We should not let our tradition of scorning Mercs and perks obscure thevital contribution of special advisers to effective, modern government,writes Conor Ryan.
There are plenty of charges you could level at Bertie Ahern. For a start, his failure to keep public finances in balance is already forcing big spending cuts. And I was no fan of his posturing in this year's abortion referendum.
But to imagine, as Fine Gael suggested recently, that he would be a better leader if the Government's €2 million bill for advisers and spin doctors were slashed is trivial, wishful thinking.
Indeed, the reverse is almost certainly the case. And it may be no coincidence that Charlie McCreevy, as Minister for Finance, has been stubbornly refusing to take external advice. Even if a good external economist cost the taxpayer €200,000 a year, he or she might have warned the Minister against making overly heroic assumptions about spending growth.
Let me declare my own interest. I was David Blunkett's special adviser when he was the British Education Secretary. Unlike many of my colleagues, I talked to the media, so was sometimes dubbed a "spin doctor". But even I spent 80 per cent of my time on policy matters.
The same is true for Irish Government advisers, who first attracted controversy when Labour introduced its programme managers in the 1992 coalition government. Yet such political advisers play a crucial role. Without them, civil servants would be constantly dragged into party politics and ministers unable to do their increasingly complex job.
In Ireland and Britain, the role of advisers still remains tightly defined. Despite the constant fuss in the British media, most cabinet ministers can employ just two special advisers. Irish ministers typically do the same, with one focusing on media matters.
Indeed, the Irish civil service grew from the same tradition of civil service impartiality, dating back to the 1850s Trevelyan-Northcote reforms. civil servants' ability to serve different political masters reflects a rather different approach from the US government, where new presidents bring in hundreds of their own people. Our systems are better for the continuity they offer. But it is foolish then to expect that ministers should not be supported by a small number of like-minded advisers.
From my experience, most advisers spend many long hours poring over detailed legislation and discussing the ins and outs of policy with civil servants and ministers. Of course, they are their ministers' political eyes and ears too. But most civil servants recognise the value of advisers in helping them interpret and deliver ministerial instructions, not least where they helped draw up policies for party manifestoes or the programme for government.
There is a separate issue with the Department of the Taoiseach, just as there is with 10 Downing Street. I'm not surprised that Tony Blair compared the numbers on the Taoiseach's Department payroll with those in Number 10 - Ahern has 205 staff compared to 190 in Blair's offices.
But Blair's surprise was borne of frustration. He has brought many outsiders into government to help with delivery on public services and to chart future reforms. Those innovations have had mixed success. And one crucial difference between Dublin and London is that many of those working on the PM's priorities form part of the Cabinet Office's 2,100 staff, and are not included in the Number 10 payroll. It would make more sense for the Prime Minister to control such staff directly as in Ireland than to second such responsibility to a more junior minister. But doing so would attract more charges of "spin" and "control-freakery".
External advice is vital for modern governments. And so long as the public knows who such advisers are, it should strengthen rather than weaken government. After all, the civil service can be slow to embrace change and modernise. It often takes an outside perspective to develop creative solutions to problems.
In Britain, David Blunkett introduced delivery units at the Education Department and Home Office respectively to see through major reforms. Such units, though mainly staffed by civil servants, also brought in headteachers or senior police officers, and have proven effective at delivery. Modern governments need more, not fewer, practitioners from the real world for successful public service delivery.
There may be criticisms levelled at the way some political appointments have been made in the past. And given the revelations about earlier Fianna Fáil governments in recent years, the public is right to be suspicious about such appointments.
But such suspicion should not blind us to the importance of good advice and able advisers. We should not let our venerable tradition of scorning the Mercs and perks obscure the tedium involved in running departments, managing change and delivering effectively. Good special advisers can quickly condense civil service speak, enabling ministers to explain matters more clearly. Fine Gael's claim that using advisers shows the coalition to be all "spin and no substance" is itself a piece of disingenuous spin, not unlike that used by the Conservative opposition in Britain against Labour. After all, the State already funds all political parties to a degree, with taxpayers' money enabling the opposition parties to make those political charges in the first place.
And that's as it should be. Turnout has been falling at elections in Ireland as much as in Britain. The public needs to see that politics and politicians can make a difference to their problems, and fairly judge where they succeed and fail. Advisers make an increasingly important contribution to that process. They are a small price to pay for the continuity of our democratic political systems.
Dublin-born Conor Ryan was special adviser to David Blunkett from 1997 to 2001. He is now a UK-based journalist and consultant.