We need to be more grateful to our politicians.

It is in our own self interest as voters.

I have just finished, and greatly enjoyed, Eoin O’Malley‘s “Charlie Vs Garret”. It was particularly enjoyable because it brought back so many clear memories of many of the events and my time involved in the Progressive Democrats.

Haughey and Fitzgerald really were the political titans of their time, in a way that simply isn’t comparable today, possibly because the office of Taoiseach is no longer the driving force of the government but more like the rotating mayoralty of a county council. Indeed, one point O’Malley notes that both men did want power to actually do things, as opposed to the apparent in office but not in power sloth of recent times.

Although I was never a member or FG voter during Garret’s leadership, I still felt a great political sympathy with him, which was then strengthened by having met him a number times during European referendum campaigns which he threw himself into. At one referendum count I even ended up, along with a member of Ogra Fianna Fail, as his de facto bodyguard when a particularly aggressive member of Youth Defence wanted to physically remonstrate with him. O’Malley’s picture of him as someone genuinely intrigued by ideas was something I experienced personally myself, sitting in the Horse Show House pub discussing different electoral systems with him. And it didn’t feel like him just tolerating a star-struck political youth: he was engaged and thoughtful and spoke to me (or at least it felt like that) as an equal. That was how he had such appeal to younger voters: he genuinely liked engaging with them.

Garret the brilliant eccentric was real. When he turned up at the Nice II count he had a folding deckchair and a pillow under his arm (something I can’t imagine Charlie doing) and sat with us, scribbling down the first referendum results and then telling us what the final national result would be. He was right to a percentage point. It was Lt Commander Data stuff.

Even after he stepped down he was still, to many of us, the epitome of the liberal and progressive Europe-facing Ireland we wanted to live in. In the battle with Haughey, Garret was the goodie.

And yet here’s the thing: as Taoiseach he simply wasn’t very good. The Anglo-Irish Agreement aside, he achieved little except for keeping Charlie out and at least not thieving the good silver. One could argue that he was ahead of his time, espousing liberal views on social issues and the North which because mainstream within a decade of him leaving office, but the list of concrete achievements in government is pretty slim.

Haughey on the other hand was a crook. But he was also effective, and achieved things which he didn’t benefit from himself but provided greatly for the country. His return to power in 1987 set in motion the basic foundations of what would be our economic breakthrough. I remember the feeling in 1988/89 that finally the country was moving out of the endless misery of the 1980s, where, as O’Malley points out, most of the income tax raised was just paying the interest on the national debt. Haughey (and Ray MacSharry), to the amazement of many, finally did the things that had to be done.

He got things done. That golden calf of Irish politics. The IFSC, Government Buildings, the grasping of the public finances, tax cuts, FDI and export driven growth and our place in the EU.

The book got me thinking about that reality of modern Irish politics: that the safest thing to do now, at least electorally, is nothing. Many people say housing should be a priority, but when you try to build an actual new housing development in a specific location, there are more votes opposing it than supporting it. Perhaps we should have a law that says the people who formally put their names to a petition in favour of a new development will be the first to be offered the new homes. If only to show that there is a silent but substantial section of the country in favour of the unpopular but necessary.

Haughey pushed through the IFSC, and yes, some wealthy people got wealthier. But it also brought in high-paying jobs whose income tax contributions funded the growth of our welfare safety net. There are people today getting welfare support because of Charlie Haughey pushing through something which he probably knew he’d get no thanks for.

This is something we as voters need to confront ourselves about. There are many long-term challenges from building new housing to power generation to defence to infrastructure which will need decisions made by today’s politicians to reap rewards for us 15-20 years from now. It’s simply not good enough to say that it is the job of politicians to make the noble long-term calls. We simply can’t expect them to be better people than the rest of us. We as voters have to reward those who actually do make the call: The Noel Brownes, the Donogh O’Malleys, the Sean Lemass. We berate them when they do something wrong. But rarely praise them when they do something right. We almost look for reasons to be disappointed.

For example:

Leo Varadkar as a minister pushed through both the National Rehabilitation Hospital and the Luas extension from Stephen’s Green.

Ruairi Quinn and Nora Owen pushed through the Criminal Assets Bureau, the single most effective weapon against organised crime in a generation.

Eamonn Ryan was the minister responsible for the greatest increase in rural bus transport funding in the history of the state.

Mary Harney banished smog from Dublin. Yes, we actually had smog in Dublin in my lifetime. She also created the Environmental Protection Agency.

Brendan Howlin legalised contraception without prescription.

Michael McDowell created both GSOC and the Garda Inspectorate.

WT Cosgrave took the incredible decision to spend 20% of the national budget building Ardnacrusha. Three years after he had left office, it was producing around 80% of Ireland’s electricity.

We should recognise and applaud success from our politicians too.

Here’s one law I’d suggest: that every major piece of infrastructure, from a public housing development to a prison to a power station to a new hospital be named automatically after the minister who originally authorised the project. They almost certainly won’t be in office when it is completed (not in this country), indeed they may not even still be in politics, but if stroking a ministerial ego might just make a politician make the correct but unpopular or unrewarding decision, that’s a start.