Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 5 Nov 1992

Vol. 424 No. 10

Supplementary Estimates, 1992. - Confidence in Government: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That Dáil Éireann reaffirms its confidence in the Taoiseach and the Government."
—(The Taoiseach).

There is never a right time to bring an end to a good Government, but this is certainly not the right time to bring an end to this good Government. Let me define my terms on this issue. You do not judge a Government by the quality of the relationships at the Cabinet table. You judge a Government by their results, and this, assuredly, is a good Government when judged by their results. Nor are these results created by the context or the circumstances; these are results which often fly in the face of the context and the circumstances.

For example, despite recession in some of our major trading partners, Irish economic growth significantly outpaced both the OECD and the EC averages last year. In other words, this country managed to do better than external circumstances would have predicted we would do. Numbers at work expanded, modestly, it is true, but there was a definite expansion. This at a time when many other countries experienced substantial losses in net employment. The government played a crucial lead role in both of these achievements.

In my own area, since coming into office I have pursued a vigorous transport development policy, setting out to build up both our access transport links and our internal transport network. Job creation and competitiveness are the priorities in our air transport policy. My approach to air transport policy has been to prepare the Irish airline industry for the European Single Market conditions which will apply from 1 January 1993. We have been preparing for this eventuality by strengthening the Irish presence on existing air routes to and from Ireland and by opening new opportunities for our airlines to compete in international markets. I have done so through the negotiation of new and extensive bilateral agreements and, within these, the pursuit of fifth freedom rights to further widen access to markets for Irish airlines.

Since assuming office, I have concluded six new bilateral agreements with non-EC countries, and I have instructed my officials to seek extra business opportunities across the whole range of activities that the Aer Lingus group are involved in. In the case of the Shannon stop, the Government made a prodevelopment, pro-regional decision. Moreover, the Government's policy has the full support of a wide range of interests, including the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Central Representative Council representing the workforce in Aer Lingus. The Government are maintaining their commitment to make Shannon a major aviation centre. In essence, the Shannon stop policy is about jobs, jobs in Shannon and along the western seaboard. It ensures that those are preserved and that new employment can be created, but it does not endanger a single job anywhere else.

The Government's commitment to maximising tourism performance remains steadfast. We are nearing completion of year four of the five year programme. By year-end it is expected that annual foreign tourism earnings will have grown by over £450 million on the 1988 figure, boosting job numbers in the sector by well in excess of 20,000 in the process. This has been achieved despite serious difficulties faced by the industry recently, in the shape of the Gulf War and ongoing recessions this year in some of our main markets.

The Government and the industry recognise that to grow we must continue to look for and develop new markets. For example, this year Ireland successfully took part in EXPO '92 in Seville where 1.5 million visitors attended our exhibit. I had the pleasure this year of welcoming the first ever Japanese tourism mission to Ireland. As a result of this initiative, talks have begun on an air transport agreement between Ireland and Japan, another potentially lucrative market for Irish tourism.

The improved performance of the industry under the Government's two consecutive programmes for economic development has not been by accident. These programmes have marked the launch of the single biggest and most sustained programme of investment in Irish tourism since the establishment of the State. Between 1987 and the end of 1993 about £1 billion of capital will have gone into developing, expanding, and upgrading the Irish tourism product.

The new county enterprise boards will in future provide an important new focus for tourism development. I see in them a vehicle for harnessing and directing local energies towards a full and integrated development of their local economies.

Based on the rate of return obtained from current EC investment in Irish tourism in terms of improved performance, I would anticipate EC agreement on a significant level of future funding for tourism.

The end of 1993 will see not only the conclusion of the five year EC-backed programme for tourism development, but also of the Operational Programme for Peripherality. That programme, which we successfully agreed with the EC Commission, has provided a very productive framework for assistance from the EC Structural Funds in respect of transport investment over the past few years. The bulk of the expenditure has been earmarked to improve Irish roads but the programme is also providing for major investments in airport, port and public transport infrastructure.

Our three State airports have shown tremendous growth in passenger traffic in recent years. We have been ensuring that the growth in traffic is catered for at the airports. Accordingly this Government have been overseeing a huge investment programme in State airport infrastructure. The Government have also been actively encouraging the development of regional airports in the interests of achieving balanced economic growth.

The Peripherality Programme is providing significant financial support in the development of our railway infrastructure. The flagship project is the major upgrading of the Dublin-Belfast rail link. This is taking place over a five-year period 1991-1996 and involves expenditure of approximately £50 million on the southern side of the Border. In negotiations with the EC authorities on this project I was successful in securing EC assistance at the maximum possible rate of 75 per cent.

Public transport and infrastructure development projects in my area of responsibility involve a total investment of approximately £50 million with half the funding coming from European Community sources. At national level, I am currently conducting a major review of the railway network, with a view to bringing forward proposals for a major investment programme to be put forward for EC funding under the next tranche of EC Structural Funds. We also need support from the EC to develop our telecommunications sector. This assistance is very important to ensure that we have the most up-to-date network of infrastructure.

Ba mhaith lion cúpla focal a rá anois faoi chursaí craolacháin. Bhí agus tá fós moltaí faoi bhunú seirbhíse teilifíse Gaeilge le cur faoi bhráid an Rialtais seo. Seirbhís don tír ar fad, ar chainéal ar leith, a ceanncheathrú i nGaeltacht na Gaillimhe atá i gceist. Bheadh sí ag craoladh mar thús ar feadh dhá uair a chloig sa ló ar a laghad. RTE agus na léiritheoirí neamhspleácha a chuirfeadh cláracha ar fáil don tseirbhís nua.

Leanfar leis an ullmhúchán don Bhille nua craolacháin agus don tseirbhís tele-físe Gaeilge, bíodh olltoghcháin ann nó ná bíodh. Sé mian mo chroí-sa mar Aire Cumarsáide a áiteamh ar mo chomh-Airí sa Rialtas an tseirbhís Ghaeilge a bhúnú.

This Government have put in place very specific development plans for the tourism, transport and communications sectors. These sectors have been playing very positive roles in the economic recovery of recent years. A crucial requirement for further expansion is a continuation of these sectoral development policies under a strong Government.

Caithfimid go léir comhoibriú le go mbeidh ár d'tionscail agus ár seirbhísí níos bisiúla. Ní féidir é sin a dhéanamh ach le Rialtas láidir agus ní féidir Rialtas láidir a chur ar fáil gan Fianna Fáil.

Today we have the extraordinary spectacle of the Government being brought down and an unnecessary and unwanted election being forced on the people by a combination of political parties in this House.

The Government's actions in the areas of agriculture and food have been positive, forward looking and beneficial. The aim in relation to agriculture was — and continues to be — to provide the conditions in which we can have a prosperous farming sector for the production of quality food and competitive products which will compete internationally in a cost effective way. I am very proud of the part which my colleagues, Deputy Hyland, Minister of State with responsibility for horticulture, Deputy Browne, also Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food and I played in increasing competitiveness and wealth in farming and agriculture. There will be a major increase in agricultural output this year and an increase in farm incomes of up to 10 per cent.

Earlier this year, the Ministers of State and I negotiated — and concluded — the most important set of decisions regarding agriculture since we joined the European Community 20 years ago, I refer, of course, to the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. It had become clear that that policy was outdated and in need of reform and the final outcome of the reform was much more favourable than many people had expected. Many people were generous in acknowledging that we succeeded in getting an extremely favourable outcome for Ireland, in fact the agreement resulted in a net benefit to Irish farming of u to £100 million compared with a loss of £61 million which had been predicted by some people in relation to the original proposal. It means that producers and farmers will derive a greater share of their income from direct payments and, by 1996, it is anticipated that approximately 40 per cent of total farm income will be in direct payments. Those payments will exceed £650 million per annum; I gave a commitment that they would be paid when they are due and already this year sheep, cattle and equine farmers are receiving payments two months ahead of the date they are due. I am pleased about that because it puts money into farmers' pockets which, in turn, helps the cash flow in rural areas.

The Minister of State, Deputy Hyland, implemented the Leader Programme with tremendous drive and vigor and several Leader groups around the country will, for the first time since the foundation of the State, give people in local areas an opportunity to show leadership and receive the finance required to get local projects and schemes off the ground. We are implementing a number of other significant rural schemes, agri-tourism, environmental schemes on the control of farmyard pollution, disadvantaged areas payments and farm improvement schemes. For many years there was a running sore in rural areas where people — typically small farmers in the west — had acquired land from the Land Commission and were then saddled with excessive payments. Nobody did anything about it until the Minister of State, Deputy Hyland, took over in the Department of Agriculture and Food a few months ago. Immediately on his arrival he tackled this problem and I am glad that, under the arrangements reached, 27,000 farmers will have their annuities either written off totally or substantially reduced.

The other area of activity in the Department is the food industry. The Minister of State, Deputy Browne, has been outstanding in that areas; £130 million has been spent in grant-aid in providing a modernised and progressive, internationally competitive, food industry. In addition to plant, equipment and factories being brought to the highest international standards, we have invested further resources in the marketing area. In conjunction with Coras Beostóic agus Feola and Coras Tráchtála we now have in place one of the keenest marketing and promotional programmes of any European country.

In addition, I have established an export group in my Department to produce policies by the end of this year which will ensure that Irish agriculture and farming will be one of the best in the world. Despite having no doubt about it, I was extremely pleased only last week to unveil a scientific study undertaken on agriculture and farming in all European countries and many other countries, the outcome of which showed that Irish farming was the most cost-competitive in Europe and one of the most cost-competitive in the world. Those policies must be continued and Fianna Fáil are most competent, best placed to do so.

May I begin by saying it was an honour to serve in the Government led by the Taoiseach, Deputy Reynolds, over the past nine months. He is a man who seeks consensus. We all had an opportunity to give our views which were listened to, as was demonstrated in the context of the Maastricht Treaty, the currency crisis, the abortion issue, all showing that he is capable of talking decisions which can be met with opposition from any side, but resolute in his determination to carry through, in addition to his belief in himself, which is very important for a Taoiseach.

The opportunity to serve in Government, in that kind of consensus arrangement, enabled me to carry out some of the most spectacular reforms in the Department of the Environment in the history of this State. For example, over the past nine months legislation has been introduced in this House using 25 per cent of the total time of the Dáil, ranging from drawing up a framework for a social housing plan, to roads, planning, electoral reform and the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency, implemented as part of the decentralisation programme, whose headquarters are located at Johnstown Castle.

In terms of the overall position vis-á-vis the construction industry, which comes within the remit of my Department, the past five years form an interesting picture when compared with the years 1982 to 1987. Government input in financial terms between the years 1982 and 1987 was considerably higher than that between the years 1987 and 1992. Admittedly, Government finance over the earlier years was borrowed and the bills were left to us. It is significant to note that it was not until 1987 that the numbers employed in the construction industry stabilished and began to grow. They now number 75,000 direct and 35,000 indirect, with major improvements being carried out on our roads, urban renewal schemes, redevelopment, rehabilitation and restoration of our inner towns and cities the like of which has not been experienced here in the past. We shall be redoubling our efforts, with new resources from the European Community, to further intensify those developments, with a changed policy to ensure it is spread as evenly as possible throughout the country while talking into account the need for tourism, agricultural and industrial development.

In the housing area we have just about succeeded in getting local authorities to recognise the new emphasis being placed on this general area. Indeed, some of the more imaginative and creative provisions of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1992 were fought tooth and nail by Opposition spokespersons in this House and by Fine Gael and Labour members of local authorities. Despite that resistance, despite their overwhelming desire to adhere to the sterile policies of the past, we fought to get that Bill through. There are at present 2,700 applicants for the shared housing option, and that despite being told in clinics and elsewhere that they should not opt for the provisions of that scheme. I was delighted to open the first one in Ballybane in Galway this week. I hope the next few weeks to finalise for the first time in the history of this State, a new permanent tenant house purchase scheme so that tenants always will have the opportunity to purchase their local authority houses as they can afford to do so.

I believe in home ownership. I believe in getting away from the dependency culture which has been fostered excessively here and which we set out to change, in the voluntary housing sector, in the new resources being provided to local authorities under that scheme without depending on taxpayers for more resources. We believe this policy will underpin a greater number of new housing starts next year which will be implemented in a much more imaginative manner. We will not push people out to the periphery of towns and cities without churches, services, water and sewerage facilities public lighting, refuse collection, shops or amenities. It will be rounded housing, talking into account the local employment potential and inner town or city development. It will be the type of housing complex that will take account of the changes in society, such as the growth in numbers of lone parents, of single households, the incidence of crime and other developments that call for new social type housing that needs to be addressed in a different manner.

In the face of all opposition we are determined to have such structures created in an imaginative fashion, giving those who can build their own homes every opportunity and incentive to do so and, in the case of those not able to provide housing for themselves, to demonstrate we shall do so on their behalf, thereby ensuring that we are perceived, on the one hand, as the facilitators and, on the other, the providers. We will put that record against anything that may be said by Opposition parties in the course of the forthcoming general election campaign.

This morning Deputy John Bruton and Deputy Spring both spoke of selective borrowing. We have put enormous efforts into endeavouring to get £6 billion from the European Community for structural reform of our roads and rail systems, education, health, tourism and rural development. Six billion pounds is an enormous amount of money which will necessitate tremendous negotiation on the part of a united Government to bring about. I remind the House that it is exactly equal to the amount of money this Government and their predecessors, between the years 1987 and 1992, will have paid in interest payments alone on the borrowing of the disastrous 1982 to 1987 Coalition Government.

Before concluding, I should like to thank my former colleague, Deputy Harney, for the work she carried out in my Department, for her great interest in and commitment to the environment generally. Some time I should like her to put on record where she found a problem with the relationship between Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats in that area.

My position on the question of confidence in the Government is guided by the record and policies of this Government over the past three and a half years during which time harsh Government measures were directed against the less well off in our society. For example, there were continued attacks made on our health services, there was the failure to allocate adequate resources to our schools, the tragedy of the spiralling numbers of our people forced to emigrate, the absolute failure to provide jobs for the 300,000 unemployed, 50,000 or 60,000 more than when this Government first took office.

With one-third of our population existing on social welfare payments, the refusal of the Government to tackle poventry or even to accept the seriousness and extent of the problems of those people living in poverty is shameful, but the most recent savage cutbacks of social welfare entitlements at their time of greatest need, when the poor face a harsh winter, tells us much more about this Government than anything else they have done. The policy of this Government can be summed up with the words, "make the poor pay while the rich get richer".

Another graphics example of the results of the present Government's policy is the deliberate scrapping of the local authority house building programme at a time when luxury houses costing as much as £1 million each clutter the pages of the property supplements of the national newspapers. We are told there are no funds for houses for the poor while, flaunted before them, are the luxury houses of the rich. This widening gap between rich and poor is what the Progressive Democrats and Fianna Fáil now represent. In Dublin alone there are 4,500 families on the corporation housing list. There are a further 7,000 families on the transfer list, existing in inadequate overcrowded flats. Next year will be designated the year of the elderly, yet in Dublin alone there are over 600 of our senior citizens without a home of their own. The living conditions in flats complexes are in dire need of improvement. Millions are spent beautifying Government buildings, a stone's throw away from flats complexes such as St. Joseph's Mansions, Liberty House and many more across the north and south inner city, millions of pounds have been spent on the refurbishment of the Custom House and on the offices of the Department of the Environment. It is a stark example of this Government's policy that the offices of the Department of the Environment are beautified while those whom that Department are supposed to represent live in dreadful conditions, many without washing facilities.

The frightning hard drug problem throughout Dublin, but most particularly in the inner city, is now out of control. The Minister for Justice simply refuses to give it priority despite the fact that the majority of serious crimes against persons involving mugging, etc. is a direct result of this hard drug problem. As long as hard drugs such as heroin largely affect poor working class areas, the problem will never get priority from the conservative political parties of Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats, just as no other social problem in poorer areas has ever been given a priority.

I will turn briefly to the issue of education. In one tragic part of my constituency 46 per cent of school going children leave the education system before they are 15 years of age. Ten years ago in that area they were promised a second level community college geared specifically to their needs. Ten years later only the site for that college remains lying derelict on Seán MacDermott Street. Dublin City Council have been told by the Department of Education, and I quote from a recent letter from that Department:

The matter is kept under constant review by the Department, however, it is not possible to say at this time when construction will commence as advancement of all projects is dependents on the availability of capital resources...

Here again we see that poverty is the direct result of political decisions taken by parties who simply do not and never will represent the interests of the disadvantaged.

I now want to quote briefly from the Official Report, column 109, of 6 July 1989 when this Government were being set up and when I stated:

Any political party which claim to be left of centre (to have a social conscience) would, at the very least, recognise that with one-third of our population socially disadvantaged there is an absolute need to provide a basic minimum income, a readily accessible health service, a public housing programme and positive discrimination within the education system. Fianna Fáil (and the Progressive Democrats) have failed miserably on all four levels — refusing to act on the recommendations of the Commission on Social Welfare; allowing the development of a two-tiered health service, one readily available for the rich and one dominated by long waiting lists, with under-funded and understaffed hospitals for the workers and the poor; in our schools, particularly at primary level, by refusing to respond to the pleas for manageable class sizes and adequate staffing levels, giving children from low income groups no chance of building a decent place for themselves in society and, finally, by scrapping the building of local authority houses even in the disadvantaged inner city areas.

Fianna Fáil (and the Progressive Democrats) whether (they) like it or not, are now the parties for the privileged in this country and increasingly the working class electorate are recognising that fact and changing their allegiance to the parties of the left. People are fed up listening to how good the last Government were for the country, fed up hearing that they were the best Government for decades. The people know that the books were balanced but that it was the old, the sick, the handicapped, the unemployed and the young emigrants who suffered and paid the unacceptable price.

Those are the reasons I do not and never had confidence in this Government.

There has been a collective sigh of relief both inside and outside this House that this ill conceived Government have finally decided to put their confidence to the test and are to come to an end in a little over an hour's time.

It is relevant to note that there has rarely been a Government in office in this country who have staggered as blindly from crisis to crisis over the last number of months as have this one. Indeed, if they are to be judged by their actions or their inactivity, as the case may be, they can certainly be deemed to be incompetent, incapable and ill conceived. They were born of personality clashes and internal turmoil, conceived at the ousting of the former Taoiseach, Deputy Haughey, and operate under a new definition of the initials FDR, which can be interpreted as the Minister Flynn, Senator Doherty and Taoiseach Reynolds axis. It was that turmoil and inner sense of frustration that led to the birth and which is now leading to the death of this Government.

How could the Government work when you consider the discontent, the frustration and the rumours on their own back benches, and the unhappy Deputies who have had to march through the lobbies on numerous occasions over the last nine months? Cabinet meetings were dominated by a small number of Ministers, on some occasions with prearranged agendas, and the minor party, the Progressive Democrats — signatory to the pact — had become irrelevant. How could such a Cabinet work when one of their own Ministers had to offer himself as a mediator between two of the major Cabinet figures? How could that Cabinet, by any standard, hope to attempt to deal with the problems affecting this nation in 1992? How could that Cabinet deal with the jobs crisis, an unprecedented 300,000 people out of work? Did that Cabinet ever meet those people face to face and see their frustration, feel their sadness and know their pain? How could that Cabinet deal with the crisis in industry where unemployment is rocketing in every county, where the inability of Government to have a broader vision of where we should be going on the international front was absent? How could they attempts to deal with the problems in the environment, the housing crisis, the social problems arising from young families living with inlaws, packed into small rooms with all the tension and frustration that results from that and the perceived relevancy of politicians who are seen squabbling over words on our national television screens?

There has been a collective sigh of relief throughout the country that at last a time for change has come and that a new Government will be elected. This Fianna Fáil-led Administration has run away from the problems facing Ireland.

They have turned their backs on a series of dark clouds that have been perpetrated by themselves. The payments left aside for next year will probably not now be honoured. Fianna Fáil have tried over the last number of months to project the image that the only kind of Government that could and would work here is a single party majority Fianna Fáil Adminstration. That has not been the case for the last 15 years and it will not be the case in a month's time.

This election may have come just in time to lift standards, to inject a new integrity in national political life and to encourage everyone to participate in the political process by installing a new Fine Gael led movement for change and for Government. I see this happening at the end of this month.

There was an ill-conceived attempt by the Government to introduce three referenda on 3 December. That date seemed to have been set in stone by the Taoiseach but now we shall have to wait to see what date he chooses for his general election. The people are confused about the third element of the referendum and cannot understand why the Government did not propose to deal with this issue in the way they proposed to deal with marriage breakdown, by passing all the clarifying legislation before the people will be asked to vote in a referendum. The people do not understand the obstinacy of the Taoiseach and the Government in deciding on the 3 December date.

A sigh of relief has been breathed across he country. We see this as a challenge, an opportunity to spell out our philosophy and to ask people to support a new movement with a new political standard, a new standard of integrity and a new range of talent which will not shirk difficult decisions.

When Mr. Richard Nixon was President of the US prior to going to the country for the second time he formed an organisation with the initials CREP — Committee for the Re-Election of the President. It seems that our Taoiseach has changed that by publicity proclaiming that he is a Committee for the Re-election of Albert to Parliament. The time of this Government has passed, they should go, they had their opportunity and failed.

This debate resembles a wake.

I assume the Deputy appreciates that he is to conclude not later than 3.55 p.m.

Yes, and I will be sharing some of my time with my colleagues here.

This Government are in their dying moments and the Dáil is in the death throes. This is a seedy and chaotic wake. What has gone on in recent weeks and months has appalled many ordinary people. Their problems with regard to employment, incomes, housing, health, education and farming seem to be remote from the political crisis. It is better to put an end to this crisis, but the public should be aware of the real smokescreen in this debate and in recent weeks.

Whatever the circumstances, both elements of the Government took a deliberate decision to walk away from the yawing opening deficit of next year's budget. The Book of Estimates, the implications of the Single European Market and its tax obligations, and the 9 per cent increase in public sector pay meant it was not possible to draft an election budget. The Government had to cut and run and any pretext would have been used.

People often switch off when one talks about agriculture because it is often forgotten that of total employment one in four jobs is in the food sector, directly employed in agriculture or the input side in the form of feed, fertiliser, agri-construction and so on. The jobs in that industry were never as vulnerable as they are now. Arising from this Government's failure to confronts Commissioner MacSharry as a colleague and friend, and arising from the failure of this Taoiseach and the previous Taoiseach to raise the profile of Common Agricultural Policy and GATT issues to prime ministerial level, we have been left with a deal which gives preferential treatment to Italy, Spain, Greece, the UK and virtually nothing for Ireland, despite the fact that we are 3.5 times more dependent on the food sector.

We, in Fine Gael, will use our contacts in the European Peoples' Party in the Christian democratic group to ensure that at prime ministerial level on a change of Government these issues will be raised. It has been commonly known in agricultural circles that the preoccupation of the Minister, Deputy Walsh, has been cheese fairs, especially soft cheese fairs, and cameras and that the real concerns of farmers have been left behind.

Next Wednesday we will be publishing a very detailed plan for the survival and development of the food sector here, but there is no doubt that the starting base is on average between now and 1995 a drop in farm incomes of about 15 per cent, irrespective of inflation and any GATT cuts would be on top of that. In negotiations we have to get a new deal for Ireland. The new Government will have to draw up an agenda for action to ensure that the maximum number of the 150,000 family farms are retained on the land and that we get the maximum employment and value-added output from our food processing sector.

During this political crisis, the GATT negotiations have been overshadowed. I would like to make it clear that what Commissioner MacSharry offered to Mr. Madigan went beyond the Common Agricultural Policy cuts. In the area of milk, for example, the EC have agreed to 1 per cent cuts in milk quotas. What is involved with cutting the EC exports and export subsidies is a 5 per cent cut in milk production over five years. This will mean that the level of set aside in grain will be doubled because of the reduction in export opportunities for EC grain. The equivalent of 180,000 cattle from Ireland which are exported to North Africa and the Middle East will be dumped on the European market. The Government's silence on this has been deafening. We must insist that there will be full compensation for these measures.

Another crisis the Government are walking away from is the 3 per cent interest rate hike and the currency crisis, which is only starting to bite. For example, we sell 30 per cent of our exports to the UK. On 1 January next year, because of the abolition of MCAs paid to exporters where there is a devaluation in a currency, a cut on cheddar cheese will be the equivalent of 13p on a gallon of milk. In relation to beef, 12p a lb will come straight off every pound of vac-pac meat going into consumer market shares. That is a loss of £13 million to the Irish economy on beef alone. I know what happened in Woodfab in Avoca in relation to lay-offs and that is only the tip of the iceberg with regard to lay-offs that will take place between now and February because of the currency crises and the increase in interest rates.

We will be setting out a detailed agenda in relation to the suspension of the milk quota, the measures needed to help small dairy farmers and in relation to the ewe premium. We saw 8,000 farmers in Molesworth Street because of the lack of action by the Minister for Agriculture and Food. In 1994-95 our beef sector will face a 1974 style collapse in prices, particularly for non-intervention stocks such as heifers. Our cereal growers are faced with the prospect that another cock-up has taken place with the CSO underestimating our national quota, and there will be huge problems in 1994-95.

Our horticultural and pig sectors have been completely neglected. Our disadvantaged area farmers, who have been depending on a reclassification to gain the extra benefits from headage, have experienced bureaucratic delays that mean that now there is still no decision on the extra areas beyond the 72 per cent of Irish land that is included.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Deasy. In the next three weeks there will be an appetite for change, and already the seeds for that are there. Fianna Fáil have in effect been in office since 1987. Fianna Fáil always taunted the previous Fine Gael-Labour Coalition Government about doubling the debt. The present Administration, and their immediate predecessor, have as close to dammit double the unemployment figures, and that is a damming indictment on their economical performance. There will be an alternative available. The Fine Gael Party will lead that alternative Government. I hope the people will not be afraid to be courageous and ensure they do not have to put up with seedy, chaotic debacles taking place on a daily basis. Fine Gael will offer the people real and new hope to meet the challenges of the nineties, a decade which clearly needs new policies and not the policies of the seventies and eighties.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Deenihan.

Is that agreed to? Agreed.

Deputy Yates spoke about the livelihoods of sheep farmers. I wish to point out that in the GATT negotiations, which are still incomplete, unfortunately — or perhaps, fortunately — our sheep farmers are getting the rawest deal possible. They are facing the prospect of a reduction in the ewe premium in excess of £6 per ewe. The Minister for Agriculture and Food stated in the House last June that the reduction would be in the order of 15p but it will be at least £6. A very sizeable proportion of the incomes of our sheep farmers will be lost. Bearing in mind that Ireland has 55,000 sheep farmers, that is a major setback to agriculture.

In the GATT negotiations all aspects of trade are on the table. It is alarming to think that while our farmers are suffering serious price reductions the European Community is importing twice as much lamb from New Zealand as is being produced here. The New Zealanders are producing that lamb at a fraction of the cost at which it is produced here because of the size of their farms and their farm structure. We are being flooded with cheap lamb from a non-EC country, and that has not even been debated in the context of the GATT negotiations. The 55,000 sheep farmers here are suffering because of an external factor that should not exist. This Government's commitment to matters agricultural within the EC has been so bad that at the end of the day all farmers will suffer.

Deputy Dr. Garret FitzGerald when he was Taoiseach had on one occasion in Athens to walk out of a meeting of Heads of State to illustrate the importance of the farming community and the farming industry to this country. Since the advent of this Government, and their predecessor, since 1987, Ireland has not raised one agricultural item at a Heads of State meeting, and that is well documented in the minutes of the meetings in question. We have had much rhetoric and many photo calls but there has been no action to defend our very definite position or our dependence upon the agricultural industry.

In relation to the overall political situation, none of us has been in any doubt for the past eight days about the invitability of a general election. From the time the Taoiseach described the former Minister for Industry and Commerce, Deputy O'Malley, as being dishonest an election seemed inevitable. The Taoiseach could have retracted and he could have used more prudent language but he chose not to do so. That is very unfortunate. When a Government are elected to do a job they should serve their full term of office, five years. The Taoiseach made it impossible for the Government to continue by his remarks and by his unrepentant attitude. Now it is not just a majority in the House who have no confidence in the Taoiseach, a considerably majority of the public have no confidence in him and the Government. The fault lies with the Taoiseach and there should be no doubt about that.

Some Ministers in the Government, such as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Andrew, have done an outstanding job. We would be failing in our duty if we did not say who has done well and who has done badly. I shall confine myself to saying that Ministers such as the Minister for Foreign Affairs have been a credit to the country but the Taoiseach has been a downright disgrace.

It is unfortunate that the whole scenario could lead to considerable political instability for some time to come. It is clear to me, to many politicians and many political observers that no one party will have a majority following the general election that will be held on 26 November. What we may have is a series of general elections until such time as the Taoiseach is deposed as leader of Fianna Fáil. Most Fianna Fáil Deputies and supporters at this stage are wishing that their former leader, Deputy Haughey, was still in charge, because whatever chance they would have of getting on overall majority with him at the top they have no chance under the Taoiseach, Deputy Reynolds.

It would be a very good idea if President Robinson, who has been such a reforming and excellent President were to meet the incoming Taoiseach — whether he or she be a Fine Gael Taoiseach, a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach or a Taoiseach from some other party — to devise a system that would ensure that when a Dáil is elected for five years that Dáil sits for five years, and that heads are knocked together if there are disagreements between coalition partners. We should have a system that ensures that there is a Government and that a disagreement or a vote of no confidence would not automatically lead to a general election. The incoming Taoiseach and the President should be asked to devise a system that would provide for a statutory five years period of office for a Government so that we do not have to go to the country every time the Government are defeated on a vote of confidence or a major issue.

Nobody will thank the Government for what they are doing. However, I say to the Labour Party and to Deputy Spring, to whom I listen this morning, that there is an onus on every politician to ensure that whatever the outcome of the forthcoming general election a Government is formed, and if some people have to compromise their principles then, within reason, they should do so. We should all be willing to compromise; we should all be willing to put our shoulders to he wheel to ensure that the country has a Government and that the country is run in the best interests of the people. The people are getting tired of politicians who show nothing but self-interest. We should be concerned with the interests of the people. I make that appeal in a sincere manner. I want to see people sitting down, buying their differences and coming together to see that the country is properly run.

It gives me no pleasure to stand here this evening to witness the end of this Government. It is a disgrace and it is seen as such by the population, especially our young people. As I am the Opposition spokesperson on youth and sport, I will confine my remarks to those areas.

At present the Government are presiding over a youth unemployment rate of 29 per cent, that is, people under 25 years of age. That is an extraordinary statistic and reflects the total failure of this Government to do anything about it. It is the highest unemployment rate in Europe. I wonder what the young people in the Gallery are thinking now; what confidence can they have in a Government that betrayed them?

I appeal to young people not to be cynical in this election but to come out and vote, as they did in America earlier this week, for change, for new ideas, for new people, to become involved in politics and to break up this monopoly we experienced in Irish politics in the last six years.

I should like to refer to specific youth issues. There are now almost 1,000 young people homeless in this country and it is obvious that the problem is being ignored. The Government have no policy to deal with this serious problem. Any incoming Government worth their salt will ensure that our young people will not be consigned to a life on the streets with all the problems that can bring.

In regard to medical services, there are long waiting lists for orthodontic treatment — which is so important for young people — and for ENT operations. This is happening when the Government — and the Taoiseach this morning — try to convey to us that we are living in the perfect State.

When the national lottery was set up, 55 per cent of the takings were to go to sport and recreation; we now know that only 14 per cent has been spent on such activities. Following six years of Government, we have no 50-metre swimming pool or national indoor stadium — both of which were promised, and for which designs were invited. This Government have been a total failure as regards sports. The sporting fraternity are angry. They were angry during the Olympic Games when the lack of funding was highlighted, and they are still very angry to the extent that they are threatening to put up candidates in this election. As regards youth and sport, this Government have been a total and object failure.

The public perception of politicians is rapidly reaching an all time low. That is why I appeal to the people to elect people they can respect. As I said earlier, young people have grown cynical about politics and politicians. Our young people have looked on in anger and amazement at the level of dishonesty revealed in the various financial scandals that have taken place. While all this is going on, the youth unemployment rate is 29 per cent and the highest in Europe.

Since coming to office, this Government have produced no proposal whatever to face up to that crisis; their only solution was emigration. Ireland has become a nation of haves and have nots. Our young people are becoming increasingly disillusioned and cynical. The people are fed up with what is happening. They want a decent Government who will clean up the appalling mess and tackle their problems. It is time to shout stop — no more. Now the people will decide.

The Deputy is upset because Clare beat Kerry in the Munster final.

They would not have beaten them if Deputy Deenihan were playing.

I express my appreciation to the Fine Gael Party for allowing me time to say a few words on this motion.

We are now facing a general election which nobody wants, with the possible exception of some people in the printing industry. There is no logical reason the Coalition Government could not have lasted another 12 months. We are told that the demise of the Government was the unfortunate use of words by the Leaders of both parties. Basically, I do not think that is correct. In my opinion the Government fell because the will to govern was not there. Where there is a will there is a way, but that will was missing on this occasion. I wonder whether, after this election, there will be the will to govern. This is something on which the Irish electorate cannot afford to take a chance.

In this opening address the Taoiseach this morning told us how the economy was progressing and gave glowing figures. Economic growth is around 4.5 per cent, which is on a par or better than most European countries; the balance of payments is right and the inflation rate is low. Unfortunately, those figures, of which any Government would be proud, are not reflected in extra jobs. The criterion the average citizen uses to estimate how the economy is going is the number of people at work. With 300,000 unemployed, his perception of the economy is a dim one and it may be more correct than that portrayed by the Taoiseach this morning.

We were told by the Taoiseach that in 1987 and 1988, because of the policies of the then Government, the prices of cattle were zooming. I am sure he would not have said that if it was not true — that would be dishonest, but it is too bad that the same influence which was used on the cattle industry was not used on the lamb industry over the last three years. Had it been, and there had been the same results, the income of sheep farmers would not have been slashed by at least 50 per cent over the last three years. Perhaps the next Government will carry out research on the influences employed by the Government in 1987 and 1988.

It would not be fair to let this occasion pass without complimenting the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications, Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn, on the stance she adopted on the status of Shannon as the gateway to North America. By taking that stand she ensured that a nucleus around which industrial development can exist in the west still exists. Those people who disagree with her decision, and who did so vociferously in this House, would be better employed using their energies to promote Ireland as a tourist base rather than trying to denude the west of its pivotal position in the tourist industry.

On a point of order and for information, I spoke in the House at 2.16 p.m. approximately. We understood there was live coverage of the proceedings of the House. Significantly this coverage was cut off just before I spoke and it has not resumed.

If I had known that, I would not have bothered to come into the House.

While the five Independent Deputies are grateful for the time allocated to them, I want to point out that none of their views has been broadcast today. All I can say is that despite the efforts made today, things do not change. It is a bloody disgrace.

I am not sure if that is a point of order. I can appreciate it is a matter of disappointment but I cannot do anything about it.

It is either a matter for the Broadcasting Committee of this House or friends of RTE.

It is a matter which can be looked into presently but not now.

Each disclaim responsibility but they are both responsible.

I wish to share my time with the Minister for Justice, Deputy Flynn.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to contribute to this debate on the motion expressing confidence in the Government. Let me say at the outset, however, that the circumstances which have given rise to this motion are regrettable and, in my view, a totally unnecessary diversion from the job of running this country. They could hardly have come at a worse time as far as the interests of the country are concerned.

The Government of which I am proud to have been a member have worked hard in the months since we took office at getting the economy right. This is fundamentally necessary if we are to achieve our objectives. Our economic policies are clear, credible and consistent. They are designed to keep us on the road of a low inflation, growth-based and confident economy. We have been decisive and determined in confronting honestly, the problems we faced and tackling them with determination.

It is now eight months since I was appointed Minister for Social Welfare. During that time we have put substantial additional resources into social welfare. Today the House passed the Supplementary Estimate which provided an additional £102 million for social welfare services this year, bringing that expenditure to almost £3.5 billion this year.

I have made a number of changes to the system, and I have made known my views on certain aspects of it. A lot more has been written and said about my intentions; some of it has been accurate but most; of it has been work of fevered and fertile imaginations. It has been a wonno derful opportunity for Opposition speakers to trot out the favourite clichés and well-worn phrases which were fashionable in the past. I will come back to those issues later.

My first and foremost objective as Minister has been and is to protect the most vulnerable in our society. This can only be done by providing a social welfare system that meets their needs, while being in line with what is reasonable and affordable in our situation. My second objective is to make the system as simple and as transparent as possible for those who use it. My third objective is to ensure that the system encourages and facilitates people to get out of dependency on the system and back into the active workforce where this is possible. I make no apology for believing in self-help and self-reliance and the need to facilitate this wherever possible.

This does not in any way conflict with the fundamental objective of a Minister for Social Welfare, which is to protect the position of those who have fallen on hard times and those who are most vulnerable in our society. However, our prosperity and well-being as a people depends on what we produce and what we manage to sell, both on our home market and abroad. Our ability as a society to support those who need the social welfare system depends on the efforts of the rest of society to generate the necessary wealth and taxation income. If nobody works and nobody generates wealth, then a social welfare system to protect those in need cannot exist. This is not an attack on the concept of social welfare, or on those who depend on social welfare, but a simple statement of fact. It makes it vital that we eliminate disincentives to work and poverty traps in the system so that nobody is locked into a cycle of dependency.

The measures taken to date in relation to allowing retention of secondary benefits for a 12-month period by people who take up employment or self-employment in the 12Programme for Economic and Social Progress pilot areas are an imaginative response to that need and an indication of my thinking and the Government's thinking on the direction of future policy. I am working on developing this whole area of social welfare policy and devising better and more imaginative ways of helping people out of the trap of dependence on social welfare.

The objectives I have outlined have guided the decisions I took and the changes in the system I have made since becoming Minister. They seem to be eminently proper and reasonable objectives for a Minister for Social Welfare. It seems to be blindingly obvious that these objectives have to be set in a context of continuing serious economic problems, above all rising unemployment.

Much of the commentary, both in and outside this House, on the things I have said and done has ignored these realities and has displayed a studied refusal to debate social welfare issues in terms of what is necessary and what is possible in the practical circumstances of Ireland in the 1990s and beyond. The debate is being conducted in terms of an abstract, not to say, academic, idealism that does not worry about economic realities and has little or no concern for real people in the real world, as distinct from academic theories or political point scoring.

We have to stop thinking of social welfare beneficiaries as passive recipients of someone else's largesse and passive subjects of anonymous social and economic forces. We have to give all our citizens the respect and dignity of seeing them as active participants in determining their own lives and the creation of their own future.

We must adapt the social welfare system to reflect the current realities. As resources are limited, our main concern must be to protect those most in need. We need also to adopt a different and wider perspective than we have in the past. In shaping the social welfare system we need to take account of its interaction with the economy as a whole and with other aspects of social policy. In particular, we need to recognise the interaction of the system with the labour market and the extent to which it may affect the choices made by people to provide for themselves and their families.

My goal is to protect those in need through a simplified, modern and financially secure system. I intend to do this in a way which encourages personal responsibility and gives people the opportunity to take control over their own lives. I want to provide an opportunity for self-reliance and independence to those who lack such opportunities because of inflexibilities in the social welfare system.

The need to reform the social welfare system is made more urgent and difficult by the financial situation in which we find ourselves. In 1991, overall social welfare expenditure amounted to £3.1 billion. This represented a 10 per cent increase on the previous year. In 1992 expenditure will be £3.45 billion, an increase of 11 per cent over 1991. The indications are that in the three years 1991 to 1993, social welfare expenditure will have increased by over 30 per cent. There is no point in putting our heads in the sand and pretending that we do not have financial problems. We do.

I want to see a system that is financially sound and less wasteful of resources. I want to develop a system that recognises that social welfare does not exist in isolation from the rest of the economy and that recognises that social welfare must not be allowed to contribute to the unemployment situation now facing the country.

I have listened to the cant and hypocrisy from the other side of the House about the social welfare system. I make no apology for trying to eliminate abuse from the system and taking whatever measures are necessary to do this. Are the Deputies opposite in favour of waste and abuse? I certainly am not. I do not apologise for trying to rid the system of abuse and I will not be diverted from this task.

My party, Fianna Fáil, have the proudest record of any political party in the country in looking after those in need. Even our most strident political opponents would have to admit, if they are honest, that most of the major social welfare improvements down through the years have been initiated by Fianna Fáil Ministers. Changing the focus of the social welfare system cannot be done easily or quickly but I am determined to make a start on this process.

I have emphasised repeatedly our commitment to protecting those in need. The Programme for Economic and Social Progress commits us to protecting social welfare recipients. In granting annual increases in social welfare payments at budget time, we have honoured all our commitments in that regard. In fact, we have gone further. The 4 per cent general increase announced in the budget earlier this year and implemented from July ensures that for the fifth consecutive year since 1987 social welfare payments have kept ahead of inflation. This is even more evident when account is taken of the latest inflation indicators which show a figure of 2.8 per cent for the year ended mid-August 1992.

We have also been consistent in our policy of giving extra increases to those on the lowest social welfare payments. For example, since July last an additional 2 per cent increase on top of the general 4 per cent increase has been given to those on weekly short-term payments. Overall, since 1987, general increases have been of the order of 25 per cent with much larger increases given to those on the lowest payments. For example, the long-term unemployed have received increases of over 43 per cent since 1987.

Significant improvements to a wide range of social welfare, schemes and services have also been achieved by Fianna Fáil since 1987. I will briefly mention: improvements in payments for children and the reduction in the number of child dependant allowances from 36 to three; payment each year of a Christmas bonus despite financial pressures; continuing annual improvements in the family income supplement for those at work on low pay; improvements in regard to pensions with the introduction of pro-rata pensions for certain categories of pensioners; extension of social insurance coverage for pension to the self-employed giving them the security of pension coverage which they did not have previously; bringing part-time workers into social insurance coverage; part-time workers will be entitled to the full range of benefits from January next; the establishment of the social welfare appeals office as an independent office with its own director, staff and offices; the introduction of the back-to-school clothing and footwear scheme to assist families dependent on social welfare to meet back to school costs; further progress in introducing flexibility into the unemployment payments system to facilitate the long term unemployed in regard to education and other courses; and further improvements and extensions in the free schemes available to pensioners, such as the free travel companion pass now available to the disabled and blind.

Every Member of this House will be only too well aware of the complexity of our social welfare system but it is only as Minister for Social Welfare that one can appreciate the extent of the complexity involved. There can be no justification whatsoever for maintaining the level of complexity which exists. It confuses our clients, makes it difficult for them to understand and be aware of their entitlements and unnecessarily complicates the administration of the system. To my mind, there is, for example, an urgent need to move towards a unified social assistance scheme which would simplify and standardise the conditions for entitlement under existing social assistance schemes.

We have now advanced to the stage where the legislation providing for the standardised means test is more or less drafted. I believe that this will be the single most significant development in the social welfare area for many years and will open the way for a major simplification of the overall system.

The complexity of the system is very much reflected in the legislation under which it operates. We have placed considerable emphasis in recent years on the development of the information services of my Department so as to promote a greater awareness of entitlements under the code, but we need to complement this by providing easier access to the legislation governing the various schemes. As many Deputies will know, social welfare legislation was consolidated in 1981 but since then, 18 Social Welfare Bills have been enacted. I am only too well aware of the difficulties of having to familiarise oneself with legislation which is continuously amended from year to year and for this reason, I was very anxious that we would undertake a further consolidation of social welfare legislation.

Officials of my Department have been working on this project over the past six months or so and have now finalised an initial draft Consolidation Bill. We plan to introduce the new Consolidation Bill in advance of the summer recess next year.

The final curtain is about to fall for this Dáil. The background surrounding its demise will fill the history books for years to come. I would like to believe that my elevation to the Cabinet has not dimmed my judgment on the overall political landscape. Furthermore, I would like to think that I have made lasting friendships on all sides of the House and have always been able to differentiate political business from personalities.

However, it would be particularly dishonest of me not to state that I profoundly question the motives of some activists of our junior partners in Government since 1989 who have brought about the collapse of this Dáil. I can attest to the qualities of many members of that party. Thus, I am more disappointed than most that perceived party political advantage has been put by some on a higher pedestal than the overall national interest.

Other members of our junior partners in Government have been swept along by the personal ambitions of a few. There are members of that party who undoubtedly know that political instability at this time is totally against the national interests. I have always believed that real politicians never run away from the tough times.

I expect that there will be ample quantities of humble pie to be eaten when the general election is over. Something tells me that it will not be the Taoiseach, Deputy Albert Reynolds, and the Fianna Fáil party that will be eating same.

I would not bet on that.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate.

My law reform programme is so comperhensive that I have to be very selective in my treatment of it today. In the area of family law the Government have, at my suggestion, published a comprehensive White Paper on marital breakdown which examines all aspects of this problem and includes detailed proposals for important changes in family law which I look forward to introducing in the new year. The White Paper also indicates the Government's intention to hold a referendum on the subject of divorce and sets out detailed proposals for the type of legislation that might be introduced if a divorce referendum were passed by the people. I am also preparing legislation to give each spouse equal rights of ownership in the family home and its contents and to allow this country to ratify international conventions to facilitate recovery of maintenance payments for deserted wives.

The legislation to allow the holding of referenda on the issues arising from the Supreme Court decision in the X case was passed recently by the Oireachtas at my instance. The Government's proposals in this area will safeguard the right to life of the unborn and of mothers and will guarantee women freedom to travel and to receive information.

Because of my concern about cases involving abuse of children, I have piloted legislation through the Oireachtas, the Criminal Evidence Bill, 1992, which will make it easier for witnesses to give evidence, for example, by means of a live television link.

Crime remains a problem of the greatest concern to me as Minister for Justice. One of the Government's highest priorities has been to tackle it by legal changes and by practical measures. I am preparing as a matter of urgency specific proposals to strengthen the law in relation to public order to tackle the problem of street violence and intimidation by groups congregating in public places. On a practical level, I have taken steps to improve the situation in the Dublin city centre area.

On a point of order, may we have a copy of the Minister's speech?

That is not a point of order. It is a point of disorder.

He is reading from a script.

This is disorder. We had a high sense of civility and fair play before you arrived. Please do not be recorded as having broken that.

Deputy Cotter is correct.

I am in order. He is reading his speech.

He is not correct.

These include the assignment of 50 extra gardaí to city centre Garda stations from the next group of recruits who will be attested in the Force before the end of the month, as well as 20 civilian clerical staff who will release an equivalent number of gardaí for policing work on the streets of Dublin.

I intend shortly to introduce a Bill to provide for the seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime. In response to public concern, I presented legislation to the Dáil in September to allow for the review of unduly lenient sentences and to require courts to take account of the effects of the offence on the victim when determining the appropriate sentence in cases involving sexual offences or crimes of violence and to give the courts power to require offenders to pay compensation to victims in certain circumstances.

I have also been concentrating on practical measures to counter crime. Since taking office I have had regular consultations with the Garda Commissioner on the crime problem and no effort has been spared in drawing up, reviewing, assessing and improving Garda anticrime strategies. I am pleased to say that so far this year the preliminary indications are positive and suggest that Garda efforts are proving successful. The level of crime in the Dublin metropolitan area is showing a very welcome decrease, while the overall level of crime in the country is stabilising. In this connection the Garda, with my full support and with the backing of the Department of Justice, have been drawing up a five-year blueprint on policy development for the Force. The blueprint will extend from administrative to operational duties and is aimed at ensuring that a quality service is provided to the public by maximising the use of available resources.

I am very concerned about the increased availability of illegal drugs. I held a top level conference with officials and senior gardaí on the problem soon after my appointment as Minister for Justice. I gave my full support and backing to the use of all the resources necessary in this particular drive and to increase cooperation at a national level between the Garda and the Customs and Revenue authorities in the fight against drugs. I am pleased to note that the Garda and the Customs authorities have increased significantly their seizures of illegal drugs. I know they will continue to spare no effort to combat this scourge.

I reaffirm the Government's commitment to putting an end to paramilitary violence and to ensure that the search for hidden stockpiles of arms will be relentlessly pursued. As Minister for Justice I have ensured that the Garda Síochána have been provided with all the resources required for this purpose. Some of the most spectacular finds in recent times were made by the Garda Síochána during the summer months of this year, as part of Operation Silo.

The anti-racketeering unit established in the Garda Síochána in the past 12 months has also had marked success. In its relatively short existence the unit has recovered over 100,000 pirated video tapes, 5,000 pornographic video tapes and 23,000 pirated audio tapes and a number of persons are due before the courts in the near future in this regard. I intend to continue to provide the Garda with the necessary resources to enable the unit to build on the successes achieved so far.

The Government have worked tirelessly to achieve political progress in relation to Northern Ireland. The basis of the Government's approach is the agreed position of the constitutional Nationalist parties of Ireland as set out in the report of the New Ireland Forum. In accordance with this position, we have made clear that a settlement can be achieved only on the basis of the equal legitimacy of the two traditions. Both the Nationalist and Unionist traditions must be accorded equal respect and given meaningful political expression.

For some time we have made clear our continuing commitment to the full implementation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and both Governments are committed to the principle of regular and frequent meetings of the Anglo-Irish Conference. This is why the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister decided recently that the next meeting of the conference will take place on Monday, 16 November. The Government, for their part, are ready to agree to a further suitable interval following the forthcoming meeting of the conference for the purpose of enabling the talks to continue on the same basis as heretofore.

Like all other participants in this process, we are committed to a forward looking and constructive approach and we are prepared to bring all the necessary reserves of patience, goodwill and flexibility to bear in an effort to ensure that this process continues and is brought to a successful conclusion.

Many words have been thrown about in the past week, words such as "dishonest" and "honour" but there has not been much talk about democracy. In the final hours of the 26th Dáil, I wish to address the issue of democracy. Because it has been ignored, it has been devalued and warped by the junior partners in this Coalition Government. The last election returned 77 Fianna Fáil TDs and six Progressive Democrats to the House. Two Cabinet posts were given to the Progressive Democrats and one junior post. That was generously disproportionate to their representation, generously disproportionate to the level of support they achieved at the ballot box. The Progressive Democrats could have decided to contribute to Cabinet as genuine partners but they did not. There can be no doubt that the Government have had major achievements but that does not mean the Progressive Democrat contribution has been straightforward or democratic. On the contrary, from the start they have sought to exercise an influence grossly unrelated to their numbers. That is not democracy.

They did not get a chance.

They sought to assume a veto over the entire Cabinet and when the veto did not work they resorted to political assassination; "Off with his head" was frequently shouted and it became monotonous.

How many heads rolled?

One after the other, the Progressive Democrats demanded the heads of Deputies Lenihan, McDaid and Haughey.

(Interruptions.)

It was the Minister who went for Deputy Haughey, he acquiesced.

That is what happened to Saint Paul and John the Baptist. People are talking about it since.

It was always paraded as an issue of principle but it always resulted in the political assassination of an individual. When Deputy Reynolds took over as Taoiseach he made one thing clear, the Progressive Democrats were our partners in Government but no more than that.

A temporary little arrangement.

They were not our conscience, they were not the tail wagging the dog, and they were no longer going to operate on ultimatum or political assassination.

What about last weekend?

None of the famous issues of principle was involved. The Taoiseach simply expected matters to be discussed at the Cabinet table, decided there and implemented.

He had an open door.

He did not accept that two members of that Cabinet could hold the others to ransom or make separate arrangements with the Taoiseach of the day. As we have learned from this morning's newspapers as long ago as last September the Leader of the Progressive Democrats was unhappy and seeing the signs of "a pattern of dictation".

The Minister should not believe what he reads in the newspapers; his former leader always said that.

There has been no pattern, just the same one.

This is a myth and every other Cabinet Minister in the House will confirm that it is a myth. There was no pattern of dictation; there was a simple rectification, a return to democratic balance. What was different was that the Progressive Democrats has a voice equal only to the merit of the argument and the issue, a voice equal only to the merit of whatever policy they were proposing and a voice equal only to that of their peers at the Cabinet table. They were not being treated as if they were the ultimate arbiters of the democratic process.

That would be a great speech if it had been circulated.

The Minister's former leader, Deputy Haughey, is enjoying the speech.

They did not like that——

The Minister gave them bad advice in 1989.

——but they did not, as they should have, address it to their partners in Government. Instead, their leader went to the top, the same tactic as before — what they could not achieve at the Cabinet table they would achieve by bringing pressure on the Leader of Fianna Fáil, except that they discovered the Leader of Fianna Fáil would not be threatened. His attention was focused on seeking solutions to our problems rather than on examining the virtue, honour and outrage of the Progressive Democrats on a weekly basis. Things had to be done and we wanted to see them done. An avalanche of problems had to be confronted by the Government; that was our business and that is the way it has continued since Deputy Reynolds took office.

It was at this point that the Progressive Democrats' real lack of respect for the business of Government came into play. The Northern talks, to which I referred, had been rated by the Taoiseach and the Government as of the utmost priority, and rightly so.

Not when he was speaking at Fianna Fáil meetings.

We have been moving slowly and painfully towards a breakthrough, towards the end of the crucifixion of a people and the Taoiseach entrusted those talks to the Tánaiste, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Justice and to one senior Cabinet Progressive Democrats Minister. The Fianna Fáil team engaged their hearts, minds and commitment to those talks.

And knuckles.

We maintained total silence about the talks and worked through 70 years of fears, rigidity, hatred and mistrust and sought to bring about a better understanding with those who are separated from us in the North. Now, as we reach this crucial point we are told, whether it is tape cutting or map launching that these duties are more important than the continuity and priority of the Northern talks. I do not believe such duties are more important, nor did the Taoiseach especially when he learned from a report in the Sunday newspapers of the plan to substitute a junior Minister at those talks. That is the way the information was conveyed to the Taoiseach, not through the courtesy of formal communication from the Leader of the Progressive Democrats. The Taoiseach indicated that the substitution was not acceptable and this was interpreted by the Progressive Democrats as a snub. That was not so.

There was no pattern of dictation at work during this incident. On one side, there was a crude downgrading of the importance of these historic talks and, on the other, a head of Government was behaving like a head of Government and making sure that the team representing Ireland was a senior team, the senior team who had worked together on the subtle issues involved over the previous months. Progress has been made and is being made and we hope we can continue that progress in the Northern talks in the future.

The Minister is worse than the rugby team, the coach should retire.

Democracy means that when you elect a Taoiseach, you let him act as Taoiseach. The Progressive Democrats never wanted to allow any Fianna Fáil leader to be Taoiseach because, ultimately, the Progressive Democrats are the most anti-democratic grouping in Dáil Éireann.

(Interruptions.)

They seem to believe that they are the way, the truth and the light and that the rest of us in this House are somehow less than they.

I wonder where they learned that?

They have operated as if they were the Opposition in Government and they have faced both ways when it suited their particular political tactics. Whenever there was credit to be got from a Government action they took that credit. They have constantly sought to give the impression that good Government action would not have happened without them, and that is nonsense.

You had better repeat it. You are getting a fantastic launch.

The Progressive Democrats are bringing down this Government, they are bringing down a good Government, they are pulling down a Government without regard to the national or international consequences not on an issue of joblessness, not on an issue related to debts in the North, not on an issue that is related to anything that is required in this economy, but on the hurt feelings of their leader. They have ended this Coalition Government as a way of proving how upright and perfect they are. They have ended this Coalition Government and put their own and other Deputies' jobs at risk before this Christmas——

What about the Minister's job?

——in exactly the same way they paraded their principles before at the expense of people. It is always and has always been at the expense of people, up to now it has been at the expense of individuals but now it is at the expense of a good Government and at the expense of this country. The Fianna Fáil members of the Cabinet can walk away with pride in what they have achieved.

All members of the Cabinet?

They were an active, fearless and professional group. I have been in politics a fair length of time. This group in Government have acted with energy, integrity and intellectual confidence and with a lot of commitment.

We will conduct this election campaign in a dignified and responsible fashion. We have a record to be proud of. We have a strategy to lead this economy forward. We are not afraid of this election. We will fight it in an open and fearless way and we look forward to the Irish people giving us the vote of confidence to carry on.

(Interruptions.)

Where are you "Scrap Saturday" when we needed you?

Deputy Blaney rose.

I do not want to anticipate Deputy Blaney, but I would presume that, notwithstanding his experience and his ingenuity, he is not likely to say anything that would put him in order now.

Before we vote, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I want to ask the Taoiseach a question and it is very pertinent.

There is no provision for such questions.

The Father of the House should be entitled to ask one question.

Neither the father nor the son is entitled. There is no provision for such questions.

Neither the father nor the son is entitled. There is no provision for such questions.

Are the Government still going to the country? If they win the vote, do they still intend to go to the country.

De réir mar a fheicimid sic transit gloria an Dála seo——

(Interruptions.)

If the Members will allow me to be out of order, sula gcuirim an cheist, ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil le chuile dhuine ó gach taobh den Teach seo a chuir sus liomsa an seall is a bhí mé anseo.

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 77; Níl, 88.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Andrews, David.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Barrett, Michael.
  • Brady Gerard.
  • Brady, Vincent.
  • Brennan, Mattie.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Burke, Raphael P.
  • Calleary, Seán.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Collins, Gerard.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Coughlan, Mary Theresa.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Cullimore, Séamus.
  • Daly, Brendan.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Dennehy, John.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Fahey, Frank.
  • Fahey, Jackie.
  • Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
  • Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Flynn, Pádraig.
  • Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Haughey, Charles J.
  • Hillery, Brian.
  • Hilliard, Colm.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kelly, Laurence.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lawlor, Liam.
  • Lenihan, Brian.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • Leyden, Terry.
  • Lyons, Denis.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • McCreevy, Charlie.
  • McDaid, Jim.
  • McEllistrim, Tom.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Nolan, M.J.
  • Noonan, Michael J. (Limerick West).
  • O'Connell, John.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donoghue, John.
  • O'Hanlon, Rory.
  • O'Keeffe, Ned.
  • O'Kennedy, Michael.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Rourke, Mary.
  • O'Toole, Martin Joe.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Roche, Dick.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Stafford, John.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Tunney, Jim.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Wallace, Mary.
  • Walsh, Joe.
  • Wilson, John P.
  • Woods, Michael.

Níl

  • Ahearn, Therese.
  • Allen, Bernard.
  • Barnes, Monica.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Barry, Peter.
  • Bell, Michael.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Byrne, Eric.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
  • Cotter, Bill.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Crowley, Frank.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • D'Arcy, Michael.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • De Rossa, Proinsias.
  • Doyle, Joe.
  • Dukes, Alan.
  • Durkan, Bernard.
  • Enright, Thomas W.
  • Farrelly, John V.
  • Fennell, Nuala.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • FitzGerald, Garret.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foxe, Tom.
  • Garland, Roger.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Harte, Paddy.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Belton, Louis J.
  • Blaney, Neil Terence.
  • Boylan, Andrew.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, John.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Lee, Pat.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • McCartan, Pat.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • Mac Giolla, Tomás.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • Mitchell, Gay.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael. (Limerick East).
  • O'Brien, Fergus.
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • O'Malley, Desmond J.
  • O'Shea, Brian.
  • O'Sullivan, Gerry.
  • O'Sullivan, Toddy.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Pattison, Séamus.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Reynolds, Gerry.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Shatter, Alan.
  • Sheehan, Patrick J.
  • Sherlock, Joe.
  • Spring, Dick.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Taylor-Quinn, Madeleine.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Wyse, Pearse.
  • Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Dennehy; Níl, Deputies Kenny and Howlin.
Question declared lost.

The House has now made its decision and I propose to proceed immediately to Áras an Úachtaráin to seek from the Presidential Commission the dissolution of the Twenty-sixth Dáil. We have had our arguments and disagreements during the past three-and-a-half years. However we are now entering a campaign to elect a new Dáil.

We should let all disagreements and rancour that existed in this Dáil die with its dissolution. Let us all focus on the future rather than on the past. I will be fighting this campaign without rancour. I will be concentrating on policy issues and not on personalities. As Leader of Fianna Fáil I will be instructing my party colleagues to do the same. I hope that other party leaders will do likewise so that we can have a high level of public debate that lends dignity to the democratic process and enhances respect for it.

I would like to convey my good wishes to all the outgoing Members of this Dáil and to those who will not be standing again for election. I would also like to give my thanks and best wishes to all my ministerial colleagues. Finally, I would like in particular to thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for your patience and perseverance and the manner in which you have conducted our proceedings. I would like also to offer our sincere thanks and appreciation to the staff of this House who have been so courteous and efficient to all of us. A special word of thanks also to the media and its representatives in this House. Every one of us will try to do our best to keep them busy for the next three weeks or so. We all look forward to the 27th Dáil, and I am confident that I will lead that Dáil also. Fágfidh mé slán agus go n-éirí an bóthar libh go léir.

I want to wish you well, Sir, and thank you very much for the way in which you have conducted you responsibility as Ceann Comhairle, often under the most difficult circumstances. You have done us proud and you have done democracy proud not only in this House but in your many representative trips abroad on behalf of this House. I wish also to express thanks to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputy Jim Tunney, who has followed the same high standards set by you. I thank the staff and the media who have reported our proceedings, always with accuracy and sometimes necessarily with tolerance. I hope that the forthcoming campaign will be a constructive one. From now forth we are looking to the future.

I would like to be associated with the remarks made by the Taoiseach and Deputy Bruton. It is extremely important that the campaign is fought in the best interests of the democratic institutions of the State. I see no reason that there should be rancour between people in public life in the course of an election campaign. I would like to thank the staff of this House and the media for their coverage of political life. I trust we will have a meaningful relationship with them in the next three weeks.

I would also like to be associated with the remarks to you, a Cheann Comhairle, on the firmness and the manner in which you have controlled debates. At times it is a very difficult job but at the end of the day there is respect by the Members of the House for the Chair, which is extremely important. Likewise, I pay tribute to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle who has an equally difficult job. Both of you have run this House in an exemplary manner, which is a credit to you both.

On behalf of the Democratic Left Party I too would like to be associated with the good wishes towards you, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank you for the way in which you have run the business of this House. We have had our differences and crossed swords at times but I have never held any personal animosity towards you on any of those occasions — you were doing your job and I was doing mine. I appreciate very much the co-operation I received from you and your office, your staff and, indeed, the staff of the House.

The election campaign, and particularly the referendum campaign, which should not be forgotten, are important for the people. I intend — I am sure everybody else has good intentions in this regard — that the matters that will be debated will be issues rather than personalities. I look forward to being back here. The expectations of everybody cannot be fulfilled; somebody has to lose out and I hope it is not me or anybody in the Democratic Left Party. I wish everybody well.

On behalf of the Progressive Democrats I would like to be associated with the tributes and thanks that have been paid to you and to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I express the thanks of my party to the Clerk and to the staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas. You have not had an easy time in the past three and a half years. The 26th Dáil was perhaps one of the more difficult for some time. I have an ambition to live in uninteresting times and I hope the 27th Dáil will be dull and boring.

On behalf of the neglected five on the back benches — I have the temerity of including you, a Cheann Comhairle, as No. 6 — I say to you that without you the little crumbs we got would not have been there at all. Without any disregard to others, I would thank your staff and the staff of Leinster House. I find it difficult not to thank the media but if I had the time I would be selective. However, I will not do so until the election campaign is over. I wish you, and every Member here, the very best. To those who have announced their intention not to run in the forthcoming election and whose names we did not have earlier I would say, perhaps you have more sense than the rest of us; you are getting out while you are still active.

Barr
Roinn