'There are many who say, 'who will show us any good?' " (Psalms 4 v. 6). Popular scepticism about the ability of leaders to produce results without the help of divine providence goes back thousands of years.
Often, unrealistic public expectations and untenable political promises focused more on surveys of what people want than honest judgment of what can be delivered are the source of disappointment.
Prof Amitai Etzioni, of George Washington University DC, expressed the opinion recently: "Politics is not really about good management. Politics is about taking conflicting interests, conflicting values and building common ground". To set the agenda is the right job for politicians, "not to make the railroads run on time" (New York Times, April 23rd).
Despite living in a democracy, where the people are sovereign and where power and decision-making are widely diffused, people still have notions of governmental omnipotence that existed not even in absolute monarchies or dictatorial command economies. Human society is too complex for that, which is why free societies and social market economies have proved a more successful, if still imperfect, model of governance. Individuals, families, local community organisations and enterprises, are the basic building blocks of society, and embody much of its dynamic.
One of the enlightened despots, Frederick the Great, king of Prussia, described himself as "the first servant of the state". Today, a minister is one whose function is to serve the people. Deputies represent and stand in for the people who elect them. Unfortunately in some ways, for the sake of parity of status with their European counterparts, heads of department substituted the ambivalent title of secretary-general for the more modest one of secretary. A secretary serves; a general commands.
The role of politicians is to assist and facilitate those that they serve. The function of government is also, following consultation, to establish plans, priorities and policy frameworks with the necessary funding, and to intervene to prevent or correct gross distortions, inequalities and systemic failures.
The policy prescriptions of experts cannot be implemented unless they go through the political process. The immediate reaction of the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, to the renewed proposal for a nuclear power project was understandable puzzlement as to how it could win public acceptance. Proposals for a return of domestic rates, or the reintroduction of university fees, suffer from the same flaw. The public cannot be persuaded to accept them.
Popular needs, wishes and desires, often conflicting, within any society far exceed available resources. It is necessary to choose, and to persuade people of ways forward that involve change and compromise, and even on occasion short-term sacrifice. Political skill is needed to get decisions that are necessary agreed, and to put them through. The democratic system provides unique validation and legitimacy for collective decisions properly considered and debated, through parliament and sometimes referendum.
Criticisms that politicians have little managerial experience are beside the point. Running things is primarily the job of public administration and agencies, and of those who deliver services directly to the public.
Implementing investment in transport infrastructure decided by government, for instance, is a task for the National Roads Authority, CIÉ and the Railway Procurement Agency. It is their job to see that projects, completed to agreed specifications, come in on time and on budget. They have become much better at it since the late 1990s. The battle against wasteful public expenditure is eternal. It is not that progress cannot be made, but there is always more to be done, particularly when new challenges and technologies are taken on. Does anyone believe that under some alternative government the Comptroller and Auditor General will have less to do, or that criticisms of aspects of selected spending projects by departments will trigger automatic ministerial sackings?
The Government's role in the health services was accurately summed up by Minister of State Brian Lenihan in the Seanad last Tuesday: "to lead reform for real improvements", "giving this our highest priority", "providing all necessary funding", empowering "HSE management to act", and "backing up their actions". The misleading impression is often given in political debate that government ought to be micro-managing the health service directly to obtain better results. This arguably is one of the difficulties that Tony Blair's government has got itself into, by trying to assume too much central control, across a range of areas, of detailed day-to- day administration, which ought to be devolved. Putting in place workable legislation and governance systems is part of the challenge, but so also is knowing when to leave well alone.
Litter and poor waste management do not occur only because of deficiencies by public authorities. They happen also where people need to assume more personal responsibility. Road safety can certainly be improved by political will, but it always needs maximum personal care and attention by all road-users.
Notwithstanding the major contribution made by different State-builders over more than 80 years, it is not ultimately this party or that government that is solely responsible for the successes of this State or its failures. They also belong to the people as a whole, which could never have been said prior to independence. Government is a necessary auxiliary and chosen guide in supporting our endeavours. It is not and should not be a commanding presence, but rather a service that helps co-ordinate our efforts and to derive maximum benefit from them. The job of government is largely to help us realise our plans and ambitions, rather than theirs, doing what we cannot do for ourselves.
If some people regard the political system as not relevant to their needs, it suggests either a comfortable sense of security, or an apathy and despondency as to "who will show us any good". Even Marx looked forward to the withering away of the state. It should not dominate people's lives, but be there forward-looking as a reliable resource and safety-net.