Enda Kenny
Question:1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place in his Department for the protection of personal data held by electronic means; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25630/09]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Data Protection.
Eamon Gilmore
Question:2 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place within his Department to ensure the security of personal data held by electronic means; if he has satisfied himself with the adequacy of such measures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27240/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:3 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the data protection procedures in place in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27252/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
Although sensitive information belonging to members of the public is not generally collected by or stored in the Department's electronic systems, specific measures are in place in my Department to protect all data held electronically.
Access to personal information held on databases within my Department is controlled by application security and confined to relevant authorised personnel only. Access by users to these systems is granted on an "as needs only" basis. The Department's computer networks are secured against cyber attacks through the use of security products such as multiple firewalls, anti-virus software and e-mail security tools. Remote access equipment is only issued to staff who have a business need to access the Department's systems out of the office. All applications for access are sent to, and approved by, the personnel officer. Staff supplied with mobile equipment are issued with guidance to ensure devices are secured properly. The hard drives of all laptops are encrypted and do not store departmental data physically on them. Strong authentication methods, in addition to user name and password, are in place to prevent unauthorised access to the Department's network from mobile devices.
My Department complies with the guidelines on protecting the confidentiality of personal data issued by the Department of Finance. It also evaluates and reviews advanced information security products and technologies as they come to market and implements them where appropriate. In short, my Department applies best practice and uses industry standard information security protection devices and software to protect all data within its systems. It regularly reviews and updates these security procedures and products as a matter of course.
I listened carefully to the Taoiseach's reply and we need more than firewalls around here. In any event, in 2008 the personal data of 580,000 people was lost and the reporting of all of that was less than adequate. To date, in 2009, Bord Gáis has lost the personal information of 75,000 customers and the HSE had 15 laptops stolen, two of which were not encrypted. The Taoiseach is aware that in April 2007 the personal information of 380,000 social welfare recipients went missing. It took 16 months, until August 2008, before the Minister for Social and Family Affairs was made aware of the extent of the losses. Furthermore, the data was only password protected and did not have any encryption in place.
The Taoiseach will also be aware that 16 laptops have been stolen from the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office since 1999. Laptops were stolen from the Bank of Ireland, computer disks were lost in New York by the Blood Transfusion Service Board, 15 HSE laptops were stolen in Roscommon and, as I said, Bord Gáis lost information on 75,000 customers.
As I understand it, there is no specific legal obligation on a body that loses personal information to notify the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner. That irritation was perfectly evident recently when that office only heard about the missing HSE laptops on the radio. There have been many high profile thefts, whether such data was being targeted deliberately or stolen by accident. Can the Taoiseach confirm that all the electronic data being held in his Department is encrypted and therefore of no use to people who have access to computers or hand-held technology? Can he say why the Data Protection Commissioner was not informed of the theft of the HSE laptops?
If Fine Gael were to introduce its Data Protection (Disclosure) (Amendment) Bill 2008, would the Taoiseach support it? That would create a legal obligation on organisations to disclose within a certain period any breaches of data security. Such an obligation would create very strong incentives for all organisations to ensure their data protection procedures were adequate in order to avoid any negative publicity that might ensue from having to disclose a breach of customers' sensitive and personal data. If we introduce that Bill will the Taoiseach support it, and will he say why the Data Protection Commissioner was not informed about the missing HSE laptops? Is he happy that all computer information, where personal data is stored with his Department, is at a minimum encrypted?
This question applies to procedures within my Department, so I am not in a position to comment as regards other matters. Such questions are best put to the line Ministers concerned as regards specific queries the Deputy may have.
In terms of my Department, in the body of my reply I indicated that the hard drives of all laptops are encrypted and the departmental data is not physically stored on them. There are strong authentication methods in place to prevent unauthorised access to the network from mobile devices. I am satisfied on the basis of the information provided to me by the personnel office and the people in the Department responsible for this area, that best practice is being applied and that standard information security protection devices and software are being used to protect all data within the systems.
In that respect it is fair to say that a small amount of computer equipment was reported to be lost or stolen. Nine devices were reported lost or stolen since 2002, three of which were subsequently recovered. There was no personal data on any of the devices concerned and the procedures for dealing with equipment reported lost or stolen were enacted in regard to these situations.
Arising from that, the Data Protection Commissioner's findings are only made public if the body being investigated actually requests it or agrees to it. For example, the Irish Blood Transfusion Board appears to have agreed to it but the Bank of Ireland does not appear to have agreed to it. Does the Taoiseach agree that in cases where an investigation is carried out by the Data Protection Commissioner concerning significant loss of personal or sensitive information, the findings should be made public, which is not always the case at present? Obviously, the findings of the Data Protection Commissioner would be helpful to all organisations and set a standard that everybody would want to adhere to. Does the Taoiseach agree there should not be this situation where the findings of the Data Protection Commissioner are made public only in circumstances where the organisation agrees or requests it? Should it not be the case that they are made public in all circumstances to help everybody else set a standard and so that items of personal and sensitive information on computer disk are not lost?
The availability of information as a general principle is obviously something of which one would be in favour. However, other considerations are sometimes in play, such as the confidentiality of personal information, and the information may not be regarded by the individuals concerned or affected as a matter that should come into the public domain in any event. There are, therefore, various considerations which must be applied in regard to data protection. For my part, any proposals that come from any part of the House on these issues will be considered constructively in line with the established principles of what is best practice in this area.
In recent years, more than 110 laptops and similar devices have been stolen from different Departments. Various e-Government projects have been spearheaded by the Department of the Taoiseach. One of the obvious consequences of e-Government is that the State inevitably accumulates vast amounts of information about the personal details of people's lives, whether that be health information, information relating to farms and farmers, or otherwise. If one is having a smart economy drive and an e-Government drive, it is inevitable that the Government ends up holding vast amounts of data about different aspects of people's lives.
I want to restate the question. First, devices which store data may be stolen or lost, perhaps because officials have them in their cars or take them home with them, or because the offices where the devices are held are broken into. The general public wants to know what provision is in place for a type of rapid warning system which all Government agencies and Departments would sign up to in order to alert people to the fact that what to them may be sensitive information has been lost or compromised in some way. Second, given that the Department of the Taoiseach has over the past ten years led the information, smart economy and e-Government project, would the Taoiseach not agree it is a matter for his Department to set standards and responses in regard to the observations from the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner concerning the security of devices, particularly concerning the issue of informing people whose data and personal information may have been compromised in one way or another?
With regard to what happens if a device is missing or stolen, in that event, the user account associated with that device is immediately disabled and, in the case of BlackBerries, they are centrally disabled from the server and the memory of the machine is also wiped in this procedure; the network provider is notified so that the SIM card is disabled, which renders the device inaccessible to unauthorised users; the Department's asset register is updated; in the case of theft, the user is asked to report the matter to the Garda; and, where personal or sensitive data are compromised, the Data Protection Commissioner will be also informed.
On whether I am satisfied that personal data belonging to members of the public held in the Department's databases are safe from unauthorised access or from hackers, I am satisfied that my Department applies best practice on data protection. The procedures, products and devices they have are regularly reviewed and updated to ensure they are capable of providing the best security appropriate to the Department's needs at all times. On whether there were any instances where personal data held by the Department or any of its agencies were compromised in any way, I am informed that no personal data held electronically by my Department have been compromised in any way.
Regarding the need to comply with data protection legislation in the protection of personal data, I am informed that the Department fully complies with the provisions of the 1988 and 2003 Acts, and the Freedom of Information Acts 1997 and 2003 in managing electronic and paper based records.
On the overall situation in terms of data held electronically in all Departments, when I was Minister for Finance, the Department of Finance, as the Department of the public service, wrote to all Departments, offices, and agencies in November 2007 seeking information on the systems and procedures in place to protect the confidentiality of personal data. After collating and examining those responses the Department of Finance then produced a report for Government which contained the findings and a number of recommendations. It was circulated to relevant stakeholders for comment and observation and was presented to Government for consideration in April 2008. The Government noted the report and also that the Department of Finance was convening a working group to produce guidelines based on the recommendations of that report. That cross-departmental working group had its first meeting in May 2008. The CMOD section of the Department of Finance chairs meetings of the group and provides a secretariat.
The group has produced guidelines and a template code of practice for Departments, offices and agencies on the protection of personal data held electronically, on paper and on data storage devices. Those guidelines also cover the protection of data while being transferred electronically between Departments and via e-mail. Those documents, based on best practice in this area were passed to the Data Protection Commissioner and other members of the working group for observations. Following their responses both documents were circulated to all Departments, offices and agencies. There has been an effort to provide uniform standards through that process in the past 12 to 18 months.
On the questions before us, does the Department of the Taoiseach have a co-ordinating role on data protection procedures across all Departments? Does that function arise and is it the Taoiseach's Department that would carry out same?
On a more general point about data protection but in an area for which the Taoiseach is directly responsible, namely, social partnership, has progress been made on the commitment in the Towards 2016 agreement that legislation would be enacted so that employment agencies shall in their dealings with jobseekers abide by all employee protection and data protection legislation in force in the State? Will the Taoiseach give an indication, as it is directly under the aegis of his Department, on what progress there has been in moving towards such an assurance, a guarantee?
I indicated in a previous reply to a supplementary questions from Deputy Burton that the Department of Finance is the Department of the public service and when I was Minister for Finance I undertook a process of co-ordination to ensure best practice in this area across all Departments, agencies and offices. In my detailed reply to a previous supplementary I indicated that that process was extensive, comprehensive and is now complete. That answers that question.
The other question about what progress has been made to date on employment agencies and commitments in Towards 2016 would be best tabled for a specific answer to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.
As social partnership is an area under the direct responsibility of the Taoiseach's Department I would have thought he would have an oversight on not only the proposal but the agreement within Towards 2016. Can he not give us something more than just a referral to another Department? Has any progress been made, to the Taoiseach's knowledge, in bringing about the commitment in Towards 2016 in this regard?
With respect, the question put down relates to the procedures in place in my Department for the protection of personal data held by electronic means. The supplementary question is far wider in scope than could have been contemplated.
Cabinet Committees.
Enda Kenny
Question:4 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the last occasion on which the Cabinet committee on economic renewal met; and when the next meeting is due. [25633/09]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:5 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the date of the last meeting of the Cabinet committee on economic renewal; and when the next meeting is scheduled. [27241/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:6 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the membership of the Cabinet committee on economic renewal. [27253/09]
Enda Kenny
Question:7 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach when the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnership will next meet; the number of meetings of the team planned for the remainder of 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30616/09]
Enda Kenny
Question:8 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on climate change will next meet. [30644/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:9 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach when the next progress report of the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and public private partnership will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31183/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:10 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of times the Cabinet committee on social inclusion has met since June 2007 to date. [31186/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:11 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of times the Cabinet committee on health has met since June 2007 to date. [31187/09]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:12 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on economic renewal last met; and when the committee is expected to next meet. [32519/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:13 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if the work of the Cabinet committee on housing, infrastructure and public private partnerships and its supporting cross-departmental team has been subsumed into the Cabinet committee on economic renewal. [33523/09]
Liz McManus
Question:14 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Taoiseach the membership of the climate change advisory panel that will report to the Cabinet committee on climate change. [33819/09]
Liz McManus
Question:15 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Taoiseach if he will consider facilitating a meeting between the members of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security and the Cabinet sub-committee on climate change in the run up to the climate change talks in Copenhagen in December 2009. [34087/09]
Liz McManus
Question:16 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Taoiseach the last time the Cabinet committee on climate change met; the timeframe for the next meeting; and the schedule for meetings for the remainder in 2009. [34090/09]
Liz McManus
Question:169 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Taoiseach the membership of the climate change advisory panel that will report to the Cabinet committee on climate change; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33205/09]
I propose to takes Questions Nos. 4 to 16, inclusive, and 169 together.
The Cabinet committee on economic renewal last met on 27 July 2009. The date of its next meeting is scheduled for tomorrow, 7 October. Membership of the Cabinet committee on economic renewal, which I chair, includes the Tánaiste, Minister for Finance, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Minister for Health and Children, with other Ministers attending as appropriate. As I indicated to the House in February, the Cabinet committee on housing, infrastructure and public private partnerships, PPPs, and its supporting cross-departmental team, have now been subsumed within these arrangements.
The Cabinet committee on social inclusion, children and integration has met four times since June 2007. The Cabinet committee on health has met on 15 occasions since June 2007. The next meeting of the Cabinet committee on climate change and energy security is scheduled to take place tomorrow, 7 October 2009, with further meetings as required during the remainder of 2009.
To further develop policies in the area of climate change an informal expert advisory panel on climate change and energy security has been established with international and national experts to advise the Cabinet committee on the potential for, and cost of, greenhouse gas reductions in the non-ETS sector. A list of members of the informal expert advisory panel established by the Cabinet committee is being circulated with this reply. I support the idea of close co-operation with the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security in the run-up to the Copenhagen summit in December and I have written to the Chairman of the committee suggesting that the best means of achieving this be considered by the relevant officials.
In conclusion, I emphasise that Cabinet committees are an integral part of the Cabinet process. Questions as to the business conducted at Cabinet or Cabinet committee meetings have never been allowed in the House on the grounds that they are internal to Government. The reasons for this approach are founded on sound policy principles and the need to avoid infringing the constitutional protection of Cabinet confidentiality.
Membership of the Informal Expert Advisory Committee on Climate Change:
Professor Stefan Proost, Faculty of Business and Economics (FBE), Department of Economics, K.U. Leuven;
Professor Alan Matthews, Professor of European Agricultural Policy in the Department of Economics, School of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Trinity College Dublin;
Professor Frank Convery, Professor of Environmental Studies, College of Human Sciences, School of Geography, Planning & Environmental Policy, University College Dublin and Chairman of Comhar;
Professor Thomas Sterner, Professor of Environmental Economics, Gothenburg;
Jack Short, Secretary General, International Transport Forum;
Paul Watkiss, Independent consultant specialising in environmental and economic policy advice;
Brendan Walsh, Professor Emeritus of Economics in University College Dublin;
Professor Peter Clinch, Special Adviser to the Taoiseach
Last December, the Government published Ireland's framework for sustainable economic renewal, which set out a series of actions for the development of what was called a "smart economy". The document was a revival and rehash of many different programmes that were already in existence. Of the 125 action points contained in the summary, only one action plan could be described as new, and it referred to a €500 million innovation fund. What is the status of that €500 million euro fund now? Is the money in place? How much of it is left? Will the Taoiseach identify what elements of innovation have been funded through the innovation fund referred to in the action plan?
The factual position I have to outline here relates to the questions. With regard to the specific issue raised by the Deputy, the question of supporting innovation is fundamental to improving competitiveness in the economy. A great deal of support has been given to that area, in the hundreds of millions of euro, through a wide range of research and development programmes. The question of setting up specific funds around existing funds or using them in addition to existing funds would be a matter for budgetary consideration.
Is the Taoiseach saying the committee dealing with sustainable economic renewal discussed this action plan? The sum of €500 million is a great deal of money. The Taoiseach referred to assistance for innovation and science related activities and so forth. That is welcome but was the €500 million referred to in the 125 action points in addition to what was in place previously? Does he have an account of what it has been spent on or what elements of it have been spent and, if so, on what they have been spent? Can we identify a report on progress made in dealing with the €500 million innovation fund?
In respect of the committee on sustainable economic renewal, the Minister for Finance, in his budget speech in April, stated:
There is scope to access significant private funds for infrastructure projects in order to sustain as many construction jobs and as much activity as possible . . . This would support existing PPP projects and other projects previously funded by the Exchequer.
What is the status of the Minister's proposal in this regard? Is an activity report available on what has happened arising from his proposal? Is the Taoiseach able to identify the major capital projects discussed at the economic recovery committee arising from the Minister's comments in April last? Have specific projects been attracted under the public-private partnership system arising from the Minister's comments?
In respect of the European Union, most Members of the House are very happy with the decision taken by the majority of the electorate when it voted last Friday. The European Union has established an €8 billion stimulus package for major projects. Has the economic recovery committee examined this package and is the Taoiseach in a position to indicate the number or kinds of applications, if any, that have been made to the European Union in respect of drawing down some of these funds, which have been made available across the Union, for Ireland?
As the Deputy is aware, it is not possible for me to discuss with him, in the context of replies at Question Time, what goes on at Cabinet committees or during Cabinet meetings. I can only do so in respect of decisions when they are taken. I am not, therefore, in a position to indicate to the Deputy progress made in any discussions in areas which are protected by Cabinet confidentiality.
On matters generally, the Minister for Finance has been emphasising the need for value for money in the capital budget. Great value for money is now available because of the more competitive pricing that is in play. I understand an average improvement in pricing of 20% has been achieved.
There has been a wide range of continuing significant capital commitments during this year. Despite the difficult fiscal position, the Government is spending more than €7 billion on public capital programmes and a capital programme will also feature next year. The important aspect of the programme is the ability to improve and increase output from resources that are not as plentiful as they were. This is a big plus in terms of ensuring that the absolute maximum of employment is achieved in respect of the implementation of the programme.
Similarly, in respect of European Investment Bank funds and other supports, continuing access is being made, where appropriate, from various Departments.
If I understood the Taoiseach correctly, the committee on economic renewal is due to meet tomorrow.
The next meeting will be tomorrow.
The committee last met on 9 July.
It met on 27 July.
In other words, what is arguably the most important committee has had nearly three months holidays at a time of massive unemployment, the collapse of the banking system and the publication of the Commission on Taxation and McCarthy reports.
The Cabinet has been meeting every week.
I understand the committee on economic renewal is supposed to be a key operator in terms of the cross-cutting, interdepartmental Cabinet committees. Given the economic crisis and weight of the budgetary and banking matters that must be addressed, does the Taoiseach believe it is appropriate to hold a meeting every two and a half months or have a two and a half month summer break? The last time the Taoiseach answered questions on the committee on economic renewal, it did not appear that this committee had any function in the banking crisis. Does it have a function in the banking crisis? When it meets, will it have referred to it, the fact that JP Morgan has indicated that Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland will need capitalisation of €17 billion and Anglo Irish Bank, which is a dead bank, will need a further €6 billion? Is the banking issue discussed by this committee when it meets? In regard to the budgetary situation, will the committee have an opportunity to discuss the McCarthy report and, particularly, the Commission on Taxation report? Is that parked, as the Taoiseach indicated in remarks he made a couple of weeks ago?
In regard to the counterpart committee——
I have to remind Deputy Burton that these questions, statistical or otherwise, could undermine Cabinet confidentiality. I have to remind the Deputy of that.
I am very sorry to take issue with the Ceann Comhairle on anything, but the banking crisis and unemployment are central to everything that is happening in the country.
Do you see my problem?
How could this committee, which seems to be central to Cabinet and Government — I think the term is "cross-cutting committees" — manage to have a two and a half month holiday? It is a reasonable question.
In regard to its counterpart committee dealing with social inclusion, children and integration, would that committee have had an opportunity to discuss the social impact of the report of the McCarthy committee, an bord snip nua, in particular the impact on children of the cuts proposed by the McCarthy report?
These matters impinge on Cabinet confidentiality.
The Cabinet meets every week, sometimes more than once a week and, from time to time, twice a week, depending on the workload or requirements. All of these matters are discussed at Cabinet. Cabinet committees can meet in smaller format and their purpose is to provide assistance on specific issues that arise or specific areas of policy that require co-ordination or further discussion. That is the basis on which the economic, social or any other committee meets. Frequency of meetings is not a full indicator of activity or consideration being given by Government in respect of any of these matters. Full Cabinet meetings deal with these matters extensively on an ongoing basis as a priority. I cannot go into any more detail, other than that, to explain the workings of the committee.
In regard to the committee on social inclusion, we have been dealing with all those matters in full Cabinet meetings. The Deputy asked about various reports being considered by Government. We are beginning the budgetary and Estimates process. A very serious challenge to our public finances exists and we have to come forward with a budgetary position which will meet that. From our point of view, the role of Cabinet committees is to supplement the role of Cabinet and not to replace it.
On climate change, I was glad the Taoiseach attended the United Nations summit on climate change. It sent out a very important signal. I also welcome his statement today that he will ensure the facilitation of a meeting between the sub-committee and the Joint Oireachtas Committee. Would it be possible for the Taoiseach to attend that meeting, because he is chairperson of the sub-committee? It would be important for us to have a round-table discussion in advance of what will be decided in Copenhagen. Can the Taoiseach give the House some clarification on the advisory panel?
I understand the climate change committee has an advisory panel of in-house civil servants and senior departmental officials. Who are the members of the international advisory panel mentioned by the Taoiseach? I am a little unclear on the role of that panel. I will not ask the Taoiseach about the agenda for tomorrow's meeting of the sub-committee because the rules of Cabinet confidentiality prohibit him from giving me such information. However, I advise him that certain organisations representing the interests of the developing world are concerned that our overseas aid budget will be hijacked to ensure we can meet our obligations under the EU's climate change policy. Will the Taoiseach ensure that does not happen? Will he focus on the additionality that is so important if we are to protect the overseas aid budget? I understand it is no longer proposed that heads of state will attend the Copenhagen summit. Does the Taoiseach share that understanding? Perhaps he will update the House on the matter.
I have asked the relevant officials to support the idea of close co-operation between the Oireachtas joint committee and the expert panel on climate change and energy security. I have written to the Chairman of the joint committee to suggest that the best means of achieving such co-operation is to engage in discussions with the relevant officials. We await the outcome of that process. The members of the informal expert advisory panel on climate change — those who are offering us advice — are Professor Stefan Proost, who works in the faculty of business and economics, within the department of economics, at the University of Leuven in Belgium; Professor Alan Matthews, who is a professor of European agricultural policy in the department of economics, within the school of social sciences and philosophy, at Trinity College Dublin; Professor Frank Convery, who is a professor of environmental studies in the college of human sciences, within the school of geography, planning and environmental policy, at University College Dublin and is also the chairman of Comhar; Professor Thomas Sterner, who is a professor of environmental economics at the University of Gothenburg; Mr. Jack Short, who is the secretary general of the International Transport Forum; Mr. Paul Watkiss, who is an independent consultant specialising in environmental and economic policy advice; Professor Brendan Walsh, who is the professor emeritus of economics at University College Dublin; and Professor Peter Clinch, who is a special adviser to the Department of the Taoiseach. I have not yet heard who will attend the Copenhagen summit. I am sure there are plenty of rumours and views on who will or will not attend. I hope the summit will take place. I think many Governments will be represented at the summit at the highest level. The heads of government and state focus on this urgent global issue whenever the European Council meets. It is usually an important item on the agenda. I am not quite sure to what Deputy McManus referred when she spoke about overseas development aid. It is obvious that we will seek to meet our burden-sharing commitments, just as everybody else will.
While I hope the Taoiseach attends the Copenhagen summit, I understand that will probably not happen. Does he accept that it would send a strong message if the Government were to publish a climate change Bill before the Copenhagen summit? Even if the Bill had not gone through the Oireachtas, its existence would indicate that Ireland is playing its part. Will the Taoiseach ensure that the Bill that has been promised by the Government will be published by that stage?
The Deputy will be aware that the Government will have to consider many legislative commitments between now and then. Obviously, there is a view that the climate change Bill can be worked on. At the moment, the real issue is whether the Copenhagen summit will be a success. There are many major policy issues and further discussions will take place to try to ensure that states such as the US and China will engage and be in a position to contribute to a solution. The UN conference to which the Deputy referred arose on foot of the efforts by the UN Secretary General to create more political momentum as we enter a critical phase of negotiations. The conference was successful in that regard but everyone's focus is now on converting political momentum into political will and outcomes which measure up to the challenge.
The "Yes" side in the recent Lisbon treaty referendum told us we had a choice between ruin and recovery. Some drew an equation between the passage of Lisbon and the creation of jobs. Will the Cabinet committee on economic renewal now address the need to formulate a plan or strategy to seriously tackle growing unemployment levels in this State, given that the Government has not produced any such strategy since the general election of 2007 and certainly has not since the current economic crisis began?
Would the Taoiseach agree that it is nauseating to hear some economic commentators refer to the so-called first shoots of recovery as indicative of the clock having turned when they are actually referring to the international stock markets, that is, the very gambling dens which contributed heavily to the creation of the crisis in the first place? Would he accept that the real first shoots of recovery will not be international stock markets but the reversal of the trend of growing unemployment across this country? Unemployment currently stands at 440,000 people and this figure is projected to rise significantly over the coming months. Can he give the House an assurance that the Cabinet committee will be coming forward with proposals to tackle the unemployment crisis through real and imaginative initiatives that curtail the continuing haemorrhage of unemployment and create new and sustainable work opportunities?
The role of the committee is of course to assist the economy back to recovery in whatever way we can. With respect to Deputy Ó Caoláin, that cannot be done in a void. It must be done on the basis of a stable financial system both domestically and internationally. The purpose is not to bail out banks but to ensure we have a system which is geared to bring about the recovery that everyone seeks. Without a functioning and viable financial system, our prospects of recovery are greatly postponed. The reason priority must be given to this matter is because of the global nature of the crisis in the financial markets.
Our second consideration is improving competitiveness in the Irish economy. Now that we are in a recession and experiencing depleted demand for the goods and services we provide to international markets, we need to be competitive and maintain market share in order to sell in similar volumes, if with tighter margins, the goods and services we produce and provide. Unless everything we do is geared towards that objective, the availability, sustainability and creation of jobs is put at risk because that is the only way we can increase enterprise and opportunity.
I reject the assertion that the Government lacks a plan. We have provided a mid-term fiscal consolidation plan which has been approved by the EU, as we were required to do. Through our smart economy framework, we have also provided a mid-term economic recovery programme emphasising areas of the economy which can create wealth and jobs. At the same time, we are required to correct our public finances because otherwise we put at risk the sustainability of public services and, more important, divert the resources currently being provided by the people towards increasing debt and interest repayments. I remind Deputies, however, that while we have a large deficit, we have a relatively low debt burden compared to some other countries because of our prudent management of finances in terms of halving our debt during the good times. That headroom, which is now available to us in the coming years, must be prudently managed and prioritised towards areas of activity that will generate economic growth and provide us with the prospect of recovery. That is the position.
The decision made on Friday last by the Irish people is a positive step by all of our citizens to help effect recovery by showing confidence in the strategic direction in which this country must go. While there would be democratic debate about all of these matters, the vast majority of the Irish people indicated that they wanted the European Union to be part of the framework for recovery in this country.
Would the Taoiseach give some sense of what innovative ideas the Government has been considering in tackling the growing unemployment? For instance, what is his position on the German approach of giving support to employers to retain people at work rather than facing the even more costly situation of growing numbers on the employment queues? Just to give us a sense of where he stands on same, has he given any consideration to that proposition?
The Government, since June, has provided an employment subsidy scheme to help those export-oriented industries in the SME sector that need our assistance and support, and that is being been taken up in broad measure. There is a commitment given by Government over the two fiscal years to meet that commitment up to the tune of €250 million. That is a significant commitment in terms of that aspect of employment support, while at the same time everyone must understand that unless the economy is competitive, the prospect of maintaining existing jobs — let alone creating new jobs — is put at risk without that adjustment that must be made.