Is there anything useful any other state in the world can learn from the success of the Irish economy over the last five years? We have a story to tell. But do we know what it is yet? And are we confident enough in it?
This question came to mind when I was looking at the list of public figures attending the World Economic Forum in Davos this week. There was no Irish political figure there. The Irish contigent comprised: Mrs Mary Robinson, (as UN High Commissioner); Prof Anthony Hourihan, of UCD; Mr Anthony Kennedy, of Co-operation Ireland; Mr Laurence Crowley and Mr Maurice Keane, chairman and chief executive respectively of Bank of Ireland; Eircom chief executive, Mr Alfie Kane; Lochlann Quinn, AIB chairman; and Mr Peter Sutherland, Goldman Sachs chairman. The World Economic Forum is a private venture, a club to which one pays a hefty annual fee of around €12,000 (£9,450). It has successfully marketed itself for 30 years, in a competitive environment for think-tanks, foundations and policy forums.
Of course, we don't necessarily need to participate in clubs where political, business and intellectual leaders "come together to shape the global agenda"; people "who belong to the same community of top decision-makers, fostering a unique club atmosphere which is very conducive to a forward-looking approach in addressing key issues of global relevance or initiating new business contacts". Maybe we wouldn't feel comfortable there, a bit bashful as a small country without much influence, without an audience queuing up to hear what our Taoiseach, Finance Minister or Foreign Minister has to say about globalisation, world trade, culture and economics, the third way, global governance and so on. But if it were a forum on peace, reconciliation and conflict resolution, we'd think differently about not being there, not being heard, and no one being interested in our story.
There have been times since September 1994 that some of us have thought we have something to offer as regards conflict resolution. Northern Ireland and Anglo-Irish relations were a new model that could be looked to for useful lessons, like South Africa. The solution was not borrowed from elsewhere; it was, in fact, invented here, in the triangle between Dublin, London and Belfast. Right now, we can't be so sure we have a model for success, because the final achievement is not yet secure enough. Notwithstanding that doubt, it is clear that the working out of the Northern Ireland and Anglo-Irish issue has been one of the most self-conscious aspects of public policy in the history of the State. Policymakers knew that new ground was being broken. There was nowhere else to look to, ultimately. It had to be invented here. For that reason, if and when stability is delivered, there will be a lesson for the world from the process.
Can the same be said of our economic performance? The Irish economic success has been unique in Europe in the last decade. If it has been merely the result of large doses of luck, then there is no lesson for anyone, and no credit due to ourselves as economic managers either. If it is fundamentally based on beggar-thy-neighbour policies in the hunt for foreign investment and the dangling of tax incentives, then few sustainable lessons can be drawn from it. If success has been the result of a benign attitude from Brussels and EU member-states, then they, not we, deserve the credit, and it is in their gift as to whether our success continues.
What has been self-consciously, peculiarly Irish about our economic story? If we are not purposeful and clear about the policies that have worked and that we need for the future, then the chances are that we will not exercise any particularly distinct policies going forward. We shall become more susceptible to pressure for non-distinctive policies from the European Commission and the member-states. These policies may or may not be right for us, but our politics will become limited to which town gets which hospital, how much certain public servants are paid, who organised the bin collections, where to place an incinerator; localism, par excellence, the concerns of a good system of local administration.
In that scenario, we would truly have nothing to say to the world about distinctly successful policies for a small, open economy on the big issues of employment, sustainable wealth creation and a balanced society. We will not say, as Charlie McCreevy effectively did say this week, to critics in the European Commission (or the IMF or the OECD) - thank you very much for your opinions, very interesting, but we are confident we are right about our economy, and we intend to take our own counsel.
Being self-conscious, and self-confident, about our chosen, distinct policies matters a lot. It matters more than going to Davos to tell the world about it, more even than having international observers and partners concede that we just might be right about our own economy.
