A report in last Thursday's editions of this newspaper gave details of concerns expressed at official level as the Minister for Finance, Mr Charlie McCreevy, prepared his recent budget. The most serious aspect of this report suggested that the Tax Strategy Group had voiced its opposition to Mr McCreevy's move to individualise tax bands. On the following day The Irish Times acknowledged that its report, as published, was not correct. Documents supplied to this newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act detailed the work of two distinct groups of civil servants and advisers - the Tax Strategy Group, and a working group set up by the Minister for Social Welfare to examine the impact of the tax and social welfare code on the family. The report of the working party was forwarded to and discussed by the Tax Strategy Group. The Irish Times report of last Thursday attributed to the Tax Strategy Group - which directly advises the Minister for Finance - some of the views of the working group, which does not do so.
The mistake caused the Minister for Finance to enlist the assistance of the Irish Independent to level charges that he had been "stitched up" by The Irish Times. Mr McCreevy is distrustful of the media, columnist Mr Sam Smyth declared, particularly The Irish Times. The Minister, of course, is perfectly entitled to utilise whatever channels he wishes to put right our error. But he is foolish if he believes he can divert attention from the political bog-hole in which he has mired himself by seeking to represent himself as being victimised by this or any other newspaper.
It is important to understand what the Tax Strategy Group did say. In summarising the report of the working group, it stated (TSG99/25): "The abolition of married tax treatment and the restructuring of transferability of bands and allowances would be a fundamental change in the tax system, creating a series of winners and losers . . . . there are also possible constitutional issues". In its minutes of its meeting on October 5th (TSG99/26) it stated in relation to the tax treatment of families: "Given the fundamental tax and constitutional issues it was felt that the matter needs to be looked at in the context of the tax system as a whole. It was also felt that it was not a priority for the forthcoming budget".
The Tax Strategy Group did not, contrary to our report of last Thursday, as such oppose the Minister's decision to proceed with the most controversial and divisive budget proposal of recent years. But the papers above make it clear that loud warning bells were ringing if the Minister had ears to listen and that pitfalls had been identified in available documentation if the minister had read it. Whether he anticipated the storm of anger which he has created or whether he was genuinely surprised by the public reaction, as he says, it is certain that he has inflicted enormous damage on his own reputation and on the Government's standing in the eyes of the voters.
It is possible to have some sympathy with Mr McCreevy. He has been left dangling in the wind by his Cabinet colleagues and he has drawn the wrath of his own backbenchers. A man who might have been seen only a few weeks ago as a potential successor to Bertie Ahern is a pariah within his own party and an object of ridicule among the electorate at large. He might be better to set about his own rehabilitation with a little self-examination rather than lashing about him at imaginary conspiracies. The Irish Times has no interest in seeing Mr McCreevy "stitched up". But it will not pull its punches in criticising his stewardship as Minister for Finance. Against a background of plenty, he brought in a bad budget which benefited the well-off to a disproportionate degree and which bypassed many deserving categories. He is the author of his own misfortunes.