If Brian Cowen wanted to inject life into the carcass of social partnership, then moving budget day from its traditional December date to October had the desired effect. Talks between employers and trade unions that collapsed in acrimony at the beginning of August have been revived, at least temporarily. In addition, nobody can remain in doubt that the country is facing a financial crisis to rival anything witnessed in the 1980s. That said, tricking around with the date of the budget is nothing more than an exercise in public relations. The rules of engagement surrounding this annual financial exercise prove the point.

Tax and spending issues have already been decided for 2008. Any initiative in either area announced in October will not come into effect until 2009. If the budget was held tomorrow the same restrictions would apply. The timing on excise duties is different, since these come into immediate effect. But if the government intends to increase excise duties on the “old reliables” of drink, tobacco and petrol (not a very sensible notion given the downturn in consumer spending), then this could be achieved by holding a mini-budget when the Dail returns later this month.

Worse, bringing forward the budget announcement by six weeks means Brian Lenihan will stand before the Dail on October 14 with incomplete data on the state of the country’s finances. His plans for receipts and expenditures will have been formulated without knowing how much tax revenue the government will have collected this year. A December budget allows ministers to plan on the basis of the proceeds from November, the best month of the year for tax returns. Mr Lenihan will only be able to make a stab at the October, November and December figures.

Given that economic projections are being revised on an almost weekly basis, this information deficit is crucial. Are these the ideal conditions under which a finance minister should introduce his maiden budget? It certainly does not inspire confidence about the robustness of the plans he will outline.

It is hard to escape the conclusion, therefore, that Mr Cowen’s decision to change the date of the budget has more than a touch of grandstanding about it. Not much has gone right for the taoiseach since he took office last May and for the past few weeks he has had to contend with accusations that he has spent the summer slacking off on his holidays while the economy went into a tailspin. If Mr Cowen wanted to prove he was rolling up his sleeves then it would have been more appropriate to recall the Dail, outline the parameters of a recovery plan and provide assurances that these would be finalised in detail in the December budget when a fuller financial picture was available.

Moving the date of the budget also runs the risk of further destroying consumer confidence. There is a balance to be achieved between creating the right atmosphere in which difficult political decisions can be made and causing the type of alarm that sends the public into lockdown mode. Knowing that what is effectively an emergency budget is due to take place in six weeks, spending could be curtailed by consumers fearing tax increases or, in the case of the housing market, what few sales there are might be postponed in the hope of a better deal post-October.

If the taoiseach and his finance minister deliver on the rhetoric we have heard from government circles in recent days, then the risks posed by last week’s budget announcement will be lessened somewhat. We only have to wait another few days to find out how serious Mr Cowen is about taking unpopular, but necessary, steps to correct the public finances. With a self-imposed deadline of seven days to reach agreement on a new pay deal, we will know by next weekend if a public-sector pay freeze has been achieved. But if the taoiseach fails to control the pay demands of his own employees, all economic bets are off.

Times Recommends

• British ‘tortured and jailed Obama’s grandfather’
• BA in merger talks with Qantas
• Mumbai police were ill equipped for attacks