Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 May 2013

Vol. 801 No. 3

Leaders' Questions

I am sure we can agree that economic recovery and job creation are inextricably linked. The stability programme update published yesterday by the Department of Finance forecast that unemployment will remain stuck at 14% for the remainder of this year, falling to 13.3% next year and remaining over 12% through to the end of 2016. The Government has again downgraded its growth forecast for this year and the next number of years. The Taoiseach has generously given himself an "A" grade for job creation, and I acknowledge yesterday's very welcome news on the upgrade of the M11 and N7, as well as the jobs announcement this morning at Squarespace, which I know the Taoiseach attended. None of this takes from the fact that the Government is starving the economy of investment. I will tell the Taoiseach why this is so.

Since coming to office the Government has slashed the capital budget by approximately a quarter, and it plans to cut it further next year. On top of that, the Government is not even spending the money budgeted for capital expenditure. For example, last year almost €150 million was pencilled in for capital expenditure but it went unspent. For the first three months of this year, the Government's spend on capital projects is down 27% compared with the same period last year. The tendency has been to slam the brakes on capital spending, particularly early in the year, to make up for cost overruns in other areas of current spending.

The document published yesterday points out that investment in the economy is at historically low levels and does not compare favourably with other countries. In September 2011, the Government announced the establishment of a strategic investment fund to channel commercial investment from the National Pensions Reserve Fund towards productive investment in the Irish economy. Where is the strategic investment fund and when will it take effect? Unemployment is the biggest crisis this country faces and the economy is crying out for investment. Nobody is suggesting that the more than €6 billion left in the National Pensions Reserve Fund should be spent aimlessly, but if there are viable commercial projects to help create jobs and position this economy for recovery, we should carry them out.

I thank Deputy McGrath for his comments and question. The grade was made in respect of the action plan as a document and it sets out the success and progress made by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and the strategy for continuing to open the doors for business in the time ahead.

I would love to have the Taoiseach marking my exam paper.

I am happy the Deputy recognises the impact of the decision by Glanbia yesterday, which will create between 1,500 and 2,000 jobs between construction and family farming from north Cork to Louth, taking advantage of the fact that milk quotas will be gone by 2015. There will also be the opening of upgrades to the M11 and N7 roads. These public private partnerships are complex and technical, and it took quite a long time to get that through the gap, with the contract signed yesterday.

The Department of Finance yesterday published its Irish stability programme April 2013 update, which was the subject of some discussion at the economic affairs committee yesterday. It sets out the official macroeconomic and fiscal forecast for Ireland to 2016, and it is the first time we have gone as far as that. It is the first update of the Government's macroeconomic and fiscal projections since the budget in December last year. The economy returned to growth in 2011 and continued to grow in 2012. The Department of Finance forecast expects the expansion to continue into 2013, with GDP forecast to grow by 1.3% this year. There has been a modest revision in the headline GDP forecast published on budget day and this revision incorporates changes to growth.

On the plus side and in order to keep fiscal targets in line, domestic demand has been revised upwards slightly, which is a help. that is on the back of recent high frequency data, leading to slightly more positive revisions to employment growth for 2013. That is offset by a downward trend in export growth because of difficulties in other countries and the global economy clearly remains weak. On the fiscal front the Department of Finance remains confident that the fiscal strategy to reduce the budget deficit to below 3% of GDP by 2015 is on target. Overall, it is clear we are making progress with the public finances and returning the economy to growth.

The Government has yet to consider the question of the investment fund arising from the National Pensions Reserve Fund and the setting up of the NewERA entity for assessing potential opportunities. It will do that in the period ahead. The Minister for Finance has made it perfectly clear that where there is flexibility for the Government in the preparation for the budget for 2014 and beyond, it would be preferable to put this into investment for infrastructure, whether in school buildings, primary care centres, road developments or retrofitting private residential houses for energy efficiency, where jobs can be created or contractors employed and the consequent spend goes right through the economy.

The Government will focus on that issue.

Our priority must be to deal with the indigenous economy, which means restoring confidence to the Irish economy, thereby creating those jobs where people can see the effect of prudent economic management and effective spending. I share Deputy McGrath's view that investment should go into capital works that will create jobs. That is an issue the Government will focus on as we start to prepare the Estimates and discuss the investment strategy and the most effective use of that money.

The decision of the ECB in respect of Ireland's programme has saved us €20 billion in borrowing over the next number of years and yielded €1 billion in savings, which the Government will consider how best to allocate in the time ahead.

The measure of the Government's performance in job creation is not the grade it gives itself, it is the results. The results at the moment are 14% unemployment. No one in this House is happy with that level of unemployment but I find it difficult to believe that the Government has yet to consider the strategic investment fund and the use of the National Pensions Reserve Fund money to invest in the economy. It was announced in 2011 that such a fund would be established to channel commercial investment from the pension fund into productive sectors of the economy. If the Taoiseach acknowledges that unemployment is the number one crisis in the country, why is that not being matched with action, not an action plan document, but action people can see in their communities? Since September 2011, we still have not seen the legislation to permit that investment. There has been a 27% reduction in capital investment in the economy in the first three months of the year. The Taoiseach must back up his words with action. People want to see money used appropriately, being invested in the economy and creating jobs, bringing about the recovery we all want to see. When is that legislation going to be passed and when will we begin to see that investment filtering throughout the economy?

Unemployment has fallen from 15% to 14%, although I agree that it is unacceptably high.

That is because of emigration.

Some 90,000 people on the live register are working three days a week. These statistics often do not give an accurate figure for those who are full-time unemployed. The National Pensions Reserve Fund launched an €850 million investment in three different categories in January. That is there to be taken up.

The Government has been dealing with the carnage in the last two years to sort out the promissory note and extend loan maturities, enabling a flattening out of the debt profile. We had come to a point, as the Deputy is well aware, where for the three years 2008 to 2011, every month the private sector lost 7,000 jobs. At least we have stabilised and now 1,000 jobs are being created in the private sector every month as a measure of increasing confidence and greater competitiveness, which has now increased by 20%. The country is becoming more attractive as a location for investment from international sources.

The challenge is to deal with confidence in the indigenous economy. Everyone understands the economic challenge people face. We have set out our fiscal plan and we must deal with the €300 million in savings from within the public sector. The NPRF has made investment funds available since January and the Government will now consider, as we prepare for the Estimates and the budget, how best to use any flexibility we have for direct investment in job creation where people can see the results. I will come back to the Deputy with a date for the legislation but it is important there be a direct injection into the economy where people can see the results in jobs coming through.

I welcome the publication of the heads of the protection of life during pregnancy Bill yesterday. Cuirim fáilte roimh an chéim thábhachtach seo. Women have been waiting for this legislation for 21 years and the Government is to be commended for bringing forward its proposals. Sinn Féin, for its part, will consider this Bill carefully and we hope the debate will be conducted calmly based on the wording as published.

In our view, the legislation must provide clarity for medical practitioners and legal protection for pregnant women when their lives are in danger. Could the Taoiseach clarify the Bill is about setting out in legislation that which is already provided for in the Constitution and for those who have argued about this being the thin end of the wedge and that it will open the floodgates, these are alarmist suggestions? It must be clear that this represents nothing of the sort.

Does the Taoiseach agree citizens can be assured this legislation is about protecting mothers when their lives are at risk and the doctors who care for them, and that we will judge this against the obligations on the State and the principles for implementation as set out in the report of the expert group on the A, B and C v. Ireland case? Will the Taoiseach reassure the Dáil this Bill deals with these obligations?

I thank Deputy Adams for his comments. As a matter of courtesy, the Minister for Health and the Ministers of State at the Department of Health will be available for briefings for the Opposition spokespersons on health if they wish. I agree the debate on this sensitive issue has been conducted to date in a measured, constructive and sensitive fashion and I hope that will continue for the discussions that lie ahead.

As I said this morning at the press conference, the law on abortion is not being changed. No new rights are being conferred on anyone. This involves a focus on the fundamental issues of legal clarity for medical personnel who work in the medical area and certainty for women who are pregnant, both for themselves and their unborn children. There are two lives involved in each of these cases. The legislation that will emerge from the discussions surrounding the heads of the Bill will be strictly within the Constitution and strictly within the existing law and the Government is now required to act within those parameters. What is involved here is giving clarity and certainty to rights that exist within the existing law and not straying outside that. The legislation in respect of the protection of life during pregnancy will respect those two parameters completely and will also respect the right to life of the unborn, which will be upheld, and the obligation on the medical profession to save both lives where that is possible will be confirmed.

This is an issue that was very divisive in Irish society for over 30 years. I ask people to reflect on this, to bring necessary certainty and clarity to women in particular in respect of their pregnancies, their own lives and the lives of their unborn children and legal clarity to medical personnel who work in this area and who have to work within that law. The laws on abortion here are not being changed. The legislation will be strictly within the Constitution, strictly within that law and will adhere to those basic principles. I hope the discussion can be tempered and considerate in understanding what it is necessary to do within those constitutional and legal parameters.

I thank the Taoiseach for his answer. Given what he outlined, would he agree that arguments about opening of the floodgates and the thin end of the wedge, and the suggestion that some women might feign suicidal tendencies to exploit this proposed legislation, are downright disrespectful to women and, if I understand what he said, impossible in light of the proposed legislation? For any of us who read or listened to the evidence in the inquest into the tragic death of Ms Savita Halappanavar, if ever any evidence was required about the need for clarity for medical practitioners or protection for pregnant women, it clearly was set out in what was reported from that inquest.

Could the Taoiseach clarify the timetable for bringing this through the Dáil? I understand it may go to committee tomorrow. Does he intend to have this through the various Stages before the summer break?

I thank Deputy Adams. There is no question or intent in any circumstance for an opening, as they say, for abortion on demand in this country. The Government is required to act in accordance with the Constitution. We are required to act within the parameters as set out and the legal implications of the X case. In the three areas, where there is either a medical emergency or an issue in a pregnancy where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother as opposed to her health, the procedure in so far as personnel is set out there, as it is also in regard to the area of self-destruction where there must be clearly a unanimous decision and, because there are two lives involved, an obstetrician-gynaecologist is one of the persons involved.

As Deputy Adams stated, many of the comments made have been disrespectful to women. After all, we trust the women of this country. It is a compassionate country. This is an area that requires thorough, comprehensive understanding and sensitive debate and I hope that will happen during the course of this.

The Deputy asked when it will come before the House. The committee of which Deputy Buttimer is Chairman will receive the heads of the Bill. I understand it will hold a meeting tomorrow about the structure of how the Chairman will propose to hold that debate. I urge everybody who has an interest in this in the Oireachtas to participate in the structure that the Chairman will set out. Clearly, when the committee deals with this business, it will come back to Government and the Bill will be prepared and will be debated here in the House. As I stated earlier, I hope that the Bill can be enacted, to bring clarity and certainty to this area after 30 years, before the House rises for the summer period. Over the years when Deputy Michael McGrath's party was in office, it offered the people two opportunities to reflect on this by way of referendum and the people made their decision clear in each case. We are now acting on the Constitution and within those legal constraints. There are no new rights being inferred here, but legal clarity and certainty for women. It is about saving lives - the lives of mothers and the lives of their unborn babies.

Yesterday, the Taoiseach told us, when Deputy Halligan correctly registered the importance of marking May Day, that we have moved on since the days of "Big Jim". The Taoiseach was obviously not aware of the massive unemployment, the forced emigration, the return of soup kitchens and evictions and children going to school hungry. It demonstrates how out of touch the Government is with the majority of citizens in this State. This was displayed graphically by the Government's handling of the long overdue X case legislation, which was necessary because of the 1983 referendum which fudged the issue and equated the right to life of the unborn with that of the woman. Rather than addressing that fudge, the Government has chosen to reinforce it by even changing the title of the Bill to one of protecting life during pregnancy when we all know the legislation is necessary to protect women's lives.

For the past two weeks, we have been introduced to a new specimen, the Fine Gael backbencher, an entity that nobody knew existed. Suddenly, it has found a voice and a conscience.

(Interruptions).

Where was that voice and conscience when the rights of born children were being decimated by the cuts in child benefit, by the cuts in social welfare payments to youngsters with a disability and the cuts in education? It was nowhere to be heard.

Their obstructing of this legislation is being presented as a battle to protect the unborn, a battle to stop Irish abortion. The reality is that Irish abortion is pretty much the same as every other country's abortion. It is merely that it is exported out of here. Of course, this Bill will not change that, and never was to. What it should have done was to ensure that a woman who needed an abortion to save her life, not her health or well-being, could get access to that abortion here at home. It should have met the wishes of the majority of Irish people who voted in two referenda that this right should include where that risk came from suicide. Instead, despite the Taoiseach's denials last week that distraught suicidal women would not be dragged before tribunals, there is the spectre of a woman having to present her case to three doctors-----

-----and getting unanimity among them and if she does not get it, going to another three. The last occasion I checked, three plus three was six.

I am glad this legislation is before us, but let us be clear. What the Government has presented is the absolute minimum. The clear intention is to make it so restrictive that most women who will be affected will not even bother and, instead, they will continue to make the journey to Britain so that the Government can continue to pretend that there is no Irish abortion.

My questions to the Taoiseach are as follows. How did he get his Labour Party colleagues to settle for this when SIPTU, ICTU, USI, Unite, the National Women's Council and every other organisation has stated the opinion of two medical practitioners was enough? Why did the Government bother to convene an expert group and hold hearings into its report, and then patently ignore its finding which stated that it was generally considered that two doctors of relevant experience and training were enough to make a clinical decision on the physical or mental health conditions of a woman? Would the Taoiseach agree that the only reason there have not been more maternal deaths because of the lack of abortion in Ireland is precisely because of our proximity to Britain?

I am not sure what Deputy Clare Daly's question is arising out of all of that. I can certainly testify that the Fine Gael backbenchers are interested in all legislation that comes before the House and they are focused, along with the other members of the Government, in getting the country back to work and sorting out the financial difficulties.

They were not focused on the respite care grant.

The protection of life during pregnancy Bill is about saving women's lives. As I stated, the law on abortion is not being changed but in very specific circumstances, where there is a real and substantial threat to the life of the mother, a termination is permissible under the law. Each of those terminations that has happened here has been as a consequence of a real and substantial risk to a woman's life where a medical intervention was necessary to save her life. As I pointed out in the earlier reply to Deputy Adams, there is a requirement here to uphold to right to life of the unborn and, in so far as it is possible, to save the life of the unborn where these situations arise.

These proposals are very much in line with what the expert review group proposed. As Deputy Clare Daly will be aware, the group also made the point, as was recognised in A, B and C v. Ireland, that the issue of suicide and suicidal intent is far more subjective than in the case of a physical risk where a emergency arises from a medical point of view. That is why a multidisciplinary team will be involved here and that is why in those cases, rare though they might be, there is an obstetrician-gynaecologist on that team who must speak, make a judgment and make a call for the protection of the life of the unborn.

It is very necessary in those cases, which are subjective, that there be qualified, experienced, multidisciplinary personnel-----

It has to be six out of six.

-----in order to deal with the-----

One doctor out of six can veto it.

-----parameters of the law here.

The Deputies opposite should read it.

Obviously any legislation put forward on any issue has to be within the confines of the Constitution. Clearly many of the arguments being put forward in that regard are red herrings. Abortion, where a woman's life is in danger, has been the lawful situation in Ireland for decades, but it simply has not been legislated for. The issue is whether the Government's legislation provides that clarity. I am not sure why the Taoiseach did not understand the question because it was pretty obvious from what I could see.

The Government, at the behest of the European Court of Human Rights, decided to go down the path of establishing an expert group. The report of that expert group stated - perhaps the Taoiseach is not very familiar with it - "it was generally considered that two doctors with the relevant training and expertise appropriate to the case would be sufficient for making a clinical decision as to the risk to the life of the woman", which is pretty clear-cut. It is an outcome and conclusion the Government has chosen to ignore.

The Deputy is being selective in her quotes.

Why did the Government also ignore the group's request to remove the chilling effect of the-----

The Deputy should read the rest of it.

I ask Deputies to settle down and let the Deputy make her point. The Taoiseach will reply.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle.

The Deputy is quoting selectively.

Why did the Government choose to ignore the call to remove the chilling effect of the 1861 Act? While penal servitude will come off the Statute Book, it is being replaced by 14 years in jail. Are women who go for abortions in Britain or who order abortifacients over the Internet now to be branded as criminals and subject to this law? The Taoiseach has made it clear that the Bill gives no new rights to women. The Tánaiste has tried to claim it vindicates women's rights. It is clear that it does not do that. It falls short of the clarity that is needed. It is a very regrettable step. While the legislation is welcome, the Government has not gone far enough, and I think it will be subject to massive change in the weeks ahead.

I do not agree that it falls short. It deals specifically with the case where a woman's life is in danger. It clarifies what the law is. The Deputy is selective in her comments because the expert group discussed the value of having an obstetrician involved as a member of the multidisciplinary team, which is crucial where there is the case of an unborn child to be heard.

As she is aware, in the case of a real and substantial risk to a women's life arising from self-destruction, additional safeguards are put in place. Three specialists - one obstetrician-gynaecologist and two psychiatrists - must unanimously agree and certify that the termination of pregnancy is the only treatment that will save the mother's life. In such cases, where it is feasible of course, a general practitioner, who would know the woman involved probably better than anybody else, will also be consulted. It is about saving lives and providing clarity and certainty for women in respect of access to procedures if there is a substantial risk to a woman's life, as distinct from her health.

In regard to the Deputy's comment about penalties, these are consistent with the law as it stands. As I said, the law on abortion is not being changed. No new rights are being conferred here. It is a case of legal clarity and certainty for women when the occasion arises when they need that.

Top
Share