Jim Higgins
Question:2 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the areas of the Programme for Government which have been realised to date; the areas in this programme which have still not been implemented; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Programme for Government.
Jim Higgins
Question:3 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the number of meetings which have been held by the monitoring committee for the Programme for Government; when the most recent meeting of the Committee took place; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
I presume the Deputy is referring not only to our original Programme for Government 1989-1993 in the national interest but also to the commitments contained in the review published last autumn. As has been stated on several occasions, the vast majority of the original commitments have either been implemented or are in the process of implementation. As a result, it was possible in many cases to set new priorities in the review last year. The Government are making good progress on a wide front.
All the main macro-economic objectives have been fulfilled. The debt-GNP ratio is now close to 100 per cent of GNP, the revised target for 1993 instead of the 120 per cent target originally set. The standard rate of tax has been brought down to 27 per cent. Much progress has been made in reducing the tax wedge in recent budgets. We have maintained a stable exchange rate policy, especially over recent weeks. Job creation targets for the industrial promotion agencies have been largely fulfilled, despite an adverse international climate.
The Green Paper on Education has been published, and the third level grants scheme has been radically overhauled and improved. The plan for social housing is being implemented. The living standards of social welfare recipients have been more than maintained. Common Agricultural Policy reform did have full regard for Ireland's special position, and did take account of the interests and well being of farmers and consumers alike, and does safeguard the fabric of rural society. Widescale Oireachtas reform has been introduced, or is under active consideration. The White Paper on Marital Breakdown has been published. Most of the other legislation promised has either been already passed, introduced, or at an advanced stage of preparation.
I announced in the course of my Bodenstown speech that there would be an increase in ODA from next year.
The Maastricht European Council created no obstacles to Ireland's participation in the front rank of European nations, and the commitments to cohesion and the Delors II proposals based on them are very satisfactory. There are good expectations that the new Cohesion Fund will be established as from some time next year.
We have succeeded in relaunching dialogue in Northern Ireland, and are working for a positive result. A long paper was published last summer on the potential of North-South economic co-operation.
I would point out that the Government have undertaken many initiatives that are not in the programme, that derive from the Programme for Economic and Social Progress or because particular needs have arisen. Looking at the programme, therefore, only gives a partial view of the Government's activity. Equally, not every measure outlined in the programme has proved possible to implement in the exact form envisaged or can be regarded as a major priority. All such political programmes have to be implemented pragmatically, depending on what is feasible and desirable, and taking account of other priorities, with the final criterion being one's best judgment as to what is in the national interest at a particular time.
The high degree to which policy aims and commitments have been implemented by Fianna Fáil-led Governments since 1987 compares most favourably with the many broken pledges of the preceding period. If the Deputy cares to look back and see how little of the 1982-1987 Fine Gael-Labour Coalition's Joint Programme for Government was ever implemented, he will fully appreciate how much better this Government have done.
With a new Government being formed last February, causing some postponement of a meeting due, the monitoring committee held its first meeting on 29 April. A further meeting was arranged in July which unfortunately had to be cancelled, because of other engagements. That meeting is now planned to take place shortly, but in any case the power of decision in relation to the implementation of the various parts of the programme obviously rests with the Government as a whole.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that in stark contrast to the rather glowing picture he paints, this is a four-year programme and we are now well into the fourth year of the term of office of this Government. Would the Taoiseach not agree that the employment creation element is a flop and that we have 300,000 people out of work, that public liability insurance which was supposed to be reformed and improved has not been changed, that the hospital waiting lists have increased by 10 per cent, that the standardised means test has not been introduced, that the special priority that was to be given to deal with the massive housing crisis has not been reflected in the programme for social housing, and that, in fact, it is a farce——
I am sorry, Deputy, this is Question Time. The Deputy seems to be imparting information rather than seeking it as is our purpose at this time.
(Interruptions.)
Is the Taoiseach aware that the capitation grant which was supposed to be improved has rested at £28 for primary schools for the past five years and that, in addition, far from reforming the higher education grants, the Taoiseach has dismantled the system?
The Deputy is continuing to give information and is embarking upon a speech. That is out of order.
Will the next monitoring committee meeting be held——
Direct, succinct and relevant questions, please.
——before or after the election?
I have no question to answer. All I heard was a long statement, a litany of what the Deputy regards as his interests. I have given an extensive list of activities on behalf of this Government, and I have said that the Government will continue to work even outside the programme with things that have to be done. Deputy Higgins has not asked a question that I have to answer.
You will continue to abuse Question Time.
Watch the ulcer.
Is it not common knowledge that the Taoiseach is trying to undermine his own Government and to push the Progressive Democrats out of the Government?
(Interruptions.)
Among the items listed by the Taoiseach in relation to the Programme for Government was the question of the Programme for Social Housing. I put it to the Taoiseach that as a programme to solve the housing problems, it is totally inadequate. Given the growing housing lists and the inadequate response of the Government, would the Taoiseach not agree that the Government should review that aspect of the programme with a view to building houses? The waiting lists are longer than ever.
I accept that the social housing programme was slow in getting off the ground and many local authorities did not make any real effort to initiate it in the early stages. However, I assure the Deputy that the Minister for the Environment is carrying out a review of its progress and undoubtedly, he will report back to Government in due course on this programme.
It was a bottle of smoke from day one.
What initiatives does the Taoiseach propose taking arising from the commitments he made in his speech at the UN Conference on Environment and Development?
It appears to be a separate matter, Deputy.
It is not a question.
With respect, Sir, it is not a separate matter. The Taoiseach addressed the United Nations conference and in the text of his speech appeared to assume a number of obligations in the environmental development area. I am merely asking——
It is worthy of a separate question.
There are questions on today's Order Paper.
A very eloquent answer to it.
Under the review agreed between the two parties in Government, lottery funds were to be dispersed among local authorities for distribution. When will that allocation of lottery funding be made available to local authorities?
These are specific questions worthy of——
It is part of the review.
It is discretionary.
It is part of the review. Has the Taoiseach no answer?
Is the reason the July meeting of the monitoring committee did not take place, and we now have some date in the distant future for such a meeting, that the glaring failures of the programme will become apparent——
The Deputy is asking questions and answering them.
——especially in the areas of particular interest to the Progressive Democrats?
That is irrelevant. I am proceeding to another question.
(Interruptions.)
A final and relevant question from Deputy John Bruton.
Will the Taoiseach give some information on the status of the assistance given by the Civil Service to the two political parties in the course of this political negotiation? I understand that, although the parties were negotiating as political parties, Civil Service resources were made extensively available to them in the course of their discussions. It seems that this is a partisan use of the Civil Service and such facilities should be available to other parties on the same basis.
I feel that if we want answers to such questions, they should be put down separately.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach if he would——
This ad hoc procedure is uncalled for.
This is directly relevant to the questions which were down and to which the Taoiseach replied. Will the Taoiseach enlighten me as to the status of the Civil Service assistance to the two political parties in this instance?
The Deputy should not have to ask that question. He was a former Minister and he knows the position.
This was a party negotiation.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 4 please.