Working out how to spend a lottery win has become a leading national pastime over the last decade. I know I've done it and I know a lot of my friends have, too.
My system is a bit old-fashioned - it starts with me paying off all my debts. Terribly sensible. Then come in no particular order charities, investments, family and friends, and the fun bits, like expensive cars, foreign holidays, and shopping sprees.
Effectively, Charlie McCreevy has won the Exchequer lottery. He's in a position that few Irish ministers for finance have ever been in. And oddly, I don't envy him. I don't envy him because everyone knows he's likely to have about £1 billion to spend. And everyone wants a slice of that exceedingly large pie.
The simple solution would be to give every man, woman, and child a lump sum. But that falls under the "fun bits" heading when it comes to dividing up a lottery win. It's equivalent to blowing all your winnings on trips to Las Vegas: fun while it lasts, but it won't last that long. And you won't be a whole lot better off in the long run.
Charlie will have to be sensible with his good fortune and leave out the fun options. He will have to strike a balance between longterm and short-term gains. He will have to choose between the popular and the practical. And even with this windfall, he cannot please everyone - and he won't.
I'm sure there are a few economists out there who'd like to see this money thrown at the national debt. But that isn't really an option. Right now, the Government is managing that debt pretty well and £1 billion wouldn't make that huge a difference anyway.
The tax system, on the other hand, he can change significantly. This Government promised tax reductions and started to deliver on that in its first Budget. We need a continuation of that now. Specifically, a reduction in the tax rates and a widening of the tax bands so that the lower-paid are taken out of the tax net completely and the rest of the population does not reach the higher rate as quickly.
Recently we've seen an increase in industrial action, particularly among public service employees, even though they've signed up to Partnership 2000. And it is not that surprising when half of their pay rise ends up being taken away in taxes.
With a widening of the tax bands, an increase in personal allowances as well as further reductions in tax rates, they would get a significant increase in their take-home pay without the Minister having to shatter the pay structures that have just about weathered the storm so far.
There is one long-term option the Minister cannot afford to ignore. People are living longer. And we don't have enough space in our State facilities to care for all of our older people. We have a strong tradition of looking after the older members of our families at home. After all, no one really wants to put his or her grandparents into a nursing home, but very often that is the only practical solution.
But there is very little State aid for those carers who wish to look after older people in their own homes and, in the process, save the country a fortune. An investment made now in this area would pay for itself many times over in the coming years.
At the other end of the age scale we have an opportunity to invest in our children. The Louise Woodward case has focused our attention on those who are charged with looking after our children.
We are fortunate in Ireland in that we have a voluntary organisation, the Irish Pre-School Playgroups Association (IPPA), overseeing the education of our children before they enter primary school along with creches and daycare facilities. We also have the Child Minders' Association.
These organisations need funds. They need them so they can put rigorous systems in place to ensure the highest possible quality of care and training. We need to fund them so that we can be assured of the safety of our children when we are not in a position to look after them ourselves.
In strictly financial terms this makes sense. It would give a whole swathe of people opportunities to take up employment that could not do so now. American research has shown that for every $1 invested in pre-school education the country saves $7 later on. These savings were made because those who received a good-quality pre-school education tended to stay in school longer, get better qualifications, get jobs more often, and stay in those jobs. They were also less likely to become involved in crime or drugs or alcohol abuse.
There is one much smaller group, which has always fared badly: widows. I know that both the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach have a strong personal commitment to and interest in this area and would need no urging to support any worthwhile proposal from any Minister that would help this group. Now I realise I'm not the first person to explain to the Minister how he should spend his millions and I certainly won't be the last. The Estimates discussions will start in September with a series of meetings among Ministers, their officials, and the Department of Finance.
This was always the least favourite aspect of my time in Cabinet. Everyone argues with everyone else. Those new to the process occasionally support another Minister's proposals. Right up until they get asked which chunk of their own budget they would like to sacrifice to get their colleague's scheme off the ground.
And the focus for the entire hassle will be Charlie McCreevy. He'll be pleaded with, shouted at, cajoled, and coerced. And because he has the extra funds at his disposal this year, those voices will be louder. It is perhaps the loneliest time for any Minister for Finance.
I hope he can shut out the hysteria and hyperbole and invest our money wisely.