Just Mary

by Mary O'Rourke

  I am not entirely sure who the creator of benchmarking was, but it quickly became an obsessive and ridiculous giant beyond our control. Senator Joe O’Toole put it most succinctly in an address at the INTO Congress in April 2000, as he sought to encourage his trade union membership to avail of benchmarking and thereby clinch whatever was the then three-year programme waiting to be ratified: ‘As far as the INTO is concerned, the move from traditional review to the benchmarking review is no more than going to a different ATM . . .’ And so it was. If you were in the public service, if you were a member of a trade union, if you were a member of the Dáil or the Seanad, you got money. Initially, you had to show that you had increased your productivity or how you might otherwise have earned it. But, of course, that was soon forgotten and benchmarking became an established rite-of-passage whereby, year by year, the public service and trade union members simply got more money because the mantra was that they had to catch up with the private sector. Naturally, it very quickly got out of hand and many of the ambitious work targets set for each sector of workers were just never realised.

  And so it was that in time the public sector grew out of control. In 2010, all of this culminated as we know in the present Agreement — loosely called the Croke Park Agreement. The name has nothing to do with the GAA, but refers to the venue where this agreement was drawn up between the government and the trade unions! The agreement was in essence a commitment by public servants and their managers to work together to change the way in which the public service does its business, so that both its cost and the number of those employed within it will fall significantly, while continuing to meet the need for services and improve the experience of service users. On the other hand, Croke Park did also offer some measure of protection to public service workers, in forbidding compulsory redundancies and providing guarantees that, following the downgrading of pay which had been necessitated by the very difficult financial times of 2008 to 2010, there would be no further reductions in this regard. And I think there must be many a public servant who is glad of these aspects of the arrangement, even though the high days are over and everyone is back to earth with a bump.

  In fact, Brian Lenihan, as Minister for Finance, did not fully approve of the Croke Park talks. On a particularly crucial day in the process, Brian was in Brussels, but keeping in touch with me by telephone. I gave a short interview on the plinth to RTÉ. Afterwards, Brian Cowen telephoned me in anger — although he did keep his calm — and more or less told me to mind my own business.

  Croke Park has doubtless served a purpose. We have come a long way, from the Programme for National Recovery to the minimalism of the Croke Park Agreement now. Along the way, many, many good things were done to enhance the quality of life for all in Ireland. But in the end, like a lot of arrangements, these programmes grew into something too stylised, too stultified and far too satisfactory for a certain number of people in Ireland — those in the public sector who gradually lost touch with the harsh reality of the daily struggles and risks being taken by many of those in private industry.

  Chapter 17

  BACK IN THE DÁIL

  As 2006 drew to a close, preparations on all sides were already underway for the forthcoming General Election, due to be held at some point the following spring or early summer. My own term as Leader of the Seanad would be coming to an end around the same time, of course, but all of my focus in terms of the future was firmly fixed on one goal: to win back the votes of my Longford–Westmeath constituents and my seat in the Dáil. I knew that Donie Cassidy, as the incumbent who had won the seat from me, would be equally determined to reassert his claim, and it was clear that the rivalry was going to be intense. This time, however, I was more than ready for the fight and had no intention of allowing any interference in my territory.

  As early as December 2006, and with as ever the invaluable support and assistance of my friend Mícheál Ó’Faoláin, my son Aengus and some other close friends, I took the bold step — which to some extent required me to put my money where my mouth was, as they say — and invested in a huge poster campaign. I was determined to get back my seat, to prove once more to my constituents, my family and myself that I could do it. There was a dual carriageway down to Kinnegad, but from Kinnegad to Athlone was still the old single-lane road which passed through the various villages. We took over a very, very big JCDecaux billboard opposite a small petrol station on the straight run into Kilbeggan. This was prime territory for me, which had been robbed from me by the tactics of the 2002 election, but on this occasion I was going to be sure to stake my claim well ahead in the game.

  We got terrific studio photographs taken and the huge billboard duly went up. On the day of New Year’s Eve 2006, Mícheál Ó’Faoláin and I drove out beyond Kilbeggan and then turned the car around and drove back, and the immense image hit us full force in the face — you couldn’t miss it. From then on, of course, it was bang, bang, bang! Donie would put up a poster and I would put up another one. Soon everyone’s posters were up and the campaign had started in earnest. It was tough but we were single-minded, and I roamed far and wide, canvassing and garnering support wherever I could. Throughout my five years in the Seanad, I had worked hard to ensure that I would have a staunch body of supporters upon whom I could call once the election date was set. Many weeks in advance we had also written to everyone who had had any dealings or contact with me, reminding them of the upcoming election and that I would be counting on their support and seeking their ‘number one’ vote.

  Meanwhile, there was huge tumult within Fianna Fáil in spring 2007, particularly during the months of March, April and May. Bertie Ahern had been called to the Mahon Tribunal to account for various ‘dig-outs’ that he had got and, in particular, to explain — though it couldn’t easily be done — how, in all the years he was Minister for Finance, he had never had a bank account. Now, in a way I understood in part why his outgoing expenses were so high. He had separated from Miriam as we know, but he felt of course that it was his duty to ensure that she and his two daughters could maintain a certain standard of living. He also had the expenses associated with a home for himself, in addition to the living quarters above St Luke’s. These costly matters had to be provided for.

  Around that time, Bertie gave a memorable television interview to Bryan Dobson. It was a very skilful, clever interview, during which just the hint of a tear was discernible in his eye, although of course he did not openly cry. Many people liked him so much that they wanted to believe everything he said. He spoke candidly, it seemed, about the various people who had given him ‘dig-outs’ — such as Paddy ‘the Plasterer’ Reilly — and although there could have been a comic side to it, with some of the names these people had, the public listened and seemed to be interested. Even so, clouds were beginning to gather above Bertie during these months and it seemed that his ‘Teflon’ coating was in danger of melting. He knew the election was to be called soon, and it was his dearest wish to be able to guide Fianna Fáil to victory for a third time.

  Soon there were a number of stories circulating about the so-called ‘men in grey suits’ having to go to see Bertie and telling him, ‘Listen, if you don’t do something and snap out of it, we’re going to be lost at the polls!’ At one point too, on his return from a work trip to the Far East, Brian Cowen paid the Taoiseach a similar visit. Soon after, Bertie appeared to rally himself and pronounced that he was ready to push forward with the 2007 election campaign, as the figurehead for Fianna Fáil. In early May, the General Election was called for the 24th of that month. As campaigning began in earnest, there was a certain sense of unease at first, but as momentum grew, Bertie’s strengths once more came to the fore.

  So for all of us now, it was full speed ahead to Election Day. My two sons fought a fantastic campaign with me and it was such a great comfort to have my own on the stump with me, so to speak, now that there was no Enda. Aided and abetted also by all of the party people and my friends in Longford–Westmeath, and with the stal
wart guidance of my valiant Director of Elections, P.J. Coghill, I was able to canvass very strongly and, as it would turn out, very effectively too. Bertie Ahern did a repeat of the tour of Ireland which had been so successful in 2002, but this time there was not the same atmosphere of loving adulation from the people. He did come to Athlone, however — two days before the vote — and many people turned out to meet him. I felt that he was in his own way trying to make up for what had happened with me in the previous General Election, and it seemed clear that his coming to Athlone that evening had a very good effect on the voters from my point of view. On Election Day itself and to my delight, I had a very good return indeed, with a great poll result. I got over 8,000 votes, and was the second highest in the count next to Willie Penrose for Labour. It was a huge result and one in which I took terrific pleasure.

  Fianna Fáil as a party would win through at that election too, in spite of all of the doubt and uncertainty which hung over Bertie’s continued dealings with the Mahon Tribunal. It was of course a relatively narrow victory. In retrospect, I am convinced that that would have been the General Election for us to lose and for Enda Kenny to win. Had Fine Gael/Labour got into government in that summer of 2007 (and they very nearly did), all of the subsequent brutal budgets would have been theirs to impose and any bail-out of the country by the Troika of the IMF/European Central Bank/EU would have been carried out under a Fine Gael/Labour regime.

  Three weeks after the election, on 14 June 2007, the Dáil reassembled. Séamus Brennan had enticed the Greens to come into government with us, while Bertie had done his usual love-in with the Independents, whom he always made sure to keep onside. And thus the new government was in place. I had just turned 70 and did not at all expect that I would get any frontbench position, junior or otherwise — and neither did I want one. I was more than happy to have at last the opportunity to enjoy being a vigorous backbencher, a position which I had not held before because during all the earlier stages in my political career, I had either been a Minister, a Minister of State or a frontbench Spokesperson, or in equivalent roles in Opposition. One way or another, my work in politics had been a juggling act between dealing with national issues and doing my best to try to keep my constituents in Athlone and elsewhere happy. As a frontbencher, I had often been in the firing line. Now I was in the rearguard and able to do the firing myself. Although I never fired just because I wanted to fire!

  Meanwhile, Bertie Ahern had asked Brian Lenihan to take on the role of Minister for Justice and Brian was truly delighted. As was I on his behalf — we were all very pleased that he had come into sunshine at last. Otherwise, the financial storm clouds were gathering in earnest by this time. Bertie, however, played bravado, saying that people who spoke in sombre tones about such matters were only seeking to wreck the economy, and so on. But, with the tribunal continuing all the while its relentless review of Bertie’s finances (or lack thereof!), the miasma of uncertainty was over Fianna Fáil. The true extent of the country’s troubles was yet to be revealed, of course.

  For the time being, however, I settled into my nice modest office over in the building ‘2000’, as we called it. Lisa Foran, who had worked with me in the Seanad office, came with me and I was glad to keep her. She was somebody I knew and trusted, and she similarly liked and trusted me, and we worked very well together. So I was set fair for life in government again — this time, as a sturdy, outgoing and hardworking backbencher.

  I was very busy in my constituency at this time, having set up a constituency office in Athlone which was run by the very capable Breda Browne. Breda and her husband Seamus have always been among my loyal friends and supporters. By this time, the mobile phone had for some years been proving to be a very useful tool for those in public life in particular, because it meant easy accessibility and easy follow-up. Now that I was once more a TD, I made fastidious use of the system of Dáil questions, of which I would generally put forward at least half a dozen per week, if not more. I also took a very keen interest in the debates at parliamentary party meetings. I always contributed where I felt it would be helpful and expressed my discontent where I felt an issue was worthy of complaint. I hugely enjoyed those encounters and they remain as clear to me now as they were at the time. In the whole of my political life, in fact, I don’t think that I missed more than one or two parliamentary party meetings, and only then because I was away from the Dáil on business of one kind or another.

  When I first got back into the Dáil in 2007, I decided that I would speak on those matters of legislation in which I was particularly interested. We would have about a week’s notice as to which legislative points were to be on the agenda for the following week, and I would select those for which I had specific ideas or direct experience. However, I didn’t ever write out scripts or have them prepared in advance. I just rang up the Whip’s office, got my time slot and then went along to speak at the arranged time. As time went on, I was pleased to note that more and more of whatever I said was being reported in the daily reports of the Dáil. But I was especially pleased to now have the chance to express myself freely — which I could not do when I had been a Minister. Mind you, even then, I had never allowed myself to be too caught up in the protocol of not saying this or not saying that. But being a backbencher now gave me great freedom and I explored it to the full.

  As well as my constituency and Dáil commitments, I had another important role to fulfil within the new government: one which I was initially tentative about but which I found to be both worthwhile and satisfying. When Bertie Ahern as newly re-elected Taoiseach was selecting his Cabinet and making his other appointments, he had telephoned me one day to ask if I would be the Chairperson of the All-Party Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children. ‘You were a great success in Education, Mary,’ he said. ‘And I know that you genuinely have children’s interests at heart . . .’

  Of course, I was extremely honoured to be so invited, but I had inner qualms about chairing an all-party committee, knowing how difficult it can be to chair a committee of any kind. However I duly accepted and the various parties put forward their nominees. For Fine Gael, the big guns were Alan Shatter, Frances Fitzgerald and Michael Noonan, who was appointed Deputy Chair of the Committee; for Labour, there was Brendan Howlin and Alex White; Sinn Féin nominated Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, who, notably, would not miss a single meeting of the committee. Paul Gogarty was appointed from the Greens, while for Fianna Fáil, we had such heavyweights such as Maria Corrigan, Thomas Byrne and Seán Ó Fearghaíl. In general, it was the Opposition deputies who were appointed to the key positions in the committee — there was a lot of flux within the Fianna Fáil ranks, but that I fully understood, as they of course would be heavily committed elsewhere with all of their various frontbench obligations.

  The date of our first meeting was 22 November 2007. I was very conscious of the huge responsibility of being in charge of an all-party committee with a mandate to bring about a consensus wording relating to the Constitutional Amendment on Children. It was a responsibility not only because our brief was a highly important one, but also because I would be required to mediate between and manage a number of big political personalities, while ensuring that we made steady progress on all of the key issues.

  After our initial tentative meeting that November, we agreed that the first official meeting of the committee would take place in January 2008 and so in effect our work began then. We were very lucky to have secured a fine Secretary to the committee in the shape of Ann Marie Fahey. Ann Marie was a civil servant attached to the Houses of the Oireachtas, and as such, well-versed in dealing with various committees. She was also someone who approached her work with such professionalism and dedication that I can honestly say she was one of the finest civil servants I have ever met.

  At that first meeting in January 2008, once we had set up our business stall, so to speak, I proposed that we would meet on a given day and at a given time on either a weekly or fortnightly basis, depending on t
he pace of business and the agenda which we had set ourselves. I had seen the committee system at close quarters in Leinster House, and I was strongly of the opinion that much of it was nothing more than grandstanding: members hauling in public figures so that they could upbraid them, get a couple of soundbites in the media and be in the spotlight as heroes or heroines for a while, without very much of any concrete value being achieved. So my suggestion was that we would carry out our business in private as far as possible, except where there was a clear demand for a particular meeting to be conducted in public. In that way, we went about our business quietly and efficiently, with nobody to bother us as we did so. It was a highly effective move, and one we were soon glad to have taken at such an early stage.

  Let me go back in time. The need for a constitutional amendment on the rights of children had been first mooted in 1993 by the then Judge Catherine McGuinness, when she headed the Report of the Kilkenny Incest Investigation. At the conclusion of the report, Judge McGuinness put forward her belief that, until there was a change in the Constitution regarding the situation of children and their protection, needs and rights, deplorable matters, such as the one she had just adjudicated on, would continue to erupt into Irish life. After 1993, the issue would come to the fore again from time to time with ferocity, when a particularly terrible case of the abuse of children within their own family unit would come to light. Everybody would wring their hands and the combined call for a change in the Constitution would be reignited — only for the issue to inevitably die down again. This is the way of public life in Ireland and something which is, I am sure, replicated elsewhere throughout the world. When an issue is current and in the media spotlight, everybody will complain, remonstrate and demand that action should be taken. As soon as the issue disappears from the headlines, so do the complaints. And so it was also with this contentious issue.