SHE played camogie for Ardoyne in her native Belfast, was once an ardent advocate of the ordination of women, and now lives in the former residence of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Of whom do I speak? If you are mindful of Mary McAleese, the President of Ireland, then you are spot on. Recently, having celebrated the fifth anniversary of her inauguration, she intimated that, yes, she was interested running for a second seven-year term.
If she were to do that, run again and win, that would mean she would occupy Áras an Uachtaráin until 2011, which time she would be 60. And that would seem to be an appropriate age to contemplate retirement. One never knows, though; maybe she might want to emulate her predecessor, Mary Robinson, for a third time – first as lawyer, then as President, and finally as a player on the international stage.
According to one academic, the one striking difference between the McAleese Presidency and the Robinson Presidency is that the present incumbent takes a narrower and humbler view of her office. Certainly there is less controversy about the McAleese Presidency, with the exception early on of the furore over her decision to take communion at a Church of Ireland service in Christ Church Cathedral. But if there is less controversy, there is more expense. Much more. The cost of the Presidency has doubled since Mary McAleese took office in 1997.
Earlier this year figures from the Department of Finance showed that the yearly allocation to the President had risen from €928,000 in 1997 to an estimated €1,985,000 this year. In 1990, when Mary Robinson took office, the presidential budget was just €341,000. But the real cost of the Presidency is much higher than the €1.98 million for 2002.
When the expenditure by other Government Departments involved with the Presidency is taken into account, the overall cost comes out at over €9 million.
Which prompts the question in these budget-conscious days – do we need the Presidency at all? Why do we have to have a President? The office was created by Eamon de Valera in 1937 when he was overseeing the drafting of a new Irish Constitution. Since then we have had eight Presidents, and few would argue with the contention that, until 1990, RAS an Uachtaráin was seen as little more than a place to which politicians might retire.
The election of Mary Robinson in 1990 certainly changed things – (a) because she was the first woman to hold the office, and (b) she was at 46 by far the youngest President. During her election campaign, she had talked of a new-style Presidency and had spoken of confronting the Government if necessary. Yet, while there was an element of this, she ended up accepting the limitations of the office. And it would be fair to surmise that her decision not to seek a second term betokened a certain frustration.
President McAleese appears to have eschewed controversy, and is more relaxed and at ease carrying out the largely routine and ceremonial duties of the Presidency.
One could say that, if we have to have a President, then we are indeed well served by Mary McAleese, as we were by Mary Robinson. And there is no doubt that the election of these two women was symbolically important for Irish women in general. But all this aside, the question still needs to be asked – do we need a President in the 21st century? Would we not be as well served with the Taoiseach of the day doing what the President of the United States does very well – combine the roles of Head of State and Chief Executive or Prime Minister?
