Guests of the Nation

EVERY SINGLE TD in the Dail is subsidised to the tune of £13,84 tor food, every day the Dail sits. This is the breakdown of the £200,000 subsidy of taxpayers' money to the Dail restaurant. By Gene Kerrigan

Here is the workrate and remuneration of the average ill. He (and the average ,TD is a he) drives to the Dail ¸and let's say he lives seve!"!:ty miles from;Leillo~ter.House. For this one-way drive he ggts, on average, £3-4.~5. He stays in Dublin for three days while the Dail sits. Por'fhis-he gets £8~.50. Then he drives home again and gets another £34.25 for that.

His wages, on top of this, average £188.65 for every day the Dail sits. However, there are some TDs who are fullltime. so we work it out like a normal wage packet, as if they worked full-time, a full week and a full year. That's £315.63 per week. Only half of this is taxed.

So, our average TD, with pay and allowances, is pulling in £466 a week, before tax. The figures are not much smaller after tax. Why TDs

should pay tax on only half their wages is something of a puzzle. It is because of "an arrangement" with the.revenue people.

Let's go back to our average TD, havingarrived in Leinnster House on one of the 87 days which the house sits, on average, each year. There, he goes to an office, heated, cleaned and maintained for him at no cost: There he writes letters and makes phone calls for a few hours. Occasionally he might have to go down to the Dail Chamber and vote, or he might feel like a bit of amusement and go down for a controversial debate and slag the opposing party for a while. Mostly, though, he sticks to his office, writing letters and making phone calls.

The letters he writes, or dictates, are typed up by a secretary paid by the taxpayers at a cost of £8,598 per year. On average he will spend £70.74 per day that the Dail sits on postage and phone calls.

In addition, there are a number of auxilary services in the Dail not included here. For instance, the Dail ushers are expected to look after the TDs hand and foot. It is quite common to see a TD lounging in his seat beckon an usher. The usher, whose weekly wages are about the same as the increase which Garret FitzGerald has just given himself, is despatched and returns carrying a glass of water for the TD.

However, all this aside, our average TD, living seventy miles from Dublin, gets £20,792, minus a small amount of tax, into his hand each year for salary and allowances. On top of this there are the post and phone allowances, plus the secretary, so that each such TD costs us a total of £36,748 a year.

Suppose that average TD lived in Dublin, five miles from the GPO. He would get only £2.35 for driving into the Dail. There he would pick up £16. This is called "attenndance money". You get this just for turning up. The Dublin TD would get £409.77 per year for driving back and forth to work at the Dail. Plus £1,392 a year for turning up for work. And £16,413 in salary. Again, minus a small amount of tax, he gets £18,214.77 a year. On top of that he costs us £15,956 a year to feed him, type his letters, post them and pay for his phone calls. A total of £34,170.77. Less than his country cousin, but he doesn't have to do all that driving.

After the latest splurge, Garret FitzGerald costs us £44,350 in wages. This is just for starters. There's another £50,000 to cart him around. Garret FitzGerald has brought several of his Fine Gael aides in to help. They are called "advisers". Altogether, for his wages, travel, food subsidy, letters, advisers and the like, Garret FitzGerald costs the taxpayer, at a conservative estimate, £146,698 a year.

Charlie Haughey would cost the same if he were Taoiseach. At the moment, with wages and pensions he gets £29,004. Plus the food, travel (state car, £50,000), seccretaries etc.

Dick Spring is paid £36,998, plus extras (car, food, secretary, advisers), call it £120,000.

On February 25 Alan Dukes, Minister for Finance, said "there is no alternative to cutting back on state expenditure across the board. The scale of the difficulties is such that no area of state activity could be exempted". Except, appaarently, TDs. He then told us, "pay increases in low single figures will have to be accepted". The TDs gave themselves 19%. On March 25 he said "we must get the best value for the spending we continue to undertake". See below for the value the TDs give. On April 11 he called for "sacrifices" and said, "these sacrifices must be borne by all sectors". Except, apparently, the TD sector. On May 2 he said, "we must be prepared for some pain in the short run". Alan Dukes now earns £34,794, plus the state car, the subsidised food and all the other extras. They ease the pain.

**
ALAN DUKES WENT TO LUNCH AT THE Killeshin Hotel in Portlaoise on May 30. The lunch was in celebration of the tenth anniverrsary of Tretorn Sports Ltd. There, he delivered himself of -such gems as, "I am confident, given the commpany's impressive record, that the Tretorn tennis balls made here in Portlaoise will have an even bigger share of the market in the future."

On April 11 he had been to the opening of an extension to Maynooth Vocational School where he noted that "any reference to the Maynooth Parents Association would be incomplete without some mention of the American Tea Parties for which the Association is fast becoming famous."

No one would begrudge the makers of tennis balls or the holders of tea parties, of whatever nationality, their success. Long may they bounce and pour. But the necessity of having the Minister of Finance present to spout banalities is questionable. Dukes, like our other ministers, is constanttly motoring around the country, hopping from lunch to dinner to ribbon-cutting ceremony, delivering himself of various banalities.

Whether opening new offices for Diners Club (September 22, "It is about one thousand years since money was first introduced to Ireland in the wake of the Norse Settlements ... ") or scoffing a Dublin Chamber of Commerce lunch (July 7, "Let us hope that Dublin and its citizens find a safe passage through the next hundred years, so that your Chamber will still have cause to look back ... ") Dukes, like the other ministers, is ferried around at enormous expense to the taxpayer. The speeches he delivers are compiled by highly-paid civil servants, typed on paper paid for by taxxpayers, by typists paid for by taxpayers and circulated to the press by messengers paid for by taxpayers.

This circus, where ministers are roped in as cheapie guest stars, is a massive abuse of public funds. It is also a very large part of what politicians describe as their "hectic workrate" when they are criticised. The events which the ministers attend are run by competent people and would take place anyway - the ministers bring nothing to them but their banalities. In return, the minister gets press coverrage, local or national, and also gets to meet and influence large numbers of people who may be useful to the minister's party or to him or her as an individual at subsequent elections.

A large proportion of the events which Dukes, for instance, graces with his presence are held in Kildare, his constituency. ("We are all aware of the rising rate of unemmployment in County Kildare and the IDA is sparing no effort . . .") The countless miles he travels glad-handing voters and making friends are clocked up as "work", to justify the immense salaries the ministers pay themselves and the state cars with which they provide themselves.

Garret FitzGerald, when challenged about this abuse of state funds, attempted to defend the state cars by claiming they were necessary for "security reasons". However, one state car ended up upside down in a ditch, and was left there, complete with sub-machine gun under the seat. Another was stolen from outside a Dublin hotel. FitzGerald claimed that in particular ministers in "sensitive" posts, such as ministers for Justice and former ministers for Jusstice, need such cars. Yet, Sean Doherty, former Minister for Justice, doesn't have a state car. However, Gerry Collins, the Fianna Fail Minister for Justice before Doherty, still has a state car.

EVEN SOME OF THOSE WHO HAVE DEFENNded the recent increases granted to TDs and Senators have made noises about the timing being wrong. The timing, for political purposes, was spot on and fits in with the overall political strategy of the Coalition.

The decision to make such a large cut in the budget deficit and the consequent stringency in this year's budget was a political decision. The speed with which the figures were being reduced and the extent of the reduction went beyond anything thought necessary by independent econoomists. The decision was made in order to leave greater leeeway for softer budgets and more goodies towards the end of the Coalition's period of office. The effect on the economy was secondary to the Coalition's political needs.

Similarly, the decision to plunder the public purse and line their own pockets was made now because it had to be got out of the way in the earlier period of the regime. That meant this year or next year - and, since it couldn't be done too soon after a budget, this is a better time than most to do it. In addition, the procedure has now been rigged so that the increases will in future come automatiically, with the minimum public fuss.

In defending themselves, the TDs have explained at great length about the seventy or eighty hours per week they work. They have pointed to all the expenses they have.

Most TDs don't work seventy or eighty hours a week.

When TDs enter the Dail they have no function except to vote when and how they are told by their party whip. They may on the odd occasion come down to the Chamber and shout abuse at their opponents. Some might make a coheerent speech now and then. It doesn't matter, no one listens. Even if they listened it wouldn't matter. Legislation is not formulated or scrutinised in any significant way by the Dail itself. It is formulated by the Cabinet and by civil servants. On rare occasions TDs will influence the formulation of legislation - through parliamentary party meetings, not through the Dail itself. Many TDs spend years in the Dail without making a speech - if they do speak it is usually on a local issue, in order to get into the local paper, or simply an abuse of their opponents.

Question Time is provided for ordinary TDs to elicit information on policy and administration. The idea is that the TD can monitor government performance. A Magill survey of over seven thousand Dail questions showed that 60% are asked solely so that the answer can be used by the TD for electoral purposes. Many of the remaining questions asked ( about public telephone kiosks and group water schemes, for instance), while ostensibly to do with policy decisions are also asked for electoral purposes. Many others (does the Minister know if any new jobs will be provided in such-and-such an area?) are to generate publicity for the TD ("Local TD Slams Minister On Jobs") and have no other use. The processing of these questions costs many thousands of pounds per year.

A handful of TDs use Question Time for its intended purpose.

This year, in the face of criticism of their irrelevance, the TDs carried out a major reform. They set up several Dail committees which will allow TDs do real work, examiining and developing legislation. So far, the committees have been less than impressive: There have been childish rows, with members of one party trying to physically lock out members of another party so as to hog the Chair. The committees have met at best once or twice a month, some meeting less frequently, some not bothering even to keep up that workrate. The only committee which has done any regular work is the one which looks after the TDs' restaurant in Leinster House.

The reason for the lackadasical attitude is simple: not enough press coverage. TDs complained to the party whips, even before the committees were set up, at the prospect of sitting in a room, working, without reporters there to type up their praises. Bertie Ahern, Fianna Fail Chief Whip, suggested that TDs sitting on committees should receive some extra money, to make the work more attractive. The TDs receive very large salaries, but unless the work they're offered benefits them electorally or financially they won't do it.

So, what do TDs do for that seventy or eighty hours a week? Bertie Ahern: "Ninety-five percent of Deputies spend 95 percent of their time working for their constiituents." The phrase !Working for their constituents" is code for "securing their re-election". The Dail questions, the rants against opponents, the occasional speech - all coming under the heading of "work" - are publicity and public relations exercises. In addition, TDs spend many hours collecting notes on constituents' problems. These generate heals of paperwork. The TD writes to the Minisster. who writes to the Department, which writes back to the Minister, who writes back to the TD, who writes to the constituent. We pay for the paper. And the typing. And the postage.

The reason such problems are brought to TDs is because of the faulty public service, with long delays in processing inquiries and despatching information. The TDs are in a position to reform that system but have deliberately and consciously refused to do so. They create and maintain a system in which voters are dependent on them for inforrmation and for apparent favours.

Another aspect of this is the TD's need to motor around the constituency, appearing at meetings and functions - in much the same way that Alan Dukes and Co do - gladdhanding the locals.

This is the seventy or eighty hours work a week which the TDs do. The minority who use the Question system for public benefit, who participate in the limited way allowed them in influencing legislation are actually working for us. The rest are merely spending four or five years running for re-election.

They complain also about the cost of being a TD and suggest this justifies their large salaries. One TD says his phone bill is £1,000 a year, twice what it should be. The simple answer is that he stop making so many phone calls. They are of no use to us and are merely part of his reeelection campaign. Similarly with the long distances they drive around the constituency. That's their business, not ours. Some TDs have had the audacity to complain that they have to buy drinks and meals in the Dail when their constituents visit - otherwise they would look "stingy". The function of parliamentary democracy is not to enhance the social popularity of TDs. Others have complained that, for similar reasons, they must buy a lot of raffle tickets.

Whatever excuses that TDs can offer for large salaries, it is difficult to see what excuses the Senators can give. In fact, they don't give any. They take the money and run. Sitting, on average, for 39 days per year, the Senators receive £9,127. This is £234 a day. Whatever excuses the TDs can make about servicing constituents, the Senators have none. The Senate is a refuge for has-beens and a springgboard for hopefuls. Whatever about the decent qualities of individuals the salaries paid bear no relation to the work involved. The work doesn't interfere with the Senators' outside interests. The salary is beer money.

Despite the calls for cutbacks, the TDs never considered the most obvious one - their own numbers. Staying within the limits imposed by the Constitution, they could cut the number of TDs, already wildly exceeding our needs (if needs is the word), by fifty. This would mean a saving in costs of well over £2.5m a year.

The poor return we get for the fortun'e we spend on the TDs is illustrated by the paucity of legislation passed, the crudity of it (the rent fiasco, for instance), and its delay. All kinds of excuses can be forwarded for the failure to introduce major legislation such as family law reform. But even on the small issues - such as pirate radio, for which legislation was promised at the beginning of 1978 - it's inncompetently processed. Even the appointment of an Ommbudsman, no big deal, a very minor piece of legislation, was intolerably delayed. All the donkey work was done byythe All Party Committee on Administrative Justice. This committee presented its recommendations in May 1977. Only now is an Ombudsman appointed.

Even if Ministers were not perambulating around the country, telling us of the crisis and how belts must be tightened, the cost of the IDs would be out of proportion to their effectiveness and competence. •