Deputy Hyland moved the adjournment of the debate. He has 17 minutes left.
Private Members' Business. - Building on Reality: Motion (Resumed).
The following motion was moved by Deputy Haughey on 14 May 1985:
That Dáil Éireann calls on the Government to withdraw the documentBuilding on Reality and to put forward, in its place, realistic plans to protect existing employment, create new jobs and alleviate social deprivation.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:—
"Dáil Éireann reaffirms its approval of the measures contained in the National Plan,Building on Reality 1985-1987.”
—(Minister for Finance.)
When I moved the adjournment last night I was making the point that while Building on Reality still remains, or seems to remain, the official policy document of the Government, the reality is that individual Ministers, including the Minister for Finance, have changed course and altered the targets of that plan on a number of occasions since its introduction. The Minister knows well that the Government's seeming adherence to the plan is at this stage merely a public relations exercise. Indeed, if there is any one area in which this Government have been successful, surely it is in the area of public relations. It has been one of their greatest and most successful achievements since they came to office.
Unfortunately for this country, government is not about good essay writing; government is not about good media management. It is about economic planning and economic management. At present, in the life time of this Dáil there is no credible plan in existence and everybody knows that there is no economic management of any kind. The truth is that the Taoiseach and the Government are now beginning to recognise that their economic projections have gone drastically wrong, that the plan which they put before this House will not in any way achieve its economic objectives. They know that time is now running out and that the politically sensible thing to do is for individual Ministers to abandon the plan and to embark on a politically motivated course of political self-preservation. That is exactly what is happening at present: we are now debating a plan that does not exist. Last night I was challenged by the Minister to give one example of where the Government changed course. One would only have to go back two or three days to find one major area where the Government changed course, namely, the most recent statement of the Minister for the Environment when he wrote to the county managers and told them to be lenient in regard to local authority service charges. When one contrasts that statement with the earlier circular to the county managers demanding immediate action to collect the charges, it is obvious that is an immediate example of where the Government changed course.
The Government now realise that the introduction of service charges was wrong and immoral. They know those charges are not a suitable means of providing adequate finance for local authorities. The decision to introduce them was poor political judgment on the part of the Minister who introduced them. We know that decision was a panic measure at a time when the Government had decided officially to abandon the local authorities. Therefore, the statement by the Minister last week, coming at this time on the eve of the local elections, will be seen by the people as a political ploy in order to regain some kind of political credibility.
The tragedy is that the dedicated and committed public representatives will have to face the electorate embarrassed and humiliated because of the almost total failure of the system in the past six years and particularly in the past two years. During that time finance has been denied to the various local authorities by the Minister for the Environment. It is nothing short of a disgrace that in the past two years the Government have almost totally dismantled the local Government structure and in so doing they have abandoned the rural community because the rural road network is almost impassable due to inadequate finance. The local authorities have not had the necessary finance even to fill the potholes. This Dublin-based Government have treated the rural community with absolute and total contempt.
The Government should now officially abandon this policy document because it is being abandoned daily by individual Ministers. They should replace it with some document entitled "Facing Reality". If they are to have any credibility they must spend the next two years or whatever time is left to them in facing the reality of the economic situation and in endeavouring to find credible solutions to some of our problems.
I agree we must have economic planning. I understand that sometimes it is difficult to reach set economic targets. However, the Government should not blindly follow a plan that has failed. Even more important, they should not embark on an uncharted course with no destination in sight, as seems to be happening now in relation to the document before us tonight.
Last night I listened to the Minister for Finance embark on a top-rate public relations exercise. Anyone who did not think too seriously about what he was saying might imagine that somehow this country and this Government were making progress. I jotted down a few areas where the House can judge if the Government were successful or were failures. I do not think anyone will deny that we have the highest level of unemployment ever recorded and which is continuing to increase under the stewardship of this Government. I do not think anyone will deny that never in the history of the State was law and order at such a low ebb as it is at present. I do not think anybody will dispute that the number of factory closures and liquidations in the past two and a half years have been the greatest ever recorded in our history. Most important, and where I think the Government have done the best public relations exercise, somehow or other they have sold the idea that they have been engaged in trying to apply financial rectitude to deal with what they call was the misspending of the previous administration. The reality is that this Minister, the man who talks so much about financial rectitude, has borrowed more in two and a half years than was ever borrowed by any Minister for Finance in the history of the State. That is saying something, particularly when one sees the public relations exercise carried out here last night for the benefit of this House and the nation.
Earlier I referred to the local authorities who are at the point of collapse. Members of this House know it is an embarrassment at the moment to be a member of a local authority. The Minister for Health is present in the House now and it is worth nothing that in almost every hospital for the past two and a half years public wards have been closed and beds have been left unoccupied because adequate finance has not been available to the health boards to provide a full range of hospital services. It is also true that patients have been denied essential operations. I say that particularly with regard to hip replacements. This operation is essential for many old people, many of whom are on very lengthy waiting lists.
It is also true that local authorities at present have to cope with the situation where more and more mortgage holders are being brought to court and their houses repossessed. These people have worked hard but because of unemployment they cannot meet their mortgage repayments. Yet, there is not one word about them from this Government.
With regard to agriculture and the super-levy, it is despicable that the Minister for Agriculture has spent the past number of weeks in Brussels negotiating a case that should not have had to be negotiated. However, this was necessary because the Minister and his Department did not make the proper calculations in regard to milk output for 1983.
One area to which I must refer relates to the breakdown of law and order. It must be placed on record that the increase in crime and violence, rampant throughout the country, is a direct result of the economic policies being pursued by this Government. It is a well established fact that the high level of unemployment contributes in a large way to the increasing incidence of crime and lawlessness, which have brought about a situation in which old people feel insecure in their homes and one in which property, public and private, is no longer safe.
In the context of what I am saying in terms of law and order it is important that we recognise and give full credit to the Garda and prison officers for the very difficult task they perform on our behalf. This is not an area for political point scoring and I wish to be as constructive as possible. I would say to the Minister for Justice that he should recognise the difficult task of the Garda and of prison officers, that he should not use the authority of his office to make these important and indispensable employees of the State feel subservient to his office, as the prison officers feel at present. We owe them an extreme debt of gratitude. They perform an extremely difficult task and we should not be seen in this House to embarrass them in any way.
When the national plan was being prepared last year the title was carefully chosen as an accurate description. The plan builds on the reality that when we assumed office we were confronted by unsustainable high levels of borrowing and debt. The plan is built on the reality of internationally high unemployment levels especially in Europe and on the reality of Ireland's uniquely high rate of increase in its working population. It is also built on the reality of a small open economy very much affected by international trade and economic trends and able to survive only if fully competitive in the world economy.
I should have said that I understand the Minister is sharing his time with Deputy Coveney.
By contrast, the major critics of the plan are, in differing ways, not as closely in touch with the reality of the current situation as we are. There are two distinct strands in the criticism which the plan has received. The first is an understandable and praiseworthy aim to have the social and economic ideals to which we all strive set out in any planning document. Thus we would all agree that low unemployment, a more efficient use of the resources which we have and a reduction in the inequalities, poverty and social hardship in our country are all aims to which we aspire; although many of us would have very different views about the best ways to achieve these aims. In the context of the starting point for the plan, however, especially the now familiar general economic problems, the most immediate and pressing need had to be preventing the insolvency of the country and turning around the disastrous trends in the major economic indicators which had emerged in the latter part of the 1970s.
This Government refused, when preparing the plan and refuses again now to hide the truth from the people: that the country was in severe crisis, that unpleasant and unpalatable measures would need to be taken and that movement away from the critical situation which we were facing would be painfully slow.
The type of criticism which stresses the major ideals of our society is, however, to be entirely welcomed and must be continued. For we need to be reminded continually of those ideals which we share and which we are seeking to achieve, however, slowly and inadequately in the face of immediate crises and difficulties. I suggest that any Government which has no underlying coherent social philosophy is not worthy of the basic idealism of the Irish people.
The differences which arise between us and the Opposition are those inherent in the job of shifting from an unpleasant, present reality to the hoped-for ideal situation of the future in trying to resolve that issue. We in the Labour Party welcome and look for open, honest, interchange of opinion in this area. We realise that in so doing the whole concept of that approach is totally foreign to Fianna Fáil and is almost incomprehensible to them at this point. There is nothing but reaction from Fianna Fáil.
The Minister's own members do not agree with him.
It emanates from a party which allows freedom of speech and action to its leader only and insists that all others must merely accept the leader's views. There is dissension in the Labour Party. There is honest controversy within the Labour Party. I welcome that but, unfortunately, Fianna Fáil take that as a sign of weakness, that has to be suppressed as it is suppressed in their party. Open discussion is the basic strength of Labour Party organisation, is a sign of some maturity within our organisation and a reflection of the truly democratic nature of our party.
The other part of the criticism the plan has received, I suggest, is not based on idealism or indeed any philosophical discussion about different approaches. The criticism of the plan which we have heard in this debate, from Deputy Haughey in particular and earlier from Fianna Fáil, owe absolutely nothing to principle or ideal, nor even to a reasonable standard of intellectural debate. They are merely destructive, misleading, dishonest and are based on the fallacy that it is possible for a Government to spend more and more while at the same time taking in less and less money in taxation and simultaneously reducing borrowing. That is the basic approach of the Fianna Fáil Party.
Deputy Haughey came in here last evening advocating £200 million for the construction industry with a simultaneous reduction in taxation. When the public service pay agreement was being negotiated Deputy Haughey said he would spend £300 million on a 14 per cent increase in public sector pay with a simultaneous reduction in taxation. Deputy Haughey has launched horticulture departments and marine resource departments, at £30 million and £40 million a piece with a simultaneous reduction in taxation. That approach is a total, absolute and abject contradiction in terms. Even the simplest arithmetic on the need to relate Government income to Government expenditure appears to be beyond the understanding of the Opposition at present.
I want to come to the basic structure of the document Building on Reality itself. It simply was that Ireland has a mixed economy, containing both the public and private sectors and is based on the fact that the State will have direct control over aspects of the public sector and a direct influence over the multitude of individual decisions taken in the private sector. Furthermore it is based on the reality that we are an open economy, as every Deputy knows, an open economy, as in which sustainable growth is dependent almost exclusively on exports to the world at large. That is the basis on which that document was prepared, is the basis on which our policies are working and will continue to work for the remainder of our term of office. Indeed I might suggest that that thrust will have an impact throughout the remainder of the eighties.
Not surprisingly the Opposition fail to understand the essential ingredients of the world trading system in which we live, and continually harp on and criticise in a totally negative way the features of planning set out in the national plan. I suggest that the important feature of Building on Reality is the extent to which it has now become a working document of Government rather than a report to be published in triumph and then forgotten totally, as happened in the case of the Opposition's last plan, The Way Forward.
Why is it that the Minister's party rejected it at their annual conference? Will the Minister answer that?
The Minister must be allowed proceed without interruption.
The details of Building on Reality, and the basic decisions within it, are reviewed by the Government every two months. We review decision after decision on the basis of implementation. I suggest that that never happened in the life of any Fianna Fáil Cabinet.
The Minister is ignoring his own party. He is forgetting about the motion they passed at their annual conference.
This is a confined debate and we should not have any interruptions.
The plan also provided the framework for the 1985 budget. For the first time in the history of the State the basic framework for the capital programme for 1985, 1986 and 1987 is set out in a document. That was never set out in a Fianna Fáil document in the history of this State. We have set out the current Estimate figures for 1985 1986 and 1987 and they were never published by Fianna Fáil. That exercise has proved to be very valuable.
A recipe for further unemployment.
There is a conflict and Deputy Reynolds, a former and somewhat distinguished Cabinet member, is well aware that such conflicts arise. All policy objectives are in conflict with one another no matter what Government are in power. We have to reconcile the various conflicts. The attempt to halt and reverse the upward trend of unemployment is in conflict in many respects with the decision to spend more and more money on the public sector side, or to provide more relief to the private sector or to reduce taxation. There is a conflict in terms of the decisions that have to be taken.
We have to ensure that the burden of taxation is kept as low as possible. That is difficult to achieve bearing in mind the amount of unemployment we have. We have to halt the ever-rising burden of interest payments on a mounting public debt at home and abroad. Simultaneously we have to ensure that we still have money for such services as health, education, social welfare and housing. They are difficult issues to reconcile. The Leader of the Opposition came in to the House and in a dishonest political presentation suggested that we spend more money on housing, that we give the construction industry £200 million.
Is that not Labour Party policy? Is that not what the Labour Party are looking for?
He called on us to reduce taxation but how do we do that? His magical way of doing that is by self-financing taxation reductions.
I have been informed that the Minister and Deputy Coveney together have 25 minutes left. I will not permit any further interruptions in this limited debate.
It is a contradiction on the part of the Opposition to advocate additional public spending. At the moment they are on the £600 million mark per year. It is not £600 million in terms of capital expenditure but £600 million annually in terms of current expenditure be it on social welfare, hospitals, housing, or education. During the course of last night's debate the Opposition criticised the current budget deficit as being too high, 7.9 per cent of GNP or £1,200 million.
What about the plan?
We are being told that we are borrowing too much ——
And making bad use of the money.
—— and taxing people too much. We are being told that we should reduce taxation, increase public expenditure and reduce borrowing. The contradictions are so manifestly self-evident that I wonder when the people will get the message of the con-trick that was tried in 1977, 1979 and 1981.
The Minister is forgetting about his Government in 1981, 1982 and 1983. The Minister is a disgrace to his own party.
Deputy Gallagher will have to behave himself or leave the House.
We now have the Fianna Fáil Party putting forward another con-trick. We had a cry from Deputy Haughey last night that the current budget deficit was too high and that foreign borrowing was too high. He suggested that we should reduce public expenditure.
That is what the Coalition promised. Why did the Coalition say that they would wipe out the current budget deficit?
The Minister for Finance asked Deputy Haughey if he was suggesting that we should lay off more gardaí, reduce the size of the Army, reduce the number of teachers or reduce the number of persons employed in the health services in order to reduce public expenditure. However, there was not a twitter of response from the Opposition in terms of controlling public expenditure. Fianna Fáil, notably Deputies Haughey and O'Kennedy, keep saying that our public expenditure is too high but when they get anywhere near the wire of saying where the expenditure should be reduced, in CIE or in other areas, they run away and will not under any circumstances give the slightest indication of where they will get the reduction. That is the type of political dishonesty with which the Opposition hope to gain support.
One of the factors the Opposition have ignored is the extent to which the plan, and the policies pursued by the Government, have impacted on the level of inflation. Inflation has been declining with a few reverses since 1982. From 1983 onward the decline has been steady and consistent and currently the rate of inflation — at 6¼ per cent for the first quarter of 1985 — is even lower than predicted in Building on Reality. After so many years of high inflation it is difficult for many of us to adjust quickly to this most welcome change. Few people remember accurately the prices of all the goods and services they buy because it is not so long ago, 1981, when the rate of inflation was 23 per cent. The annual rate has been reduced by us since then to rock bottom. It is the policy of the Government to keep the rate of inflation low because that has three advantages.
By reducing the rate of inflation our competitive edge on the export market gains considerably. Secondly, a low inflation makes life easier for those on fixed incomes whose pay is no longer seriously eroded by massive price increases. Thirdly, it makes it possible for more moderate wage demands since the cost of living is rising much slower. I was appalled to hear Deputy Haughey last Christmas saying there was no problem about granting a 14 per cent increase in the public sector, amounting to £300 million. It must be remembered that every increase of 1 per cent in public service pay costs £20 million. When Deputy Haughey was asked where he would find the money he said he would cut public expenditure in other areas. He forgot that 70 per cent of all public expenditure in the current Estimates is for pay. That hypocrisy puzzles me. Unfortunately the performance of the Fianna Fáil Party in that area is something which I have great difficulty in assessing from time to time.
(Interruptions.)
The Minister has until 7.57 p.m.
The volume of industrial production, which increased by 13½ per cent last year, is a very substantial increase while the volume of industrial exports last year went up by 19½ per cent. I doubt if that could be equalled on any record of the Fianna Fáil Party. Ireland's record for industry is very encouraging. It augurs well for the future and the Central Bank in its latest report predicts a volume increase in industrial output of 9 per cent in 1985. There has been a slight fall in industrial employment largely because of better labour productivity within our export industries and, therefore, the international competitiveness of our industrial products has increased markedly in recent years. I will conclude my observations in this regard.
The Minister has seven minutes if he wishes.
I will conclude my observations. Work is being done by the Youth Employment Agency on the employment side; work is now being done under the social employment scheme, which has already proved to be extremely popular and to which there has been a massive response; work is being done under the enterprise allowance scheme, introduced in January 1984, which has already enabled 5,000 unemployed people to establish themselves in their own work using that scheme; and, indeed, work is being done in many other areas. In education there has been a continuing investment of State funds. In 1983 the taxpayer provided a basic £550 for every primary school child, nearly £1,000 for every post primary school child and between £2,100 and £5,000 for every third level student, depending on the course of studies. These are record money transfers into the education system in the lifetime of this Government and there have been very few complaints from very few Deputies in that area.
(Interruptions.)
I would make the point in relation to housing ——
(Interruptions.)
Order. The Deputies should behave as adults.
——that last year, for the first time in ten years, we constructed 7,000 local authority houses. In addition we introduced the £5,000 scheme for local authority tenants who wish to proceed to private dwellings and we introduced the doubling of the housing grant to £2,000. Therefore, we now have a situation where there are thousands of local authority tenants getting £5,000 to vacate their dwellings so that the local authority can allocate them to somebody else. These people also have the £2,000 new house grant and £3,000 in mortgage interest subsidy. In total £10,000 is available and that is being taken up at local authority level. For the first time in the history of the State we have an excellent scheme which is working and which is to the credit of this Government.
With an inflation rate of 6¼ per cent increases in social welfare payments have matched inflation. Despite the recession and the fact that every other Minister for Social Welfare in every other European country is reducing social welfare payments, we have matched inflation on every single rate. The long term unemployed have had a 33 per cent increase since we took over, with inflation at 23 per cent in that period. There has been a real allocation of 10 per cent.
(Interruptions.)
If the Deputies do not believe me I will arrange for a special briefing in my Department and they can all come down and discuss the matter with the officers.
(Interruptions.)
Order, order.
I will conclude because many other Deputies want to discuss this matter. The contribution of my colleague, Deputy Dukes, my brief contribution tonight and this debate generally shows the extent to which progress has been made towards the targets outlined in Building on Reality. We have had the very difficult task of shifting the economy away from the financial crisis which was almost upon us when we took office while at the same time offering help on the unemployment problem and seeking to maintain all necessary social expenditures.
What is the budget deficit now——
Order.
The Government welcome——
——which you promised to wipe out in four years?
Deputies should not reduce this House into something——
(Dún Laoghaire): Give that young fellow five minutes and let him talk.
Mr. Cowen
On a point of order——
Order, please.
Mr. Cowen
I will not be patronised in this House by him or anyone else. I am here as a democratic TD no matter what age I am and I have 26,000 people to back me.
I would ask the Deputy to resume his seat or leave the House.
Mr. Cowen
I would ask the Deputy to withdraw that remark. I will not be patronised by him or anyone else.
(Interruptions.)
The Opposition had a full opportunity in a very lengthy debate to consider the document Building On Reality in October 1984 following which——
The Minister has a minute left.
——the Dáil approved and offered its support for the plan. I regret that a few months later the Fianna Fáil Party, because of understandable and welcome criticism of the plan at my party conference, are calling for the withdrawal of the plan. We do not doctor our agendas. All resolutions go on. No resolutions are buried, as they are in the Fianna Fáil Party. We do not have dictatorial domination of the party by Deputy Dick Spring such as that which operates in Fianna Fáil.
You have some audacity to say that in my presence but, knowing you, you are capable of anything.
Order.
I am sorry, but to hear the audacity of that Minister——
We must have order in the House.
(Interruptions.)
I will not have any surrogate socialist criticising my views.
(Interruptions.)
You were never a socialist and you are a shame to that party.
Order, Deputy.
I have never joined the Fianna Fáil Party. They joined the Labour Party and went back to Fianna Fáil.
(Interruptions.)
I will conclude. As far as I am concerned, the people of Ireland should be thankful, having seen in the past many manifestations of it, that they are not in the hands——
The Minister is now eroding Deputy De Rossa's time.
——of a wretched Opposition and that this Government despite its deficiencies——
Deputy De Rossa.
——have honestly presented the facts to the people, that we are not afraid to tell the truth and that we will go on doing so now and up until the next general election.
Deputy De Rossa has about eight minutes.
I move amendment No. 2:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:
"noting that Building on Reality is basically a restatement of unsuccessful social and economic policies pursued by successive Fianna Fáil and Coalition Governments, calls for the withdrawal of the plan, and urges the Government to recognise that private enterprise cannot provide full employment and that productive State enterprise must be the engine of growth to create jobs and get the economy on the move again.”
The Minister, Deputy Desmond, is right in saying that this is a repeat of a debate which took place last October and November and for that reason much of what I have to say may be a repeat of what has already been said many times. The debate between the Coalition and Fianna Fáil is basically about who will manage the existing economy and system better. One side argue that they are doing it correctly and the other side argue that they would do it better if they were in. I and, I assume, the Labour Party Members of the Coalition would argue that the system needs complete overhaul and change and that it is not simply a question of who is to manage it more effectively but who is capable of altering it in such a fundamental way that the doctrine of profit and private enterprise is overtaken by the doctrine of socialist planning of the economy.
Various Governments, both Coalition and Fianna Fáil, have issued various documents from time to time which they called plans. The most notable thing about all of these plans is that they are not plans, they are a series of aspirations strung together with incentives tacked on to encourage private enterprise to do the job. They have not in all cases spelled out exactly what they meant about doing the job, and we must read that to mean doing their own job to make money irrespective of the effects on the social fabric of the State. In the few minutes that I have it is necessary to make a simple point: that until such time as the major conservative parties in this House, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, agree either to manage the economy together or to go into opposition to a socialist Government, we will have a continuing growth in cynicism and disillusionment among the electorate. All they have seen for most of today at any rate is petty bickering, cat calling and name calling across the floor with no basic difference of political or economic opinion between the two sides. It is galling that on the one hand we have the Labour Party in Coalition— that is bad enough — but on the other hand Fianna Fáil on this side are claiming to be at this time the voice of the working class and the unemployed. At one stage they launched themselves into great support of the ICTU document and said that they supported it completely, that everything was in order——
Deputy, you have five minutes.
I will say what I have to say in five minutes. They supported all of these things in the ICTU document, but the working class people outside this House should recognise the record of the Fianna Fáil Party in Government, when they had the opportunity to be friends of the working class and unemployed and when they put ESB workers into prison, had the postal workers on the streets for months in 1979 coming up to the local elections and refused to pay the second phase of the public service pay award in 1982. It was they who went on a binge of borrowing in 1977 for day to day expenditure in order to pay for their election promises, and that to a large extent has us in the present crisis of foreign debt.
People listening to the Fianna Fáil spokesman speaking on this document Building on Reality should compare it with The Way Forward which was issued in 1982. To my knowledge Fianna Fáil have not abandoned that document, publicly at any rate. From reading sections of it it is clear that it bears a very close relationship to Building on Reality. The charade that we go through every now and again in the House of the Coalition and Fianna Fáil berating each other for not doing this and not doing that could give way to real political debate about the nature of the society we have on this island, the nature of the economy and what is required to eliminate unemployment. It is obvious to anyone who has watched what has been going on since 1973 that cutting budget deficits and cutting foreign borrowing in themselves will not solve the unemployment problem any more than increasing the deficit and borrowing for day to day expenditure will solve it. A very basic debate needs to be carried on which I have not time in the five minutes available to me to pursue; but until we settle down to debate the real economic issues we will increase cynicism and disillusionment in the people outside this House.
I will make one or two points about Fianna Fáil and the ICTU document. The Fianna Fáil document says that the growth in the size of the public service and its cost must be reversed. The ICTU document says that not enough resources are devoted to the public service. Fianna Fáil say that it is intended that the annual allocation to education in 1984-87 would be £94 million as in 1983. The ICTU say that there can be no cutback whatever in overall expenditure measures in real terms in education. Fianna Fáil say that the emphasis will be on reducing State support for public housing. The ICTU say that there is an urgent need for an increase in the proportion of houses provided by local authorities and they call for a State construction company. Fianna Fáil say that they support the ICTU document, they are the voice of the working class and at the same time their document The Way Forward is completely and totally contradictory of everything the ICTU stand for.
In the short time available I would like to go through a number of points. If I were not here talking about Building on Reality I would not believe the reality of the speech made by the Minister for Health and Social Welfare. We are not just now saying that this plan should be withdrawn. From the day it was issued we said that this plan was not real, it was based on unreality and it was not practicable. The arguments put forward by the Minister for Health and Social Welfare as to why we should follow this plan and why people should work to it are unbelievable. The objective of Building on Reality was set out. The plan sets out to halt and reverse the continuing upward spiral of unemployment——
The Deputy has 25 minutes.
It will be shared between me and my colleague. The plan sets out to halt and reverse the continued upward spiral of unemployment, to create the conditions in which, after the sharp decline of the past four years, employment will be more readily created and sustained. Then the Minister for Health and Social Welfare comes in and sets out all the reasons why we have to cut down, to control our debts and halt this huge deficit we have, to stop foreign borrowing, and justifies almost everything that must be against Labour Party policy.
I can understand why Deputy De Rossa is slightly annoyed, but it is amazing that tonight, when we are talking about the economic policies of the Government, he stands up for ten minutes and spends nine and a half minutes talking about Fianna Fáil policy and 30 seconds talking about Government policies. That is unlike him. Obviously, he is concerned about Fianna Fáil having an impact on the working class. He knows that the Minister for Health and Social Welfare has no support.
It is a pity the Minister has left because I gather he was a strong supporter of the ICTU and today's paper reports a motion from the ITGWU National Executive Council calling on the Government to declare the unemployment crisis a national emergency, to table the emergency on the agendas of the European Commission and the Council of the European Communities and to be discussed at the uniion's conference in his home city of Cork next week. He is the Minister who has decimated the health service, who tonight put forward all the reasons why he could do nothing, why there is no money for education or to help youth unemployment. I will tell him one thing that he could do. This year £500 million is to be spent by his Department paying people on unemployment benefit and assistance. Half of the people on the live register have been on it for over 12 months. Does he not care about them? Is it a simple question of putting forward his monetarist policies? Does he ignore the executive of the ICTU who supported him for years? Does he ignore his own conference, his parliamentary party, the Labour Party? I know that a person such as the Minister of State, Deputy Bermingham, who is chairman of that party, must feel sick when a Minister of his Government comes in and speaks against his party, his parliamentary party, his national executive and his trade union movement and says that the policies of the Labour Party are now the same as those put forward by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Dukes, here last night. He quoted the great success in the building industry, but he quoted selectively from the Central Bank report. He did not finish the paragraph, which read:
The volume of private housing output is estimated to have fallen by about 8 per cent, with larger falls occurring in industrial and commercial building. Public Capital Programme (PCP) expenditure affecting the building industry fell by about 2½ per cent in volume in 1984....
The outlook for building and construction continues to be unfavourable in 1985. A volume reduction in the building content of PCP expenditure of about 4 per cent and a continued decline in the private housing sector suggests a further 4 per cent volume fall in building output in 1985. Employment in the sector is projected to fall by 2½ per cent.
The Minister quoted just one line. Every report whether by the NESC, ESRI, Central Bank, AIB or any other organsiation, sets out clearly that this Government are simply increasing the numbers of unemployed. Almost 20 per cent of the people are unemployed, over 225,000, and if we include the youth who are unregistered, there are another 16,000. We see brochures from Britain daily about the thousands of people going to London looking for work. Organisations which closed down in the fifties in London — the Irish Welfare Bureau, the Brent Irish Advisory Service, the Harringay Irish Community Service and Irish welfare centres all over London — have reopened and are trying to advise people not to go to London because the jobs are not there. Yet people are going to London irrespective of this advice and working for £10 when the union rate is £30 and the Minister for Health is happy. This is unbelievable.
Last night the Minister for Finance coolly and calmly read out the same speech he has been making for the last two and a half years. He told us there were no real problems. I know he has been busy for the last three weeks, that he does not have to worry about local elections and that he is given briefs by his officials, but he should go out with his colleague, Deputy Keating, to Sheriff Street where there is 40 per cent unemployment, or any other part of the city, and hear the views of the people on Deputy Dukes and his Government or about Deputy Barry Desmond. He should listen to what the people have to say about hospital wards being closed and about the queues at the outpatient clinics being longer than they have been since the foundation of the State. There is no point saying you will provide services if you close the units which should provide those services, because that is what is happening. The Minister for Labour was credited with a social employment scheme which I supported but there is no point having such a scheme to help 10,000 people when only six people are availing of it because the trade unions will not cooperate with this Government. Deputy De Rossa should mention a few of these points when he is talking about the trade unions. We never said we supported every line of the documents and the trade unions know that because we met them several times, but neither did we say we supported a 14 per cent increase for the public service. Whoever advised the Minister for Health on economic and financial matters obviously gives him the same advise as he does on health matters because most of the points he put forward as Fianna Fáil policy are not true. The facts are on the record. The Minister, Deputy Desmond, was not here last night when the leader of the Fianna Fáil Party spoke, so it was easy for him to misquote this evening.
The people know the facts. Almost 20 per cent of the working population are unemployed. This Government have taken money out of the education system, they closed Irish Shipping, they privatised the B & I, they have almost closed the Port and Docks, and factories — Fords, Dunlops, Verolme and so on — have closed down. The people who lost their jobs in those industries do not have a hope in hell of getting another job. I spoke today to some people from Irish Shipping where 240 people lost their jobs; 21 have since got employment, 17 outside the country and the four who got jobs in Ireland were typists. That is the reality. What did the Government do for them?
I would like to ask Deputy De Rossa if Fianna Fáil would have closed Irish Shipping. Did we cut the pensions of people who were 15 or 20 years out of Irish Shipping from, say, £15 to £10 a week? Did we refuse to give them redundancy payments above the statutory limit? I met a man tonight who had worked for 27 years in Irish Shipping but what did he get? He got £4,000 and he cannot get back his pension contributions. These are the policies being followed by this Government.
Last week we spoke about the myths and inadequacies of the training schemes; we spoke about the unfairness of the social welfare system and how difficult it was to get a medical card but tonight the Minister said how he had developed this service and the community welfare scheme. He has cut back on the health boards, local authorities are starved of funds, and there has not been a new education service in two and a half years. Nothing has been done by this Government. They continue to stab the workers and the unemployed in every way possible. Last summer when everyone was on holiday they introduced the food subsidies. People will not forget these facts. The Minister for the Environment has called off the harassment of people who do not pay their local service charges because the local elections will be held next month.
Last October we said the policies in Building on Reality were not real. We have asked this Government on a number of occasions to bring in realistic policies, to bring investment back into the country to the level it was at in 1977 to 1982, but what did they do? They produced the document Building on Reality which does not have a section on investment and there is nothing for the construction industry. The Minister said we promised £100 million for the construction industry, but is it not better to put that amount into this industry than to provide £500 million for people on unemployment assistance? There are thousands of people living on the breadline who have medical cards but who are being chased to pay water rates and other charges. This Minister neglects his parliamentary party, the trade union movement and the working class and then says Fianna Fáil will do no better. We have always done better.
It is easy for minority parties, who will probably never be in the position to do anything, to knock everybody else. It is unusual for Deputy De Rossa to do that, but there is no point in saying we did not do this, that or the other. We built industries; we set up semi-State companies; we built an excellent construction industry; we saved Dublin port and made it viable; we built housing estates and education complexes in difficult times. But what has happened in recent years? Nothing. In the last two and a half years the working class people have been turned on by this Government. I would expect Deputy De Rossa to support the Opposition and not spend his time trying to give credibility to unrealistic policies.
This Government took the wrong road a long time ago. We have repeatedly said that. There are 250,000 people unemployed, three times the number needed to fill Croke Park with thousands still outside. We cannot continue to put people on welfare benefits, take away their health services and disrupt their way of life and still expect their support.
Perhaps the businessmen thought for a while that this Government were going to control public expenditure, but I am sure Deputy Coveney will explain in five minutes that they did not even do that. Building on Reality has done nothing for the business people. It has done nothing to control the finances of the State. We are not saying, as the Minister for Health said, that the deficit was too big; we said that the money provided had been spent in the first three months of the year and we asked if there would be a budget two days after the local elections. This Government have done nothing for jobs, employment or people on welfare or assistance. It was amazing to hear the Tánaiste make a 50 minute speech, as dead a speech as one will ever hear, last Saturday week. His only boast, as far as I can remember, and the Minister for Health repeated it tonight, was that the Labour Party in Government had succeeded in ensuring that the money paid to the 250,000 people unemployed kept pace with inflation. That is some boast. He could not say they had done anything for employment, good bad or indifferent. He did nothing for people who wanted to get off the live register. He did not do anything either for education or health, and his boast is that he kept unemployment index-linked to inflation. The sooner people get a chance to vote in a general election the better. At least they will get a chance to show their disapproval in the forthcoming local elections.
I support the motion put down by Fianna Fáil. Before tonight, I thought we had only to convince two people — the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance — that we really have serious problems. Unfortunately, we now have a third recruit, the Minister for Health, who is far removed from the reality of ordinary, everyday life. I could not believe my ears when I listened to the hypocrisy he expounded, especially as I remember him from 1977 to 1981 and thereafter talking about the social conscience of the Labour Party and what should be done for ordinary people. He now joins the most right wing Minister for Finance which this country has ever had. He is so removed from the reality of the Labour Party Conference in Cork that he did not get their message either.
We have no hang-ups about Building On Reality. As I said on the day it was introduced, it was badly named; it should have been called “Building on Unreality.” It was built on quicksand. Any small builder — although there are not too many working today — knows that a house built on quicksand will not last. It was also built on heroic assumptions. What were they? A priority for the success of the plan was to be a freeze on public sector pay. Did we get that? We did not, because at 11.42 p.m. on the night before the budget Fine Gael had to cave in to the Labour Party who would not accept a freeze on public service pay and they put £108 million into the budget to provide for it.
So much for the honesty and credibility which the Government espouse night after night. They use every possible tool available to convince the people that all is well at home. Last Sunday the Taoiseach was asked if he would not come home from Canada to deal with the problems here. He replied that there were no problems at home. I listened to the Minister for Finance last night, a man who consistently talks about honesty and credibility but who distorts facts and figures to convey the message that all is well. Let us look at the facts and stop trying to cod the people. You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.
We have a discredited Taoiseach and a discredited plan. There was supposed to be a public sector pay freeze but that has gone out the window. Interest rates were to come come down but they are now higher than when the plan was introduced. The dollar is not losing its value. Have international markets continued to expand and will they so so for the next three years? The best information is that they will not and that the American economy is entering another recession. We know that when America sneezes we all catch a cold. Even Government Ministers do not believe that the plan will work. When Deputy Quinn was asked about reducing the current budget deficit to 5 per cent in 1987, he replied that he intended to forget about that target because he did not agree with it. If you want to reduce the current budget deficit to 5 per cent for 1987, then next year you will take off £340 million in cuts and more the following year. The Government are not prepared to do this.
Minister Desmond has the gall to say that Fianna Fáil make contradictory statements. If he looks at our record for 1982 he will see that we kept on target. Every time the people called on Fianna Fáil to lead and develop the country we were always able to do so. We did not get into office under false pretences as is the case with the Government. Their plan was out of date within a month of being published and it is now discredited and disgraced. Indeed, the Central Bank said that all the factors combined in the plan give an impression of hasty compilation and half baked stances. Every chapter is a failure. There is total dishonesty and misrepresentation of labour force figures. The Government said that in April 1984 there were 214,000 people employed in manufacturing industry and quoted a labour survey as the source of these figures. There was no labour force survey in March or April 1984 and the only statistics available at that time were those from the Central Statistics Office on employment figures which mentioned 197,000. How can the people believe the Government's figures? They will give their answer on 20 June, and in a general election they will give the same answer.
The Government said that unemployment would level off at 220,000. At the end of 1984 it stood at 234,000. Do I have to go any further? The Government should come clean and tell the people that there are big problems. When we look at the current budget deficit we see that two-thirds of it is eaten up already and they expect us to believe they will be on target. They will be on target for the highest budget deficit in the history of the State. I heard Minister Desmond talking about 1981 but the current budget deficit then was 7.9 per cent. That is the time when the so-called economic commentators were trying to put the fear of God into everyone by saying that if our finances were not put in order international bankers would be knocking at our door to tell us how to run our business.
The Government are asking them to come in now.
If they were going to ask them a few years ago there is an even better excuse for asking them in today. Deputy Coveney is in business and if he can tell me that the environment for growth and the climate for investment is such that an enterprise can flourish I will bow my head to him. I know he would not say that. I also know that he did not say at a meeting of the Committee on Public Expenditure that the Youth Employment Agency was a farce, that we did not need it and that it was just another layer of bureaucracy. He should also stand up and say that the NDC is another layer of bureaucracy which will not do anything to alleviate unemployment. He is not allowed to say those things, but I know he believes them. He and I know that the climate is wrong and that there is no incentive to work.
Another chapter mentions a new approach to public enterprise. The only approach I see by the Government in that regard is one liquidation after another and sending for what used to be called a receiver. Now we have to send for the national undertakers because that is about all that is left. The National Development Corporation is a stillborn baby of the Labour Party. If Minister Bruton has his way it will never see the light of day, and more luck to him. There are supposed to be two parties in the Government. We wonder how long more the Labour Party will hang in there since they are not getting their part of the deal.
The next chapter deals with helping the long term unemployed. We dealt with that last week. We put down a motion which the Government accepted by having no vote on it. They have not got a manpower policy. The whole plethora of schemes they have is not working. The social employment scheme the Minister for Health talks about has not got off the ground because of trade union pressures. The Government's social policy is in tatters. Everybody on the streets of Ireland knows that the Government's social policy is represented by massive cuts in education, the dismantling of the health services and everything that goes with them. The Government tried to convince us that the family income supplement would look after 30,000 families. Only 1,800 families have got it. This has been talked about for 18 months, another fraudulent presentation to the Irish people who are only waiting to get their hands on the Government.
Tell us about the £9.60.
The postal service was so bad that the post never arrived. Do I have to dwell on Government expenditure? I can only describe the Minister for Finance as the new Paul Daniels of Irish politics. He tried to tell the taxpayers they would not have to pay more tax. Everybody who got a pay cheque last week knows the reality. Who is the Minister codding? He is the Paul Daniels of Irish politics — now you see it; now you do not. He is trying to fiddle around with figures and con the people into believing that the Government are not borrowing as much money as they were. When they took office the national debt was £12.7 billion. At the end of this year it will be £20 billion. Foreign borowing which they were to wipe out has gone from just over 3 billion to £8.5 billion. I described the current budget deficit. Do I have to say more?
It is time the Government came clean with the people and told them they will take more tax from them and borrow more money and use it to pay an ever increasing number of unemployed people. How can the Government convince me or any man with common sense that it is good business to borrow money to pay people to do nothing, while there are roads to be built and natural resources to be developed? This document is an insult to our natural resources. One-third of a page is devoted to fisheries, one page to forestry and half a page to tourism — all the areas where the jobs could be got if the Government had the political will and the business acumen to do the job. They should not try to cod the people any more with this document. There is nothing in it.
The Government's answer to everything is tax, tax and more tax. The Fianna Fáil attitude is work, work and more work. The Government will not reduce the taxation burden on the PAYE sector until they get more people back to work. The more people we have working, the bigger the contribution to the Exchequer and the quicker taxation will come down. It does not need any fancy plan bound up and sold like a packet of Persil which washes whiter than white to show what the country needs. The ordinary people know that. I cannot believe the Government do not know it. If they want to keep their heads buried in the sand, that is their business.
In the interests of the people and young people in particular, the Government should stop demolishing everything that was built up over the years by hard work by Irish men and women. The best of our people whom we will need in the future to build up the country are going abroad. The Government should take down the signs of demolition, disillusion and despair and put up the signs of reconstruction and rebuilding. Let us get down to doing the job we were elected to do. There is a job to be done. Let us do it. The Government should take away this document as an admission that they understand the realities in Ireland today.
I am out of breath after listening to that. This plan or any plan is constrained by three factors: the question of borrowing, the question of taxation and the question of public expenditure. We would all like to be able to invest in a high growth economy. We would all like to put £200 million or £300 million into the building industry and a whole series of other projects. The reality is that the country is crucified with taxation and foreign borrowing. We must do something about public expenditure. Fianna Fáil know that. It is written all over their own document. It is dishonest for them to continue to say we should have a high growth policy for employment. We would love to do that, but we inherited a financial problem of enormous magnitude which prevents us from doing so and which constrains the development of the economy.
Comments were made about the attitude of the Government to semi-State bodies. We are determined to encourage efficiency in semi-State bodies. The people want and expect that of us. In a short period of time there are some signs that that policy is working. NET are beginning to come out of their dire financial problems of a few years ago. There are other signs of semi-State bodies being revived and encouraged by the Government.
I want to say something about charges for local services. I do not understand the attitude on the other side of the House on this subject. The only Fianna Fáil Party policy document in existence that I know of is The Way Forward 1983-1987. It states very clearly on page 96 that “it will be necessary to consider imposing realistic charges both on individual users of sanitary services and developers so as to recoup part of the cost. This matter will be examined in the context of legislation to empower local authorities to charge for services generally.” That is identical to the policy of this Government. I do not understand why Fianna Fáil are running away from it. They should not run away from it now that local elections are in the air.
There would be a difference of opinion between Deputy Reynolds and myself, although we share backgrounds in business which might not be dissimilar. I do not expect him to take my word for it that Building on Reality is beginning to work. I have here the April edition of the Report of the Confederation of Irish Industry entitled Economic Trends. It says:
Ireland's inflation rate is continuing to come down. Having fallen to an annual rate of 6.2 per cent in February, current predictions are that it will fall further to as low as 5 per cent by mid-May. This will put Ireland below the EEC average for the first time in many years and lower than the UK, France, Italy and Belgium. A stable currency backed up by a low inflation and high productivity should enable Ireland to share many of the characteristics of the more disciplined communities such as Germany and the Netherlands and will lead to a more conducive climate for investment and job creation.
If that does not mean Building on Reality is beginning to work, I do not know what it means. It is patently absurd that we should be expected to deliver on a plan for three years in six months, and that we should be expected, when it is beginning to work, to review it and abandon it. That would be the height of irresponsibility. The community expect stability. They expect some rational form of planning. This is not a perfect plan. Any of us writing the plan could come up with a slightly different version. This is a good plan and we should stick with it.
The motion is in very specific terms based on the failure of this document — I will not use the word "plan"— to produce any results over the seven months since it was introduced here in the House. We are calling on the Government to withdraw it and asking sensible people in the Labour Party to support our motion as it was supported in a very substantial way at the recent Labour Party Conference in Cork. The reasons are quite obvious. This document, purporting to be a plan, has not succeeded and has shown no sign so far of working towards the sort of successful conclusion which Deputy Coveney just mentioned.
Credibility is the all-important factor in the production of any document of this kind. The document in question was presented as a plan for the period up to 1987. It was produced on the basis that with the finance legislation that was to follow it would form an overall approach to economic planning in terms of dealing with our unemployment and public finance problems. That is the very tone that was put on the document by the Taoiseach but this is where the basic lack of credibility lies. Speaking about the document on 16 October last the Taoiseach said that the rise in unemployment would be halted. This was from the Taoiseach who has been in the US for the past couple of weeks seeking to establish credibility on another basis. The basic weakness in the case of this entire Government stems from the Taoiseach himself and permeates the Government. That weakness is manifested in the lack of credibility. Not content with what one might regard as that negative promise, the Taoiseach went on to say that there would be a rapid increase in jobs, the number of which had fallen in the previous four years.
The latest figures we have in regard to the building and construction industry particularly, in housing input and output, show that for the first time since 1977 the figure fell below 25,000. We read at page 21 of Building on Reality that overall growth should resume early in the period of the plan and there is the forecast that employment would rise slightly between 1984 and 1987. However, since the publication of the document in October last there has been a decrease in volume of about 9 per cent in the building and construction industry alone. That trend developed prior to the doubling of the VAT on new house purchases so that with the reduction of 9 per cent in respect of employment in the industry, there is now a change in the VAT that will further aggravate the situation.
I turn now to the general picture in terms of the national finances and here again we find a serious situation developing. In the first quarter of this year the current budget deficit is estimated at £800 million or almost two-thirds of the deficit budgeted for the whole year. Therefore we are going into a very serious unemployment situation and a very serious budget deficit situation which can only have been brought about by the downward turn in the economy because there is no doubt but that there is a downward spiral, that there are fewer people at work with the consequent lesser yield in taxation and greater cost to the Exchequer in terms of social welfare payments. In addition, this leads to further borrowing to cater for the deficits.
This whole downward spiral in economic activity and public finances has been caused by the presentation, for the first time in this cosmetic way, of economic planning. The Government plan had no basis in reality.
During the debate that followed the publication of the document, I said that the stated objective of the plan was to increase employment but that in subsequent pages of the plan there was the projection that the unemployment figure would increase during the three year period. This lip service to the problem of unemployment is callous hypocrisy, as can be seen from the table on page 145 of the plan where we read that it is proposed to scale down the public capital programme so that by 1987 in real terms public capital investment would be 20 per cent less than the present level. It is not possible to bring about a reduction in unemployment and, consequently, an increase in employment unless there is an increase in public and private capital investment. That is a basic, simple and straightforward fact. It is what economics and public finances are about. If there is an increase in investment either on the public side or on the private side, there will be more jobs and this results in less strain on the public finances in terms of social welfare payments and of taxation because there will be a broader spread of the tax base from which taxation is gathered.
That basic element of economics is ignored in the document but we are talking of a document that is fraudulent. However, this is typical of the Taoiseach and of the modus operandi right across the board in so far as the Government are concerned whether they are dealing with economics, public finances, Northern Ireland, crime and vandalism or any other aspect of public policy. The main purpose of the Government in the past two and a half years has been not to govern but to appear to look good. That is not good enough either so far as this Dáil or so far as the people generally are concerned. The people are waiting anxiously for a restoration of basic confidence in their institutions, for confidence in the capacity of the Government and public agencies to make things work, confidence in a tax system that will provide an environment in which people can work and, above all, political leaders in Government who can give them the necessary inspiration to point the way ahead and indicate to the people that there is a way forward, as we indicated in our document, The Way Forward, before we left office two and a half years ago.
As this Government practically complete their third year in office, we see how fruitless those three years have been in the way of real performance as opposed to cosmetic performance. We have had plenty of the latter. We have had apparent leadership, not real leadership. There has been the issuing of documents like Building on Reality in the economic area and exercises in the political, constitutional and national areas and all these exercises have been basically fraudulent. Fraud is one thing that the Irish people will not tolerate in matters of public affairs. That is why they have already decided — I do not care when it happens — in their minds and in their hearts to reject this Government because it is a fraudulent one.
The sooner the Government realise that this type of exercise is not good enough, the better, and that what is required above all else is a psychological spur which will revitalise the minds and the creative abilities of our people, to show entrepreneurs and investors from home and abroad that there is a future and scope here for investment. They must be shown that that scope for investment and that future will not be dependent on the whims of people who want to destroy the system or who have reservations about the system but that plans and developments on which confidence can be based will provide the psychological spur based fundamentally on a Government that will stay in office for the full period of five years with a clear majority, sure of where they are going.
What is required today, above all else, is a political solution to our problems. People tend today to denigrate political solutions and political aspirations. These are fundamental to Ireland's present day problems. We have had sufficient analyses. In fact, we have been paralysed by analyses. We have sufficient handlers, cosmetic people, dressage people and people who have sought to present us in this, that, or the other light. What we want are people who will govern this country in a secure way, knowing that they will be there for a full period of five years, people who are not interested in knocking the other Government or the other party or parties. After the next election, when Fianna Fáil obtain a clear majority, I do not intend to refer any more to any member of the Fine Gael and Labour Parties. I would regard that as utterly irrelevant in the on-going political process which will be concerned with positive and decisive Government.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
You will not hear from this bench or from anyone on this side any remarks about the flawed pedigrees which range in front of us. We will give them the charity of our silence. That is what is required today. If this Government had adopted a policy of that kind, instead of chasing ridiculous hares in the earlier period of office and taking pleasure out of indulgence in proving themselves whiter than white, and engaging in a massive charade of hypocrisy and self-indulgence, they might have got down to work two and a half years ago and we would not be where we are today.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
We are where we are today because in pharisaical pursuit of what they considered to be some form of invented moral virtue which bore no relation to reality, they proceeded to produce publications like Building on Reality which were not based on any semblance of reality. That document was fraudulent from day one in seeking to establish in the Irish mind that something had arrived in 1984 which was going to produce, by 1987, economic development that would lead to the growth in the Irish economy required to sustain the necessary employment and to eliminate social deprivation. That whole aspect has turned out to be a very sick joke.
I hope by moving this motion that we have sought to re-establish today a plan for such economic development. Above all, we want to see the re-establishment of old fashioned things called honesty and integrity in the conduct of Irish public affairs which were present before certain people started to debase this Parliament in their time, by using and abusing it instead of regarding this Parliament as the place that elected an Irish Government to carry out the business of the nation in an honest manner, rather than carry out a public relations exercise.
I am very proud to say that over many years as a Government Minister I have never had a public relations man in my office and never intend to have one. I intend to continue in that way. The only good industry in this Government has been the hiring of public relations men, of consultants and the ultimate hirelings of all, liquidators to deal with the situation caused by the hiring of those consultants and public relations people.
I am putting the Question: "That amendment No. 1 in the name of the Minister for Finance be made."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 71; Níl, 66.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barnes, Monica.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bermingham, Joe.
- Birmingham, George Martin.
- Boland, John.
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Carey, Donal.
- Cluskey, Frank.
- Collins, Edward.
- Conlon, John F.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Cooney, Patrick Mark.
- Cosgrave, Liam T.
- Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Crotty, Kieran.
- Crowley, Frank.
- D'Arcy, Michael.
- Desmond, Eileen.
- Donnellan, John.
- Dowling, Dick.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Doyle, Joe.
- Dukes, Alan.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Farrelly, John V.
- Fennell, Nuala.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Harte, Patrick D.
- Hegarty, Paddy.
- Hussey, Gemma.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Barry, Myra.
- Barry, Peter.
- Begley, Michael.
- Keating, Michael.
- Kelly, John.
- Kenny, Enda.
- L'Estrange, Gerry.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McLoughlin, Frank.
- Manning, Maurice.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Molony, David.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Naughten, Liam.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick East)
- O'Brien, Fergus.
- O'Brien, Willie.
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Leary, Michael.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- O'Toole, Paddy.
- Owen, Nora.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Prendergast, Frank
- Quinn, Ruairí
- Ryan, John.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, Patrick Joseph.
- Skelly, Liam.
- Spring, Dick.
- Taylor-Quinn, Madeline.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.
Níl
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Barrett, Michael.
- Brady, Vincent.
- Brennan, Mattie.
- Brennan, Paudge.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Browne, John.
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Byrne, Seán.
- Calleary, Seán.
- Conaghan, Hugh.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Coughlan, Cathal Seán.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Daly, Brendan.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Fahey, Francis.
- Fahey, Jackie.
- Faulkner, Pádraig.
- Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
- Flynn, Pádraig.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat Cope.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Harney, Mary.
- Power, Paddy.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Treacy, Seán.
- Tunney, Jim.
- Haughey, Charles J.
- Hilliard, Colm.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Leonard, Tom.
- Leyden, Terry.
- Lyons, Denis.
- McCarthy, Seán.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McEllistrim, Tom.
- Mac Giolla, Tomás.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Nolan, M. J.
- Noonan, Michael J.
- (Limerick West)
- O'Connell, John.
- O'Dea, William.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Edmond.
- O'Kennedy, Michael.
- O'Leary, John.
- Ormonde, Donal.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Walsh, Seán.
- Wilson, John P.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Barrett(Dún Laoghaire) and McLoughlin; Níl, Deputies V. Brady and Browne.
Amendment No. 1 declared carried.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.