I am extremely grateful that the time for this debate has been extended from the original hour and a half offered by the Government to three hours, a request which was made by the Labour Party Whip.
In her biography of the Duke of Wellington, Elizabeth Longford describes the entry of Napoleon into Paris this way:
The Emperor was carried shoulder-high into the Tuileries on the 20th of March, 1815, with his eyes shut and a sleep-walker's smile on his face. The Hundred Days had begun.
The Hundred Days she referred to, of course, represented the period between Napoleon's triumphant return to Paris, after his escape from the island of Elba, and his ultimate defeat at the battle of Waterloo. It was a glorious and exciting hundred days, which in many ways encapsulated the brilliance and also the fatal flaws which characterised Napoleon.
Today we are coming to the end of another period of a hundred days, albeit a rather less glorious and exciting one. The hundred days we are celebrating today marks the period between Elba and Waterloo as well — but it was Deputy Brian Lenihan who was exiled to Elba a hundred days ago, and the Taoiseach who meets his Waterloo today, defeated as he is by the intransigence of one of his own Ministers, who refuses the transfer which in anybody's opinion he so richly deserves.
The Emperor, surrounded by his marshals and foot soldiers, is carried shoulder high in here today, his eyes firmly shut to the division his Government have created in our society, to present us with a sleep- walker's reshuffle, characterised only by his dithering and lack of decision.
In the last hundred days we have seen squalid scandals of mature recollection here at home. Internationally we have seen the world go to war. We have seen some of the largest armies and biggest collections of firepower ever assembled inflicting massive destruction. We have seen this Parliament participate in a charade over Ireland's position in relation to that war, and our Taoiseach has not been able to make up his mind about appointing a Minister for Defence.
Surely there could be no greater comment on the pomposity and self-importance of this Government that while they have flown around Europe, posturing about our position in the world and in the European Community, we have been unable even to appoint a solitary Minister for Defence. How or why we should be expected to be taken seriously, while this foolish agonising about a simple appointment was going on, defies any attempt at rationalisation.
Of course, the last hundred days have seen the emergence of a new dimension in internal Cabinet relations as well. Two high offices have been personified in one person and, as a result, whatever about other tensions in the Cabinet, at least we have been able to say that the relations between the Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence have been without any argument.
Thus, the Minister for Defence has been able to supply 150 soldiers to guard the Taoiseach's own palace. The Taoiseach has been able to silence any protest by the Minister for Defence at the relatively modest provision in the Estimates with which the Minister will be expected to meet the high expectations generated by his predecessor's promises to the members of the Defence Forces, promises made of course, while the predecessor was both Minister and a candidate for the office of Commander in Chief. Of course, between them, they have been able to make any arrangements necessary to ensure that anyone interested in peaceful protest will not be able to get within a mile of Shannon Airport.
It must have been very soothing for the holders of these high offices to find so much common ground between them. In fact, I began to suspect that the Taoiseach was giving consideration to holding on to Defence. Think of the toys to be played with — the tanks to be lined up in the new palace, the helicopters to land and take off from the roof. Think of all the times he would receive the crisp Army salute as he went about his rounds — quite a refreshing change that must make from the rather more abject and grovelling adoration he gets from his backbenchers, who are gradually departing.
Instead, he has decided to re-instal Deputy Daly as Minister for Defence. On behalf of the Labour Party I wish Deputy Daly well in his appointment. If I describe his appointment and the proceedings today as a damp squib, it is for those reasons and not a personal reflection on Deputy Daly. He is a decent Deputy who is well respected in this House and is popular. He was dropped from Cabinet only because he was made the scapegoat of a disastrous collective Cabinet decision in relation to the rod licence issue.
I would issue a word of warning to him, which I know he will take in the spirit in which it is intended. He faces high expectations as Minister. The provisions made in the Estimates under the headings of pay and allowances for the Defence Forces will not give him any room to manoeuvre. He will need the strong support of his Taoiseach and other members of the Government in the months ahead. I think he knows enough to know by now that the strong support of the Taoiseach is reserved for only one man, and that is the Taoiseach himself.
I described this appointment as a damp squib. The reshuffle which we all expected, and which this Government need if they are to change the more reactionary elements of their image, has become a total anti-climax, because one Minister has refused to be moved. We all know why — the Minister concerned is afraid that if he agrees to move it will prove that everything that "Scrap Saturday" says about him is true. It must be the first time in history that a satirical radio programme has turned into self-fulfilling prophecy.
Virtually every Minister who resigned from Mrs. Thatcher's Government in the dying days of her administration offered as his reason that he wanted to spend more time with his family. I do not question the Taoiseach's statement that he did not ask the Minister for the Environment to move and, therefore, was not refused. The point is that the Taoiseach's authority is totally diminished and he could not even ask for the move he wanted. In the case of the Minister for the Environment, it would perhaps be difficult for him to offer the reason offered by Ministers across the water. We have all found out in recent months that he is an acknowledged expert on the family and on parenthood. There is no need then for him to be changed from his present position. This expert on the family will continue for the time being to preside over the re-emergence of a housing crisis, the kind of crisis which places intolerable strains on families waiting for housing throughout the country. He will continue to preside over the decimation of local authorities and the essential services they provide. He will continue to do so because he decrees that he will, not because the Taoiseach, his party leader, wishes it.
Because the Flynnstone factor has prevailed in determining the nature and the scope of this reshuffle, the Minister for Health is also to remain at his post, presiding over a health service he is privately prepared to admit is in more serious difficulties than at any time since he came into office. His management of the health services has been an unmitigated disaster from the beginning. The most serious criticism I can offer of him is that, single handed he has removed any concept of a right to the provision of health care.
Three years ago we had a health service which was struggling with financial difficulties, but one in which access to care was determined by medical criteria. Now access to health care when it is needed is determined almost entirely by income. That is the fundamental change brought about by the policies of this Minister, and by his failure to fight for the rights of the people he was elected to serve. If anyone should see himself as the champion and advocate of the sick and the handicapped, it is the Minister for Health. This Minister has never done so, and he should have been offered a free transfer years ago.
The same is true of the Minister for Education, who has substituted bluster and sleight-of-hand for policy in the last three years. We have all seen the promises of reductions in the pupil teacher ratio in the last few weeks. What should not be forgotten is that even if those promises are kept, the pupil teacher ratio will still be greater than when this Minister came into office.