New economic council is really just a subcommittee

Gatherings of senior management can lead to a sense of exclusion among other managers

THE WORKINGS of Cabinet government are seldom analysed in our political system so Stephen Collins’s feature yesterday on the Economic Management Council was particularly welcome.

The council, made up of the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure, meets once a week to co-ordinate economic policy.

One can see why, given the incoherence on economic policy exhibited by the last government, the current Coalition is anxious to talk up the significance of the Economic Management Council.

As one would expect, the four Ministers who are members would be anxious to emphasise the centrality of their roles. This administration also comes with a cohort of new senior civil servants, some of whom are proving as adept as their political masters at talking to the media.

Talking up the role of the council is double-edged. Large organisations sometimes find that structured gatherings of very senior management, while designed to enable greater co-ordination, can lead instead to a sense of exclusion among other managers.

The concept of party leaders and the Minster for Finance meeting regularly is welcome, although it is not new to this Government. Similarly, the attendance of secretaries general of relevant departments or senior advisers at Cabinet subcommittees is not new.

The concept of the politicians on such a committee wishing to meet without the administrators or advisers is also not novel, although one hopes that in this Government as political colleagues they get to do so very frequently without having to give their get-togethers such a grandiose title. These gatherings are in reality no more than a subcommittee of a Cabinet economic subcommittee. This Government again exhibits its fetish for grand-sounding committee titles by calling this economic subcommittee an Economic Management Council.

As with all senior committees the exclusions are more telling than the inclusions. An Economic Management Council that does not include the Minister for Jobs is a curious thing; it would be like a Cabinet war council without the Minister for Defence.

We are told this committee is overseeing the implementation of the EU-IMF bailout yet it deliberates on these matters without the big spending Ministers. It is to be presumed, for example, that the overrun in health expenditure was the subject of discussion at the council meetings before the recess. As Minister for Health, and, indeed, deputy leader of Fine Gael, should not James Reilly be party to any senior discussions on this?

One can also see why Joan Burton, deputy leader of the Labour Party and Minister for Social Protection, whose department is likely to be the theatre for the next round of expenditure battles, might resent such matters being dealt with before Cabinet discussions, at cross-party meetings which she and her secretary general do not get to attend.

It is actually the dramatic reconfiguration of department responsibilities at the core of Cabinet rather than the actual creation of this council that has been the more significant.

Overall responsibility for European affairs has been shifted from the Department of Foreign Affairs to the Taoiseach’s department, where it is headed up by a second secretary who doubles as head of the office of the Tánaiste based in Government Buildings.

Even more dramatic has been the carving out of a semi-independent Department of Public Expenditure and Reform from the Department of Finance.

The co-ordination of national policy towards European affairs at prime ministerial level is the norm in other European capitals. It should have been done here long ago and was mooted by both Garret FitzGerald and Charlie Haughey, both of whom saw their proposals fail because of turf wars between mandarins, some of which were depicted colourfully in the opening restaurant scene of Eamonn Delaney’s An Accidental Diplomat.

A designated Minister focusing on public expenditure and public sector reform is also long overdue. This new department is delivering on tighter expenditure controls, although it remains to be seen if it can deliver on substantial public sector reform.

It is ultimately personal relations between politicians rather than structures which shape the cohesion and effectiveness of coalition governments. It is clear that Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore enjoy a strong working bond. Harmony between party leaders helps, although it would be naive of them to think that they alone can resolve all internal Coalition disputes.

Michael Noonan and Brendan Howlin also know each other well, have previous experience of coalition together and are cohabiting successfully in Merrion Street.

The relations between Ministers in the wider Cabinet are clearly not as harmonious.

The blanket coverage of the Olympics means that this year the Government has been saved the excess of silly season political coverage. Even allowing for this, however, there was a bizarre story about the introduction of a scheme for wealthy people to renounce their child benefit, which the department itself quickly rubbished.

The more damaging spat has been the exchanges between Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney and Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn over suggestions that third-level grants might be means-tested on the basis of assets rather than income.

Like the earlier exchanges between Coveney and Pat Rabbitte on cheese advertising and between Brendan Howlin and James Reilly on health spending, they have unfortunately occurred along the inter-party fault line.

More generally there appears to be communications difficulties down the lines to the two parliamentary parties.

Cohesion will have to improve at all levels of economic and message management if the Government is to carefully chart the political storm which will greet its next budget.