THE former attorney general John Rogers, SC, is right. It is now necessary for the people to drive home, well in advance of the next general election, their demand for “a commitment by the parties to true reform of the Oireachtas”.
And in this context it is necessary to remember that the Oireachtas consists of three elements – Dáil Éireann, Seanad Éireann and the presidency. Article 15.2 of the Constitution says: “The Oireachtas shall consist of the President and two Houses – a House of Representatives to be called Dáil Éireann and a Senate to be called Seanad Éireann”.
The Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny has already promised to abolish the senate, though a degree of scepticism is warranted. But what of the presidency? Does Ireland in the circumstances, and especially the economic conditions of 2010, need a president?
If all our institutions are to be critically re-evaluated, then no exception should be made for the presidency. For one thing, keeping it is not cheap. My former Irish Press colleague Mary Kenny recently suggested that while the presidential office should be retained, its occupant should be paid much less in the future.
“I believe the next president of Ireland should be paid much less than the current salary of €335,000 per annum (with its concomitant generous pension). This is not a criticism of the present, or past, incumbents: Ireland has benefited from a series of excellent heads of state, and Presidents Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese have both been outstanding.
“But the salary was set at a different time and perhaps on a scale appropriate to the remuneration of lawyers. We are now in a very different era and the salary, I think, should be much less. Indeed, I believe it should be reduced by at least two-thirds.”
In addition to her salary, President McAleese also received €1.2 million since 2006 in tax-free presidential allowances. These, according to a spokeswoman at Aras an Uachtaráin, are to cover justifiable expenses, such as state dinners, foreign travel and hotel accommodation, while on official business.
On budget day last December, Mrs McAleese, who is now 58 and has been President since 1997, volunteered to give up 20 per cent of her salary. This followed a previous pay reduction of 10 per cent in November 2008. Her salary now stands at €240,406.
It is worth noting, for purposes of comparison, that the salary of the new British Prime Minister, David Cameron, now stands at £142,500 – considerably less, not just than President McAleese, but also the taoiseach Brian Cowen, who, bizarrely, is paid more than President Sarkozy in France, Angela Merkel in Germany and President Obama in the USA.
And then there is the very generous pension. Former President Mary Robinson receives a pension of €187,000 from her time in the Aras and also as a senator. Her pension award is made up of €150,748 for her time as president and €36,549 for her time as senator.
The presidential salary and pension represent an enormously generous level of remuneration and one that a small country like Ireland can ill-afford. So, of course there is considerable justification for Mary Kenny’s call for a drastic reduction in these.
Thousands of families up and down the country would be more than happy to have an income comparable to Mrs Robinson’s senate pension alone. In fact, the levels of remuneration set for the taoiseach, ministers, judges, top civil servants and heads of universities are crazy compared to other much bigger and richer countries, including the United States.
But a more fundamental question arises in regard to the presidency – do we need it?