad consensus on policy, was suddenly transformed…

What a difference a budget can make! A fairly level economic playing pitch, with broad consensus on policy, was suddenly transformed into a slippery slope where Fianna Fail and the Progressive Democrats tried desperately to keep their feet while the opposition parties moved to firmer, higher ground.

Mr McCreevy confessed: never in his wildest dreams had he imagined his tax proposals would generate that kind of negative public reaction. As to whether his belated concessions to stay-at-home wives would extinguish the "bush fire" he had started, the Minister simply did not know. And the consequences, in terms of further social welfare payments and tax concessions to the lowest paid, were still working their way through the system.

Even if Mr McCreevy's budget can be resuscitated, its negative emotional and political impact is likely to be considerable. It could influence the vote-getting ability of Fianna Fail and the PDs in the next general election and, more importantly, dictate the composition of any future coalition government.

The main reason the Budget caused such a furore was because it ran counter to public expectations. For months, Government representatives and social partners had discussed the future of the so-called Celtic Tiger and considered ways of ensuring strong economic growth while sharing benefits within the context of a new national wage agreement. A month before the Budget, the recommendations of the National Economic and Social Council were accepted as a template for future development.

READ MORE

On income tax, the report said: "An increase in the personal allowance at which people enter the tax system is the most effective way of helping the low paid while, at the same time, providing reductions of equal amounts to most taxpayers in a straightforward way. The Council also attaches significant priority to an increase in the income level at which people become liable for the higher rate."

In other words, priority should be given to helping the low paid, with people at middle income levels also having their tax charges reduced.

It didn't happen like that. The Budget unashamedly favoured the better off, with cuts of up to 50 per cent in capital and corporation taxes; income tax reductions favouring higher earners; £4 a week for the unemployed and little progress on childcare. But the item that acted as a lightning conductor for public anger and helped to unify disparate elements in opposition to the Budget was the treatment of stay-at-home wives.

It took a week for the Government to partially defuse that issue. Then it had to compensate those social welfare recipients who had been left out. And ICTU demands for larger tax allowances for the low paid have yet to be resolved.

In an attempt to minimise damage and recover the situation, Bertie Ahern took control of negotiations with the social partners. He admitted the Budget had lacked balance and promised future redress. It was fire-brigade stuff that brought joy to the hearts of the opposition parties. At a time when they had expected to be dismissed to the sidelines while Coalition Ministers doled out the benefits of a booming economy, they were centre stage - leading the charge of angry voters.

John Bruton and Fine Gael emerged as the immediate winners. The party's spokesman on finance, Michael Noonan, was the first to alert women about the inequities involved in the way tax individualisation was being introduced. And he was there again to excoriate the terms of the Government's U-turn. But, through it all, Mr Bruton was passionate and committed in defence of traditional family values and Fine Gael was seen to be the big hitter on the issue.

The Labour Party joined in the attack but, having favoured individualisation for social welfare purposes, it didn't concentrate on women in the home. Instead, it singled out low pay, child benefit and social services as the pressure points. Ruairi Quinn declared on radio that Labour would "not go into government with any party that is going to give money to people who don't need it, while withholding services from those that do".

From a position where the Labour Party had been gradually distancing itself from Fine Gael on matters of income tax and social policy, it was a big shift. On two occasions in the Dail over a matter of months, Derek McDowell had rejected Fine Gael's new income tax proposals, which advocate introducing a new 35 per cent income tax rate and reducing the number paying tax at the top rate to five per cent. Instead, he had favoured increasing allowances for the lower paid, while leaving the tax rates unchanged. And the party had advocated much higher public spending on social services.

That careful choreography was blown away by Mr McCreevy's Budget. Suddenly, the opposition parties - led by Fine Gaeland including the Labour Party, the Green Party, Sinn Fein and the Socialist Party - were all swept up in a wave of public anger directed against the Budget and the Government. The Minister had driven a deep wedge between Fianna Fail and the Progressive Democrats and the other political parties.

From a position where all Dail parties had been agreed on the broad parameters of economic policy, the Government had suddenly changed the goalposts. And it wasn't simply a McCreevy solo run. As far back as last September, Bertie Ahern said that ensuring people on modest incomes would not pay tax at 46 per cent would be the focus of the Budget. That happened. He also said most Ministers agreed that 46 per cent was not an unreasonable tax rate for top earners to pay for modern services. Mary Harney objected. She insisted the Progressive Democrats' commitment to cut the top rate of tax be implemented. Then McCreevy introduced his individualisation system to square the circle, without the necessary balancing arrangements for childcare.

The rest is history.

The Taoiseach is desperately trying to recapture the economic middle ground by embracing the NESC report and opening negotiations with ICTU on the position of the low paid and families on social welfare. It will be a hard battle. And it remains to be seen whether Ahern can re-establish Fianna Fail's credentials as a party of social inclusion before the general election arrives and the dance of government-formation begins.

Denis Coghlan can be contacted at dcoghlan@irish-times.ie