An analysis of manifestos for 'The Irish Times' says they all meet EU guidelines on borrowing, writes John McManus
As efforts to agree a framework by which to compare their economic manifestos collapsed last night, leading independent experts have questioned the value of the exercise.
The pressure to have their policies examined has also diminished following the acceptance by the parties of an independent analysis of their economic proposals, commissioned by The Irish Times, which found they all met the EU's economic guidelines.
Two well-known economists, Mr Jim O'Leary of NUI Maynooth and Mr Jim Power of the Friends First financial services group, have said that the economic debate should now move on. Both have said that the parties should outline how they will ensure that they get value for money from proposed spending rather than argue about who will spend more.
Economic experts have also queried the extent to which the various manifesto proposals can be accurately costed. This is a key contention of Fianna Fáil, which claims to be the only party to have accurately costed its proposals.
"Specific programmes can be costed initially but the scope for error is large. The current special savings incentive accounts scheme is a perfect example; a take-up of €5 billion would have cost the taxpayer €1.25 billion gross (excluding any clawback from DIRT) but if the outcome is €10 billion the cost rises to €2.5 billion," according to Dr Dan McLaughlin, the chief economist with Bank of Ireland treasury.
The analysis of the main party manifestos carried out by by Mr Colin Hunt of Goodbody Stockbrokers for The Irish Times earlier this week found that the economic policies proposed in the manifestos of the four main parties all adhere to the European Union rules on government borrowing.
The Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and Progressive Democrat proposals would also all lead to a reduction in the relative size of the national debt.
The various parties' economic policies would all involve cuts in day-to-day government spending. The biggest savings would be achieved under the proposals put forward by Labour and the Progressive Democrats, who would keep the increase in spending below the rate at which the economy as whole is growing.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael would let spending in this area grow by up to 2 per cent more than the economy as a whole, according to the analysis. ...
A Fianna Fáil spokesman said last night that the Goodbody analysis "is a fair reflection of our policies, but not of the other parties". The spokesman said Goodbody took the costing put by the other parties on their proposals at face value.
The Progressive Democrats said the study showed their budget approach was "prudent and credible". Labour said it broadly welcomed the analysis but echoed calls for the debate to move on. "It shows that Labour's pledges are readily affordable. Now lets get on and fight the real election," said a spokesman.
A Fine Gael spokesman said the exercise confirmed "that the cost of maintaining existing public services together with our manifesto proposals is less than the limit set out in our economic frame work".