IT was Sean Lemass who said that election promises become invalid as soon as the results come in. A cynical assessment perhaps, but one that the electorate and, more importantly, politicians should bear in mind.

Over the next three months, we will be inundated with all sorts of promises from all the political parties, but you have to wonder why they bother.

Ever since Fianna Fáil's disastrous 1977 election manifesto - which set the country on the road to the grim recession-filled days of the 1980s - the voters have been extremely wary of geeks bearing gifts. And with good reason. There is certainly an argument from recent history that the country has been better served when parties have failed to follow through on their election promises on getting to power.

If only Fianna Fáil had, 30 years ago, dumped its goody-laden manifesto, the Celtic Tiger might have been conceived a decade or so earlier (although the country perhaps needed to be on its deathbed before we could stomach the harsh medicine required to save us).

Fine Gael and Labour, in the teeth of a wicked recession in the mid-'80s, tried to stick to their joint programme when the horrendous economic climate demanded a rethink. In contrast, Fianna Fáil did a complete u-turn on its 1987 manifesto - and thank God (or Charlie Haughey) for that. Everybody remembers the evocative 'Health cuts hurt the old, the sick and the handicapped' Fianna Fáil posters from that election, but there was also the very woolly economic strategy of increased spending funded by economic growth. The reason the manifesto is forgotten is because it was dumped by Haughey once he became taoiseach, when he and finance minister Ray MacSharry finally set about tackling the country's finances, planting the seeds for a decade of unmatched economic prosperity.

In 1992, Labour had its best ever election based largely on its trenchant opposition to what was then a rather jaded-looking Fianna Fáil, before then going into government with the very same Fianna Fáil. To be fair, Labour did manage to deliver on a lot of its election promises during its five years in office, but many who voted for Labour in 1992 were furious at the party for going into coalition with its arch nemesis.

And if voters harbour any doubts about the folly of election promises, they only have to look back at the most recent general election in 2002. There was the madness of Fine Gael's proposal to compensate Eircom shareholders and taxi drivers that helped send the party into freefall.

Labour's promise of free GP care for everybody - regardless of their income - at a cost of almost Euro0.5bn was almost as mad, although largely ignored. And then there was Fianna Fáil's commitment that waiting lists would be ended by 2004 - the ultimate hostage to fortune.

Most memorable though was Fianna Fáil's hand-on-the-heart assurance during the campaign that "no cutbacks whatsoever are being planned secretly or otherwise". Within months of being re-elected, the government was introducing a series of, well, cutbacks.

The resulting backlash against Fianna Fáil was enormous as voters felt they had been misled in the run-up to the election.

The crazy thing, from the government's point of view, was that it didn't need to engage in oversell. The election was a done deal from months out. If Fianna Fáil had said that it would deal with the economic situation, as it arose, in a sensible, responsible manner and do what was best for the country, it wouldn't have lost one vote and avoided all the grief it is arguably still suffering from almost five years later.

But driven by the goal of an overall majority - which, remember, Fianna Fáil only missed by a few hundred votes - it couldn't resist over-egging the pudding.

You'd imagine that, after all that, the political parties would learn a few lessons.

But the evidence so far is that the upcoming general election will feature the usual raft of rash promises. Fine Gael and Labour published their joint health policy last week with promises of free GP care for children under the age of five and free health insurance for all children up to the age of 16. We know from the experience of the free medical cards for over 70s that such universal measures, without recourse to means testing, are tantamount to the state writing a blank cheque.

But even more disconcerting were the comments on radio afterwards from Fine Gael's health spokesman Liam Twomey - normally a rock of sense - to the effect that if he were minister for health, he would rein in the HSE. His comments were later endorsed by Labour leader Pat Rabbitte.

Reining in the HSE is exactly what the health service does not need. Removing political interference from the system is absolutely key to having a functioning and well-run health service. It might sound good to talk tough about increased accountability, etc, but the HSE is part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Stamp duty is likely to be another area where parties attempt to outdo each other in the coming weeks, with the emphasis on attracting middle-class voters rather than delivering the best outcome.

The one promise that it would be nice to hear being made is a party committing itself to always act for the common good and face down vested interests regardless of the electoral consequences. Given that this utopian ideal is unlikely to occur, it's probably best to bear in mind the more pragmatic assessment of former US presidential adviser Bernard Baruch: "Vote for the man who promises least; he'll be the least disappointing."