ANALYSIS:The party's shortest election manifesto in many years contains no new spending pledges

IT IS rare indeed for a political party anywhere to base its election campaign on the promise of no new spending commitments but that is exactly what Micheál Martin did yesterday at the launch of Real Plan: Better Future,the shortest Fianna Fáil manifesto in many years. At just 35 pages, the document is unrecognisably different to the 153-page, pledge-filled tome the party produced for the 2007 election or the similarly extravagant 92-page manifesto of 2002.

Despite its brevity (or perhaps because of it) yesterday’s package is a lot more credible and considerably bolder than any other manifesto with which the party has waged an election campaign in recent years.

“We have put aside the old approach of developing a long list of proposals on every issue for every interest group,” said Martin. “The money is not there,” he added bluntly. In this, he is making a virtue of necessity.

The first two sections of the three-section manifesto are essentially a summary of the National Recovery Plan published just after the terms of the EU-IMF bailout were announced in November.

Section one simply repeats the budgetary commitments made at the time and many of the tables and graphics are lifted from the National Recovery Plan. Martin was adamant about these targets, claiming (unconvincingly) that diverging from the plan is not possible. Echoing his remarks at a press conference last Friday, he said: “There is no other way.”

Section two of the manifesto includes commitments on competitiveness. Fianna Fáil’s credibility is close to zero on implementing the sort of competitiveness-enhancing reforms listed in the manifesto.

The document will do little to rebuild its credibility, as the reforms it includes are mostly changes that the National Competitiveness Council has been urging governments to implement for years. Those governments sat on their hands.

Martin’s personal credibility in this sphere matches that of the governments of which he has been a senior member. His four-year stint at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment from 2004 to 2008 will not be remembered as a time when the cost of doing business was cut because of his reforming zeal.

The third and final section of the manifesto deals with political reform. It is the boldest and most original section. Martin’s Pauline conversion to the cause of real reform of the State’s creaking political edifice is perhaps less surprising than his record of new thinking on policy would suggest. He is both clever and reflective. Now he is contrite, too.

Yesterday, the Fianna Fáil leader was candid in saying that underlying flaws in how the system works went unseen during the boom years. He now accepts the political system is no longer fit for purpose and unveiled a plan for reform that is, in one very important way at least, more far-reaching than the sets of proposals put forward by Fine Gael and the Labour Party.

The manifesto commits the party to introducing a separation between the executive and legislative branches of government by obliging those elected representatives who are appointed to ministerial office to give up their Dáil seats and by allowing non-politicians to serve as ministers.

Though this might sound radical, it would merely bring Ireland into line with non- Westminster democracies, in which ministerial power is separated from lawmaking power for reasons of accountability and effectiveness.

When asked, Martin gave specific examples of the gains of ending Westminster-style double-jobbing.

In two roles he has held – minister for foreign affairs and minister for enterprise, trade and employment – extensive foreign travel is required to sell Ireland abroad, help exporters win new markets and lure foreign investment. When serving in those roles he was at times obliged to return from trips to fulfil his parliamentary duties, he said. A minister focused solely on enterprise and trade could be more effective and would, he said, be better placed to crack Asian markets, where the door-opening power of high political office is so important.

Yesterday’s proposals, if implemented, would amount to the biggest change in the basic architecture of government in the State’s history and improve the effectiveness of policymaking, in the economic sphere and in others, too.