Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 19 Jun 2002

Vol. 553 No. 3

Private Members' Business. - Programme for Government: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by Deputy Hogan on Tuesday, 18 June 2002:
That Dáil Éireann:
–conscious that there will be considerable additional pressure on the public finances to meet spending commitments in the areas of pay and infrastructure;
–believing that the prudent management of the economy in these challenging circumstances requires realistic and structured spending priorities and that the programme for Government should set the agenda for the nation, identify priorities and chart clear timetables for delivery;
condemns the Government parties for producing a programme which is largely aspirational, contains no costings, few measurable timeframes and no clear targets; and calls on the Government to immediately set out specific targets in key policy areas against which the success of their programme can be judged and the consequential budgetary framework for the next five years within which these commitments will be met.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:
–welcomes and supports the clear and specific Programme for Government agreed by the parties in Government, based on the manifestos endorsed by the electorate, which create the framework for the continued development and enhancement of economic and social progress over the next five years.
(Minister for Finance).

I thank Deputy Michael D. Higgins for agreeing to share his time. I wish to share my time with Deputy Ferris.

The motion aptly states that the programme for Government should set the agenda for the nation for the five year period for which the Government is supposed to be in power, identify priorities and chart clear timetables. I agree with that. The Government's amendment states that it welcomes "the Programme for Government agreed by the parties in Government" and that it is "based on the manifestos endorsed by the electorate". There is a contradiction in that some of the contents of the manifestos were specific while other parts were general. That is part of the problem with the programme for Government. It is very much a curate's egg.

I want to focus on what I regard as the greatest fraud perpetrated on the people in relation to one specific area of An Agreed Programme for Government. This is the health issue, which is not specific in the programme although the manifesto that was put to the people was very specific. It was the single biggest issue that exercised the minds of the people during the course of the election and a large number of Independent candidates were elected to this House on the health issue.

The Fianna Fáil manifesto stated categorically that it would permanently end waiting lists in all our hospitals within two years through a combination of bed capacity, primary care, secondary care and targeted reform initiatives. That is extremely specific and that is what the electorate bought into. It is a scandal to say that An Agreed Programme for Government is based on the manifestos endorsed by the electorate and leave out the specifics. If one is specific in one's manifestos, one must be specific in one's programme. Fianna Fáil has done a very great injustice by immediately after the election going into Government with what is very much a right-wing party, the Progressive Democrats. We will get more of the same, but they are not now prepared to be specific about the delivery of what they promised specifically to the electorate.

The same is true in the case of another important area of service, housing. The scandal of homelessness trebled under the previous Administration and we are awaiting the outcome of the recent survey, about which all the indications are that there is a considerable increase again in the number of people who are homeless. Many of these homeless people took part in the anti-drugs march on the streets today. They encounter difficulties finding shelter in any circumstances, but this is a much wider issue. Few young people can afford to purchase a home at present and An Agreed Programme for Govern ment does not contain specific details on how the Government will deal with the other scandal of the unprecedented prosperity in our country over the past five years but nothing to show for it in terms of providing basic services to the people.

The last budget surplus was induced by sleight of hand. It is sad that the previous Government, which came into power in 1997 after the leader of my party, who was then Minister for Finance, had delivered the first surplus budget, left us with a much weakened economy and a budget which, when properly analysed, was not in surplus. It left an economy so weakened that our rate of inflation is more than double the European average, tax returns have fallen very low and we are not likely to reach budget targets. The Government has given no figures on increased spending in its programme and there is no budgeting whatsoever for benchmarking which is coming down the road at the end of the month. One commentator, Senator O'Toole, declared that benchmarking is equivalent to an ATM. The Government never corrected him and allowed expectations to rise at an inordinate rate. It has not put in place a budgeting mechanism to deal with benchmarking.

An Agreed Programme for Government has very little to offer. It contains very few specifics. Where there were specifics in the manifestos, they have been left out in the programme. I do not expect to see much delivery of essential services, which determine a better quality of life for the people of this country, during the term of office of the Government.

Promises made, promises delivered was a slogan often used in the party political broadcasts of the majority partner in Government during the election campaign. Many promises and commitments were given in its election manifesto, some of which were laudable and others which were not.

One such promise was to wipe out hospital waiting lists within two years. However, reading the programme for Government of Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats, it is more than clear that there was nothing more to this promise than the quick soundbite it provided the Taoiseach while on the campaign trail. For the majority partner in Government to back down on a fairly straightforward and categorical commitment suggests that the 29th Dáil will be littered with broken promises and continuing social injustice. Health care played a major part in the election campaign, probably more so than in any previous election campaign. This is because our health services have never been in such disarray and morale has never been so low.

Kerry is a microcosm of Irish society at large. Its urban areas have all the problems associated with urban areas the length and breadth of our country. Its rural areas suffer the same neglect as rural areas in Donegal, Galway, Mayo, Cork and Clare. In Tralee General Hospital, the waiting list stands at almost 3,000. There are genuine fears for the future of cancer screening and treatment services at Tralee. There are no breast-screening facilities in Tralee and there are no full-time CAT scan facilities because there is no resident cardiologist. This is a disgrace because Tralee has a catchment area serving the entire county of Kerry and west Cork.

Our public health service suffered a massive crisis while public finances were at an all-time high. The Celtic tiger roared for corporate Ireland while it whimpered in the corner as people lay dying on trolleys in public hospitals. Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats cannot absolve themselves of responsibility for that. They sustained and promoted the conditions that saw the public finances of the many used to fund the private health care of the few. They sustained the conditions that ensured the rich got richer while those less well-off slipped further away. Their approach to health care is indicative of their approach to many aspects of society. "If there is not a profit in it, it is not worth doing" should be their motto. There is no sense of community welfare, no sense of community development or no sense of people.

Rural Ireland has suffered greatly as a result. Government policies have ensured that the family farm is on its way to extinction. There has been a drop of over 25% in farm incomes in the last four years. We need to proactively pursue rural regeneration as a priority. We must inject funding and commitment to develop the overall fabric of rural life. It means ensuring that those who wish to remain on the land can do so economically. It means developing our agri-tourism sector and protecting our fishing industry.

Beginning in the early 1970s with our accession to the Common Market, successive Governments have sold out the fishing industry. In exchange for subsidies, which primarily benefited larger farmers, our fishing rights in our own waters were abandoned wholesale. The latest proposals from Brussels are the final nail in that coffin. Fisheries and marine affairs have always been at the bottom of the agenda of Government. There is little in the programme for Government to convince us otherwise. The debate on the exclusion of the marine portfolio from departmental titles exposed that reality. The Taoiseach downgraded the importance of all aspects of the marine when allocating ministerial positions and was then obliged to row back.

We need to offer equality of treatment to all citizens regardless of where they live. Sinn Féin will not be supporting the Government's amendment because it is built on the foundation of broken promises. It does not offer a chance of economic enhancement and social progress. It is a programme for Government that will continue the social injustices witnessed during the past five years. It is a programme for Government of the rich by the rich.

I wish to share time with Deputies O'Flynn, Killeen and Ardagh.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I am proud to speak in support of the Government amendment to this Private Members' motion. I am pleased that we have been presented with a programme for Government. It is great, when beginning a new term of office, that a clear and specific agenda is laid out for the years ahead. People will judge us at the next general election on foot of whether we match up to what is contained in the programme, with which everyone should by now be familiar.

I welcome the reappointment of the Minister, Deputy McCreevy, to his position. He proved to be a good Minister for Finance during the past five years. Most people recognise that the next five years may be more difficult from an economic point of view. I know the Minister's skills will be tested but he will prove extremely capable and able. I also welcome the appointment of Deputy Michael Ahern as Minister of State at the Department of Finance. Deputy Ahern served as Chairman of the Joint Committee on Finance and Public Service in the previous Dáil and, as vice-chairman of that committee, I worked closely with him during its lifetime.

It was interesting to hear the previous speaker refer to "broken promises". That term is a popular cliché, but it has no relationship to reality in the context of the programme for Government with which we have been presented. When Fianna Fáil entered Government with the Progressive Democrats in 1997 it was the first occasion on which an Administration ever put in place such a clear programme for Government. I estimate that 99% of the contents of that programme were implemented in full. It is safe to say that since the foundation of the State no programme for Government was implemented to such an extent as that put in place by Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats in 1997. I have no doubt that the same will apply to the programme before us. It is, therefore, premature for anyone to refer to "broken promises". We have set out in our document what we propose to do. It is a well researched and well thought out document and it recognises that, in economic terms, we may be facing a difficult period and that people cannot expect exact timescales or targets in respect of various changes in the economy. The Government must have the flexibility to ensure that, during its five year term of office, it can implement the document in full.

In its election campaign, Fianna Fáil adopted the slogan "A lot done. More to do". When watching television last night, I came across a new programme entitled "More to do", and I take that as a compliment. It is clear that RTE and the people in general have recognised that the slogan was a fair and reasonable assessment of what the outgoing Government had achieved. We did a great deal in the past five years but we were first to acknowledge that more needs to be done. We did not go to the country saying "We did a great job, please return us to power." We went to the people and stated that we had done a lot and that we had done our best but we recognise that more needs to be done. The people appreciated that level of honesty and openness from Fianna Fáil. We did not have stock answers prepared for every question we were asked during the campaign. We recognise that the job of government is ongoing and that we will continue to have to deal with problems as time passes.

The issue of crime was raised on doorsteps throughout the country during the election campaign and it is well dealt with in the programme for Government. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform faces a tough task in the years to come. It is vital that more gardaí are placed on our streets in order that the myriad legislation passed by the outgoing Government can be implemented in full. That is the most important thing we must achieve in the coming years. There is a great deal of legislation on the Statute Book and we want to ensure that people feel safe in their homes, on streets and in estates and townlands. When their teenage children go out at night, parents must be able to rest safe in the knowledge that they will return safely from the disco or other venue where they have spent the evening. It is important that people enjoy such security and we want to ensure that they can do so.

In some instances, greater vigilance will be required on the part of the Garda but there will also be a need for greater consistency on the part of the Judiciary. One need only consult the various provincial newspapers to see that people convicted of serious offences are regularly given probation or suspended sentences by members of the Judiciary when a term in jail might be more appropriate. Consideration must be given to this matter.

As a representative of a midlands constituency, I am pleased the Government has singled out transport as a special area for attention. The new Minister in the area, Deputy Brennan, faces a major task in terms of upgrading road and rail infrastructure throughout the country. In the context of my constituency of Laoighis-Offaly, a number of new motorways are to be built and we must also increase the access in and out of Dublin in terms of the rail network. I hope this will happen in the years ahead.

Many speakers referred to the health strategy. The previous Government will be remembered as the Administration which gave free medical cards to everybody over 70 years of age. Many old people were afraid to go to their doctors because of the amount they would have to pay out of their old age pensions. I am proud that everyone in that age group now has access to a free medical card.

The Government has committed itself to increasing the rate of old age pension to €200 per week during its term of office. Five years ago we committed ourselves to increasing the same pen sion to £100 per week. When we entered Government, the rate stood at approximately £72 per week and people thought we were making an outlandish promise. Not only did we achieve it – we set out to do so in five years but did so in under four – but we surpassed it. I hope we will also achieve our target of increasing the rate to €200 sooner rather than later.

Another example of the slogan "A lot done. More to do" is that the Government, during its previous term, introduced the minimum wage at a level which makes it the highest of its kind in Europe. People were concerned that this would have an impact on employment levels, but it has proven to be extremely beneficial. We did a lot in that regard but we now have more to do. In the next two budgets we must remove everyone on the minimum wage from the income tax net. We must ensure that there is consistency between the tax net and the earning capacity of people who are in full-time employment. I hope the minimum wage will increase and I also hope the social partners will agree to a new partnership deal in respect of the economy by next spring. The spirit of partnership between the Government, the trade union movement, employers and farming and other organisations was one of the cornerstones for the success of the economy and increases in employment in recent years.

The main success from an economic point of view in the past five years was the change in circumstances of many people who had previously been living in poverty. I firmly believe that the best way to aid people living in poverty is to give them a job so that they can earn a decent income, support themselves, feel dignified by holding down employment, work hard and enjoy themselves. I hope that all those earning the minimum wage will be removed from the income tax net in the near future.

I support the Government amendment to the motion. I congratulate Deputy McCreevy on his reappointment as Minister for Finance. He did an excellent job during the past five years, not only for the Government but also on behalf of the Parliament and the people. I congratulate my colleague from Cork, Deputy Michael Ahern, on his appointment as Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Deputy Ahern's background is in financial accounting and this will be of immense value to him when he undertakes the tasks set before him. He will do Cork proud in that office.

The Government has set out a programme for the next five years, agreed by both parties, which will ensure the continued development of our economy. It will also ensure we achieve the objectives of our social inclusion programmes. Specific priorities are set out in the agreed programme and targets have been set. This is what the people voted for on 17 May. They expressed their satisfaction with the last five years of government and the previous Government's progamme. The vast majority of the targets set were achieved. We must now build on and continue that work.

I want to see further improvements in the quality of public services, improvements in services for older people and more increases for pensioners who worked so hard to make the country what it is today. I welcome the Government's commitment to increasing the old age pension to €200 per week by 2007. I welcome the setting up of the national pensions reserve fund which plans for the future pension needs of all our older people. This was a huge step forward and will be a help to future Governments which will not have to provide the funds required to service this need. The workers of today will benefit from this fund when they reach pension age. I note that no member of the Labour Party is present. During the general election campaign that party proposed that the fund be raided and used for short-term spending. I am glad the electorate was wise enough to see that the fund is an important one. The main Opposition party supported the fund when it was set up and still does.

I welcome the Taoiseach's decision to set up the new Department of Transport under the Minister, Deputy Seamus Brennan, with responsibility for major roads and public transport investment. We will have a better delivery of investment and improvements in this area when it is focused under a single ministry. I look forward to increased investment in roads and infrastructure in the Cork area in particular. I am sure my Cork colleague, Deputy Simon Coveney, shares my opinion on the importance of continued investment in Cork Airport. I am delighted tenders have been invited from interested parties, that €100 million is to be expended on the airport and that two million passengers will go through it this year. Before the general election some Opposition candidates claimed this investment would not materialise but the beginning of the tendering process is an important step forward.

We have seen improvements in bus investment in Cork city and hope to see more investment in rail services in the region. We will be pressing the Minister for Transport for money for the docklands development plan, where much spending on infrastructure is required. The south link road, the downstream crossing – the Jack Lynch tunnel – and the Blackpool bypass have been completed and the Watergrasshill and Ballincollig bypasses are in progress. A new north west link road is on the drawing board. This is needed in order that people can get to my office. I hope funds will be provided in order that it can be completed in the next five years.

The programme for Government is based on the manifestos of the two Government parties and has been democratically endorsed by the electorate. The priorities are set on a solid budgetary base which seeks to maintain a balanced budgetary position for the next five years. It is entirely realistic since it is a continu ation of the programme of the previous five years, which was hugely successful. Five years ago many said the programme set out then, which was much less detailed and specific than the current one, was entirely unattainable. In fact, more progress was made in several areas than was promised by the Government. For example, it delivered in excess of 300,000 new jobs and saw the rate of unemployment slashed from 10.3% to 3.9% in five years. It also saw the government debt to GDP ratio halved form 74% to 34% and left Ireland with the second lowest national debt in Europe. These are considerable achievements and no one would have believed it if they had been predicted five years ago.

It is reassuring that the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, is committed to continuing to generate resources, using them prudently and seeking maximum value for money. We must face up to the fact that the State can only provide services if it can afford to pay for them. There are huge demands in many areas, particularly in health and education, which the programme plans to address. The budgetary policy must ensure they can be paid for. The policy as set out in the programme for Government can ensure this.

Over the last five years expenditure on infrastructure increased from approximately €2 billion in 1997 to almost €6 billion this year. A strong case can be made for providing some kind of incentive payment for design teams on public projects to come in under budget. This is one place where the system does not lead to value for money and there seems to be an incentive to increase the cost rather than reduce it. This problem must be addressed in the short term.

The national pensions reserve fund has been referred to by a number of speakers. It will fund pensions for today's workers. I am glad the Minister for Finance had the foresight to learn from the difficulties experienced by many of our European partners in the area of pensions and paying people who worked hard to create those strong economies. There have been generous pension increases in the past five years and this programme undertakes to continue that positive trend. However, there is one group of workers whose pension needs have not been looked after and whose case I have raised here on several occasions. They are the employees of Aer Lingus and Aer Rianta. The case of these pensioners must be addressed during the period of this Government.

There have been huge increases in child benefit which have contributed positively to family income, particularly for mothers. This has been added to considerably by the reduction in tax rates which have led to much improved take-home pay for workers. The PAYE regime, together with the company tax regimes, encourage employment. This is important in a competitive global economy where there is a huge level of competition for employment providers.

The programme includes a commitment to decentralisation. There was some disappointment at the slow rate of progress in this area in the past five years but difficulties are being addressed. I trust they will be surmounted. The people of Kilrush would be slow to forgive me if I were not to mention the fact that they will be making a strong case in this regard.

I am glad the programme makes positive mention of the Aer Rianta and other regional airports. The example of Shannon Airport and the wonderful response to the difficulties arising from the events of 11 September and changes in bilateral agreements must be saluted and recognised. There will be difficulties in the next five years. Those of us who have been prepared to take a stand for Shannon in the past will be prepared to do so in the future and will watch very closely any developments in this area.

The health strategy is an integral part of the programme. I am delighted that the planned progress of Ennis General Hospital is moving forward apace. I understand interviews will be held over the next week for the design team. I am delighted that is happening. It would have been electorally advantageous had more progress been made before 17 May, but the commitments entered into before that will be fulfilled under this programme.

The ongoing delay with the Ennis bypass was also of considerable electoral significance. That is a matter we will be watching closely on this side of the House. I see one of my new colleagues is here and he will be watching from the Opposition perspective. I can assure everybody in Government and elsewhere that there will be a strong and effective watching brief from this side. We intend to ensure that project continues. The NRA has already commenced two huge projects in County Clare, the Newmarket bypass which was recently opened in part and its continuation to Shannon. That is only part of the story and we intend to ensure it continues.

I thank the Fine Gael Party for tabling this opportune motion. At the start of the Dáil term it is correct to discuss An Agreed Programme for Government. I am delighted to be able to contribute to that discussion and support the amendment tabled by the Minister. The programme contains 30 pages of closely spaced small print set out in a comprehensive and easily readable form. When the programme is implemented our small country will be a more caring and healthier place that is safer from both the security and environmental points of view.

As an elected Member for the constituency of Dublin South-Central, I must consider this programme from my constituents' viewpoint. Dublin South-Central has areas of the greatest social and economic deprivation in the whole country. The greater part of the constituency comprises areas of hard working, tax paying citizens, who earn around the average industrial wage. There are also areas where there are concentrations of senior citizens and there is a small professional section of the Civil Service in the constituency. All socio-economic groups live in there. I must ask if I can look my constituents in the eye and say this is the programme for Government for which they voted. I must ask if it is clear and deliverable. Since I need to be able to answer those questions in the affirmative, I will consider some of the items in the programme.

Everyone in this country has an underlying desire for peace in Northern Ireland. The programme states we will introduce an all-Ireland travel scheme for pensioners resident in all parts of the island. The free travel scheme, initiated by Charles J. Haughey, was one of the best things ever to happen in this country and this proposal would be of great benefit to pensioners.

It is the stated intention of the Government to have a referendum on the Nice treaty in the autumn and this will be an opportunity for public representatives from Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fáil to work together to explain the benefits of enlargement and address the concerns that were expressed by people before the last referendum on the treaty. I wish the Taoiseach the best of luck in Seville in seeking a declaration on neutrality.

The programme states we will implement Dáil reforms to ensure improved scrutiny of EU legislation and developments. We are very lucky to have three eminent and well-qualified members of the convention on Europe in Deputy John Bruton, Proinsias De Rossa representing the European Parliament and Ray MacSharry for the Government. Yesterday I attended the National Forum on Europe and they set out what is happening in the convention including how the national parliaments can become more relevant to European affairs. In that way the European Union would become more democratic and transparent.

Our intention is to complete the extension of our overseas aid programme and achieve the UN target of 0.7% of GNP on development aid by 2007. That is a target all the people in Ireland and my constituents in Dublin South-Central would accept. Everybody has a great empathy with those who are suffering from wars, AIDS, HIV and famine. There is a duty on those of us who have done well in recent times to help in this regard.

There is a tradition in Dublin South-Central of people joining the Army. I am delighted there have been such major and positive developments within the Army, helped to a great extent by the revenue from property sales, which will be invested in infrastructure and equipment. Members of the Defence Forces are delighted that Irish troops will continue to be available to serve abroad on international peacekeeping missions. It is a great way to train Army personnel and keep up their morale.

The motion is very much tied into the framework of the budgetary process and the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, addressed this last night. I share the Minister's view that we can and should only spend the resources we have. We should not overspend. As the Minister said, we have given a foreign commitment under the EU Stability and Growth Pact to maintain the budget close to in balance or in surplus. This was set out very clearly in our manifesto and was accepted by the electorate.

The programme states that Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats have delivered dramatic reductions in taxation over the past five years. That is self-evident and anybody who canvassed at the general election saw that there were new cars and home improvements, people were fitter and better dressed and there is a better quality of life. This came about as a result of people having more money in their pockets.

Over the next five years the priorities will be to eliminate from the tax net those on the national minimum wage. We will ensure that 80% of all earners only pay tax at the standard rate. Those two items are very important to the constituency of Dublin South-Central where there are people working on wages close to the national minimum wage. As I mentioned earlier, many of my constituents earn around the average industrial wage.

The programme sets out many of our intentions in relation to the very important area of enterprise and employment. Dublin South-Central contains areas like Walkinstown, Crumlin and Drimnagh that have been in existence for about 50 to 60 years. Many people now elderly came into those areas and worked hard. Many of their children went to university, obtained masters and PhD qualifications and are now in the workplace. The Government will encourage multinational and indigenous firms to develop higher productivity and knowledge-based activities, which is the direction we must take. We must develop the types of industries and services where the wages and salaries are higher than they are in the rest of the world.

I am delighted the old age contributory pension will be increased to €200 per week and €150 is the intended amount for social welfare payments. The original question was whether I can go eye-to-eye with my constituents and say An Agreed Programme for Government is what they voted for and that it is clear and deliverable. I believe I can truthfully say it is.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Coveney, Connaughton, Breen, Murphy, Timmins, Boyle and Connolly.

An Agreed Programme for Government has 23 commitments to "improve the level and quality of participation and achievement at every level of education" but only one of these 23 commitments, that is in relation to establishing a national expert service for special needs education, actually has a targeted time frame. The most telling line in An Agreed Programme for Government is that "it is a pledge to keep faith with the people and to honour the mandate given by them". Some manifesto promises, but not all, are included, frequently as watered down, untargeted, immeasurable aspirations.

The Government has committed itself to "further expand adult literacy services". One quarter of our adults have the lowest level of literacy. What happened to the provision of training places for over 70,000 people in five years as promised in the Fianna Fáil manifesto? What happened to the Progressive Democrats promises that "basic literacy at all levels is the most fundamental national education target"? When and how is it intended that this target will be met?

Every county has school buildings in dire conditions. Some in my constituency were recently described as unfit and unsafe. An Agreed Programme for Government pledges to ensure that every school building attains set modern standards. I would have assumed that the Government would have been aware at this stage of the conditions of school buildings around the country but yet, in order to reach this modern standard, children, their parents and their teachers will have to wait for a national assessment and inventory of conditions, without any timescale for completion. Why has the Government limited the "second chance guarantee" to those who left school before completing the junior cycle at second level? This excludes the significant portion that completes the junior cycle but fails to complete the senior cycle and leaves school with very limited qualifications. Are these young adults not equally deserving of a second chance?

The programme contains no commitment to ensuring greater participation in sport, particularly at primary school level. No effort has been made to promote sport among school children so as to create a habit of physical activity at an early age. Indeed, the pledge to work with local authorities to provide facilities such as swimming pools at municipal level threatens to remove the one proper physical education outlet available during school times to children because, as is the case in County Offaly, many swimming pools are not under the control of local authorities and are totally under-funded and in danger of closing.

Commitments to third level education are equally uninspiring. Continued support for advanced research and physical renewal of campuses is welcome but uncosted. There is no mention of tackling drop-out rates in third level education or of trying to increase participation. There is no commitment to tackling payment rates for third level grants, only an increase in eligibility for families with a number of students attending college at the same time. We still lag far behind the EU average for the provision of on-campus accommodation, forcing students to pay exorbitant rents, with over half of them in part-time work so that they can afford to remain in college.

There is no commitment to improve the quality and take-up of science subjects at second level, nor is there a commitment to ensure that all schools are in a position to provide the three main science subjects. No motivation or incentive is provided in the programme to encourage students to go down this route and, indeed, the fiasco of last week's biology paper will probably provide a further disincentive to students picking their subjects for next year.

One glaring omission from the programme is the lack of commitment by the Government to provide outreach facilities from existing third level institutions to areas without these facilities. My county and constituency has one of the poorest take-up rates of third level places in the country. The failure to include such an important commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government leaves very much open to question last night's statement by the Minister for Finance on the Government's commitment to ensuring that all our children can achieve their potential.

Before speaking to the motion, I first congratulate Deputy Michael Ahern on his appointment as Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. I was very disappointed that Cork did not get more than one Minister of State but the Minister of State who has been appointed is well deserving of his portfolio and I genuinely wish him well.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion before the House. This is my first time returning to the Dáil after a general election and I had expected a detailed and ambitious programme for Government, with set targets to be achieved and a timescale laid out. I expected, particularly with the influence of the Progressive Democrats, that things would be approached in a businesslike manner. Even the smallest company or business setting up and looking for the trust of a bank requires a detailed business plan with short, medium and long-term projections and targets so that progress can be measured and monitored.

An Agreed Programme for Government is little more than a list of aspirations, most of them very worthy, but with no figures, targets or timescale to enable us to measure its performance. This time next year we in the Opposition could still be fed with the same aspirations with no target being met. In the section under the heading "Insurance and Road Safety", which affects so many young people, there is an aspiration that "work on the penalty points system will be completed to ensure its implementation at an early stage." That same aspiration, in almost exactly the same words, was expressed three and a half years ago, yet the Government still lacks the confidence to promise to deliver that before the end of the year.

My new responsibility is to provide constructive opposition in the portfolio of Communications, the Marine and Natural Resources. The first failing in An Agreed Programme for Government is that it did not even inform us that communications, the marine and natural resources were to be linked in the same Department. In fact, there is no real mention of communications in the document, apart from a brief mention of broadband access with no timescale and no targets. Under research and development, all the difficult challenges that we face in broadcasting are not even referred to in the document, something about which people working in RTE will be very concerned.

I wish to raise two specific questions in relation to my areas of responsibility. First, why was there a demotion of the marine portfolio? We are an island nation with responsibility for 15% of EU waters, with potential riches in fish and natural resources second to none in Europe. We are facing negotiations on a new Common Fisheries Policy in Europe. Yet, when the Taoiseach announced the Cabinet, there was not even a Minister for the Marine and it was only after intensive lobbying by the marine industry that he changed his mind and re-installed the marine portfolio to the Cabinet table. Second, why is the communications brief linked with the marine and natural resources? There is no real connection. We will have a Department split in half, with one side dealing with communications and broadcasting and all that goes with that, which is substantial, while on the other side the same Department will deal with fisheries, marine and natural resources. This is in a year which may be the most important in decades for Irish fisheries. I do not see the logic or the connection in that regard, but it is clear that there has been a serious downgrading of the marine as a priority area for this Government.

On looking at An Agreed Programme for Government in relation to my areas of responsibility, I found no reference whatsoever to the communications portfolio and there is a half page on the marine and natural resources. Some of the sections on fisheries are encouraging and relevant but there is no reference to the National Maritime College which is being established for the first time, nothing on sail training and the word "safety" is not even mentioned in the document in relation to the sea, although people die every year – needlessly, in my view – because of lack of Government policy in this area. There is still a great deal of work to do in relation to the marine and natural resources and, indeed, communications. I hope the Government gives it greater priority than is highlighted in this document.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on An Agreed Programme for Government set out between Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats. Essentially, this will be the Bible by which this country will live and prosper, or otherwise, over the next five years.

I congratulate Deputy Tom Parlon on his elevation as Minister of State at the Department of Finance and I wish him the very best over the next five years. I have no doubt the challenges which confronted the Government in the last five years will be much more difficult in the next five years, but I hope for all our sakes they are met successfully.

Since my appointment to the Fine Gael front bench as spokesman on regional development, I have taken particular notice of the programme for Government and what it says in that area. As the document reveals, the core objective of the national development plan is the achievement of a balanced regional development. The number one item under that heading states that the Government will complete and implement the national spatial strategy which is aimed at ensuring all the regions develop to their potential. If I had not been around this House for a while, and had not listened to a lot of things over the past five years, I might actually get excited about that development.

The problem is that the Government dodged and failed to bell the cat in the last five years so far as spatial development is concerned. The Government has no proposals for any counterbalance to the unhealthy example of growth that is Dublin. In a country of 4 million inhabitants, that 1.5 million people live in one area does not make sense and shows that we are the most centralised economy in Europe, if not the world.

There needs to be a re-think on the way the economy is dispersed. It is very important that Dublin is strong, and everyone accepts that, but there are many things Government policies can do to ensure that the thousands who do not want to commute to and from the city every day, and do not want to clog up the thoroughfares of the city, do not have to do so, and that those who want to live and work in their localities can do so. This can only be done with a proper, well researched spatial strategy that ensures we have areas of growth big enough to pull away from the terrible attraction that is Dublin.

Since I came to the Dáil, no Government has been able to pinpoint why everything is happening in Dublin and why it cannot happen elsewhere. Unfortunately, we have now reached the stage where, unless we are prepared to take the bull by the horns and provide areas with infrastructure on a scale that is strong enough to overcome that draw towards Dublin, we will make a hames out of this country. We are far down that road.

I hope I am wrong but, from what I hear and see from economists, engineers and project evaluators across the country, the National Development Plan 2000-2006 cannot be delivered in the manner we have been told it will be. I hope that it can be done but I am told that there has been a 25% cost increase. Some of the roads that we are told are so necessary might not be ready for another ten or 15 years.

I welcome the chance to speak in this debate. Fine Gael has been calling for some time for a dedicated Minister for Transport and I welcome the chance to engage with the new Minister. It is unfortunate that it has taken five years for this Government to see how bad the transport situation is. The programme for Government has done nothing to improve this. It is nothing but a wish list, lacks direction and is drawn up by a Government that is unable to implement most of it and is unwilling to recognise the problems the country faces.

The Government states that it will support an agreed survival plan for Aer Lingus in its programme for Government. Nobody on the Opposition benches wants Aer Lingus to fail; it is the Government that has undermined the State airline at every turn. When the rainbow Government was in place, the national carrier was in extremely good health. The Government is not serious about sharing the benefits of the Celtic tiger it inherited five years ago. It is vital that international airports such as Cork and Shannon are developed to their full potential. Proper leadership is needed with regard to restructuring Aer Lingus. There is a situation at Shannon Airport where the only direct flight to New York, the EI 111, is now to start in Dublin before travelling to Shannon and on to New York. This means that cabin crews are to be based in Dublin. There are at present 254 cabin crew based in Shannon and some of these jobs will be transferred to Dublin. Is that progress in the airline business?

Fine Gael is totally committed to Aer Lingus and its staff but this support need not be to the exclusion of communities far removed from the population centres that have done well from the recent boom. Fine Gael believes in protecting the needs of the entire nation and the Government must join with us in ensuring a vibrant rural economy, a strong national airline and modern transport infrastructure.

The programme for Government says that the Government will ensure a low-cost facility is built at pier D in Dublin Airport without delay. However, it does not mention other airports such as Shannon Airport. A terminal was built at Shannon in 1998 costing €30 million that can handle up to 5.5 million passengers per year. At the moment it is handling 2.2 million passengers and is totally under-used. That is what the Government is doing towards regionalisation. I have mentioned what the Government has done in relation to the low cost airlines.

When passengers are out of the sky and on the ground, things get no better. The programme suggests that the Government will fully implement the national roads programme in the national development plan. There is no mention of the economic mess that the plan is in or of the 33 road projects currently on hold, among them the Ennis bypass which has been on hold since last October. One of the largest volumes of traffic in Ireland – about 22,000 cars – passes through Ennis town every day. There is no mention of the delays, the mismanagement and the lack of consultation by this Government in its mishandling of the national development plan.

There is also the problem of the railways. In the programme for Government, there are promises on Luas but no promises on the railways in the western part of the country. The Limerick-Sligo line is in total chaos. The Government won last month's election on the back of a good economy behind which it could hide its lack of pro gress on countless social and economic fronts. It will have nowhere to hide in the months ahead. The programme for Government is a sham. For Irish passengers and commuters it is progress delayed. It will take the next programme for Government to get Ireland moving.

The programme for Government clearly says that the Government will support the positive role of community employment schemes to meet the needs of both the long-term unemployed and the community. The Government has made a great start to this by cutting 7,000 places. I have listened to the Minister's explanation as to how she will put jobs currently with FÁS into health and education. She calls it "mainstreaming" these jobs. This is not such a bad idea provided the Department of Finance is going to properly finance these departments. Unfortunately, the experience is that the health boards will always be short of money. Consequently, these services will suffer.

The big problem that has not been mentioned is how the Minister is to mainstream or finance environmental projects. The town and village renewal schemes carried out in co-operation with local authorities were a great success, and the development of leisure facilities in towns and villages was equally successful. However, the cutbacks in FÁS schemes puts these projects in jeopardy. The natural way to mainstream these jobs, if one was to follow the Minister's line, would be through the local councils. However, this Government introduced the policy document, Better Local Government, without financially compensating the councils. Most councils are now completely broke and have not the financial resources to mainstream these tasks. This is a major crisis for local communities and the Tánaiste, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs and the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs must come up with a scheme to deal with it.

Despite the decrease in unemployment figures to which the Tánaiste constantly referred today, there is still room for a social employment scheme. There are still people who are at a disadvantage or are too old to go into mainstream employment, who want the dignity of having a job and to be able to continue to serve their communities. A solution is possible if the Government has the will to solve it.

The programme for Government continues: "We will move forward the progressive decentralisation of Government Offices and Agencies taking into account the National Spatial Strategy." This is extremely good news for the people of north Cork who were told prior to and during the election that a decision to decentralise to Duhallow and the Charleville area would be taken, but not officially announced during the election in case it would be regarded as a cynical exercise. As the election is now over, this promise will definitely be regarded as a cynical exercise if the Government does not deliver. This area of north Cork meets all the requirements, we were told. Now we await the announcement. As an area which has been seriously disadvantaged during the past five years by the policies of the last Government, particularly because of its neglect of agriculture, it is time it was thrown a lifeline.

The programme for Government frequently refers to justice and the prevention of crime. While it is all very praiseworthy, it is of little use to a community like Newmarket which will no longer have a Garda barracks because it has been condemned. Despite our best efforts and those of the GRA, no funding has been made available. The grandiose talk is of little use to villages scattered throughout Cork and the rest of the country which no longer have a Garda presence. Words, plans and programmes or even well-intentioned waffle will not provide these services, action is what is needed.

I congratulate Deputy Parlon on his appointment to the Office of Public Works, an ironic position for him. Having read the programme for Government, I understand why he decided to take his chances in the floodwaters of Ringsend rather than face the agricultural community, particularly in counties Laois and Offaly. Given that there is very little in the document on agriculture, he has made a wise choice.

It is often said that the Taoiseach speaks in forked tongues and operates in strange ways. I have a grave suspicion about the programme for Government. Although I belong to the group which believes that self-preservation is best served by not being overly critical, the Tánaiste and Taoiseach have handed us a time bomb because the document contains a huge amount of material with which it is possible to find fault with the Government. As I do not wish to be overly negative, I will confine my remarks to the section on agriculture, food and rural development which contains 20 points, five of which I have chosen at random.

The first is the undertaking to "maintain the Government and diplomatic offensive to improve world access and the opening of markets". The Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, knows how successful the last Government was in that area. The document continues: "We will broaden the scope of agricultural education." In the past few years five of the 11 agricultural colleges have been closed. It further undertakes to "encourage the Irish beef industry". This, it states, will be "underpinned by the National Beef Assurance Scheme". The relevant legislation was passed in 1998, yet four years later it has not been implemented.

The Government also promises to

foster a clean and attractive countryside with a high quality of life that can be enjoyed and appreciated by all. As part of this policy we will seek to make the REP scheme more attractive.

Since the REP scheme has come into operation, the number of regulations has increased. Accord ingly, inputs have increased while funding, in the form of the grant for the scheme, has not changed. This hardly amounts to encouragement.

My final point refers to the promise to "agree a series of proposals with farming organisations designed to tackle red-tape". I heard some Government members mention that an appeals office has been set up, yet to the best of my knowledge it has not heard a single appeal. I have covered just five of the 25 points in this section and will not elaborate further on them because my own preservation would not be best served by doing so.

I wish to make a few points about the agriculture and food sector. Many people in the industry have been experiencing difficulties as a result of the inclement weather.

There are just five minutes remaining in the slot which I understand you are sharing with two colleagues, Deputies Boyle and Connolly. Is that correct?

As some of my colleagues appear to have overstepped the mark in terms of time, I regret I will have to conclude. While I would like to discuss the programme for Government in much greater detail, I am sure I will have an opportunity to elaborate on other aspects of it at a later date.

The Minister's predecessor, the Minister, Deputy Cullen, who also had responsibility for flooding, gave a loose commitment to provide funding for flood prevention works in Arklow. Funding was provided for a study which is due to be published shortly and I look forward to the allocation of funding for the proposals it will contain. Many areas of Wicklow, including Baltinglass and Avoca, have suffered from flooding.

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for terminating my contribution.

This programme for Government is a modest little document from a Government that has decided it has much to be modest about. The motion on Private Members' time on the failure to adequately cost the provisions of the document is self-evident and the Green Party is happy to support it. With half the Government benches filled by members of the Progressive Democrats, I am pleased the party has at last achieved equal partner status.

The Opposition will challenge the mythology, which the Government appears willing to perpetuate, that somehow one can collect less taxes while spending more money by magicking the money from other sources, such as public private finance initiatives. The external factors which helped the roller coaster ride that was the economy during the past decade no longer exist. It is not so much that the bubble has burst, but that it has vaporised. The Government will have to reap what it has sown in raising expectations and failing to deliver for the vast majority of people.

In addition, it should not get carried away with the idea that it has received some kind of mandate to carry out this programme. Although it received an electoral bonus in terms of seats, the people gave the parties on this side of the House about 55% of the vote. Therefore, we have as much right to claim we represent the interests of the people as the Government. We are prepared to offer the type of challenge to the sterile and ultimately damaging philosophies it seeks to impose on the people for another five years.

I earnestly ask that the Government take account of the very serious situation at Monaghan General Hospital. The position is that we will not have medical personnel in place, nor have any such vacancies been advertised, to ensure that accident and emergency services will continue to be provided after 1 July, that is, in ten days' time. I am extremely conscious of the very significant mandate given to me by the people to ensure there will be a hospital available to the people of County Monaghan which will deliver basic services, including accident and emergency services.

Monaghan General Hospital has a proud record of service provision and expert care and innumerable lives have been saved due to the professionalism and expertise of its staff. However, the tendency recently has been to denude the hospital of its basic services, thereby forcing patients to bypass it to receive treatment in Drogheda, Navan or Dublin. In cases of major trauma, this places lives at unnecessary risk and, given the hospital's proud record, it is unforgivable.

Best medical practice indicates that the first hour, the golden hour, after a major accident is most critical and often determines whether a patient will live or die. A two or three hour delay is totally illogical when the previously adopted policy of the North-Eastern Health Board requires that a fully resourced and staffed accident and emergency department be based at Monaghan General Hospital. Here, a patient's condition could be immediately stabilised prior to a decision being taken on possible transfer elsewhere.

In view of its unique geographic location in the Border area, Monaghan General Hospital is in a position to extend its services to its natural hinterland which straddles the Border and embraces south Tyrone and Armagh. The CAWT initiative with the North-Eastern Health Board presents us with an exciting and imaginative vista which envisages services being provided on a cross-Border basis. The people of County Monaghan have a right to convenient access to the highest standards of health care in a rural setting. Population rather than economics should be the sole arbiter of this. On behalf of the people of County Monaghan, I commend to the Government the urgent requirement and basic need for a fully staffed, fully equipped and properly funded general hospital in Monaghan with proper accident and emergency facilities.

I am pleased to be here this evening to speak on the motion. The previous Government's record over the past five years provides a firm basis on which further progress, as set out in the new programme for Government, will be achieved. The new programme for Government is specific and targeted. It sets out key priorities for action aimed at building on the successes of the previous Government over the past five years. The Government programme clearly sets out its priorities with regard to improving the quality and effectiveness of public services and delivering on major capital programmes.

The level of investment in the health service since 1997 has been significant and is now at the EU average. The new programme for Government re-emphasises the Government's commitment to implementing the key aspects of the health strategy.

The Government has already shown its commitment to those on low incomes. In the period 1997-2002 social welfare spending increased by over 60% to just over €9 billion this year. The proportion of our population experiencing consistent poverty, as targeted by the national anti-poverty strategy, has fallen dramatically and there have been substantial reductions in unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment. The new programme commits the Government to reducing this even further.

Over the past five years the Government made education a top priority. This was underpinned by an unprecedented level of funding. In our new programme for Government we will continue to implement policies which will ensure all our children can achieve their potential. These policies will have particular regard to children with special needs and children and adults from disadvantaged areas.

The current programme for Government undertakes to "address Ireland's infrastructural deficit in a coherent and determined way over the next five years". It states, "New methods of financing major capital programmes are required which must take account of the need to maximise efficiency, delivery, value for money and appropriate risk transfer across multi-annual programmes." In order to achieve this the Government proposes to establish, under the auspices of the NTMA, the National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, to finance major public projects and evaluate financing options for public-private partnership, PPP, projects. The NDFA will enable the Government to apply commercial standards in evaluating financial risks, costs and options associated with projects. As a result it will ensure the best financial package is availed of in each instance. The NDFA may compete with, but will not substitute for, private financing of PPP projects. It will work as an additional mechanism to be used to achieve value for money and risk transfer in PPP projects. Where significant once-off revenues accrue to the State through the sale of State assets or the restructuring of the Central Bank, we will use these revenues to create a national transformation fund. This fund will also be managed by the NTMA and used to finance multi-annual infrastructural projects. Work on the establishment of the NDFA is already under way. Primary legislation will be required. The Minister for Finance expects to be in a position shortly to seek Government approval to prepare it. It is hoped to have the agency operational by 1 January 2003.

Our economic prospects remain favourable, provided we continue to pursue the correct policies and secure our competitiveness. This Government's policies offer the best prospect of meeting the challenges which face us. I am in no doubt that the economy is in a healthy state and well positioned to take advantage of the improvement in the international economy as the year progresses in order that we can return to our potential GDP growth level of around 5% from 2003 onwards, but this is not to say we can take success for granted. As a small open economy, it is very important that the economy remains competitive, particularly as we no longer have domestic control of exchange and interest rate policy. That is the reason social partnership has been so important to our economic success. We must ensure costs evolve in line with productivity. It is crucial that an inflationary mentality does not take hold. Social partnership is key in this context.

The previous Government achieved much in the past five years. The record speaks for itself. Our new programme for Government is specific and targeted and will result in even more success and prosperity over the next five years for the economy and the country as a whole. I urge the House to support the amended motion.

I call Deputy Paul Kehoe who I understand is sharing time with Deputies Damien English and Richard Bruton.

I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, on his appointment. Farmers in counties Laois and Offaly must be very disappointed he did not take the agriculture portfolio. I also congratulate my constituency colleague, Deputy Browne, on his appointment as a Minister of State.

The Government's agenda for the future is very disappointing. My expectations have been sadly dashed. When the programme for Government was being prepared I thought there would be something very exciting in it, but we are back to the same old programme of planning for the future. I thought the Government would have learned something from being in government for the past five years. All kinds of promises were made before the general election about what would be done if it got back into power, but looking through the programme the calculator used to add up the figures was not functioning properly. Two phrases resound through the document –"we believe" and "we are committed". I hope the commitment and belief expressed are carried through in the future.

The development of a world class health service is one of the core objectives and I am eager to see its implementation. According to the Fianna Fáil manifesto the waiting lists were to have been eliminated in two years, but there is no reference to such a period in the programme for Government. What has happened to this aspiration? Perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, can explain this, or the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, when he next comes into the House. It appears that it will be only a matter of days before people will get the treatment they need in regard to hip replacements, heart surgery and cataract operations. With my colleagues on the Opposition benches, I will be keeping a close eye on how the Government handles the issue of health care.

Perhaps the Minister for Health and Children will be able to visit my home county of Wexford in the sunny south east because he has not yet been there. I would like to bring him to St. John's Geriatric Hospital where a new hospital has been promised on three occasions, yet not even a spade has been stuck in the ground. Perhaps the Taoiseach or Tánaiste or anyone else will come down to turn the first sod. The people of County Wexford raised £250,000 for a CAT scan machine to be in operation from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., five days a week. In May 2001 I got a guarantee from the Minister for Health and Children that the machine would be operated to its full capacity, but the situation has not yet improved. I look forward to a resolution of such matters in the near future.

The programme for Government states:

We are committed to helping to improve the level and quality of participation and achievement at every level of education . . . We will ensure that every school building attains set modern standards.

We could bring the Government to County Wexford or anywhere else in the country to see the poor state of our schools. Since I became involved in political life, an inordinate number of people have come to me on behalf of schools waiting for more teachers, including remedial, extensions and so on.

The proposal to help carers is long overdue. It is about time that recognition was given to the hard work done in regard to the care of the elderly and those with disabilities. I hope the Government will give such people the recognition they deserve.

There is much work to be done over the next five years, but the programme for Government does not inspire confidence that enough will be achieved.

I am thankful for the opportunity to speak – I would love an hour to do so. I am not impressed by the programme for Government. I find it amusing if nothing else.

The election is over.

Is it over? The election started two weeks ago. I have little faith in the document—

(Interruptions.)

Will I get a chance to speak?

The Deputy without interruption, please.

Have some manners. It is his first speech.

The Minister is very friendly in the corridors. It is a pity he could not bring his friendliness in here.

He should have some manners.

I have little faith in the document, which begins with talk of the opportunity to build a fairer society of equal opportunity and sustainable prosperity. I know the Tánaiste thinks this Government has been in existence for only two weeks, but Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats have been in Government for the past five years. Why do they want to plan only now for a fairer society? Did the past five years not present the opportunity to do so? They have hardly realised that an opportunity exists only now.

There are many examples of unfairness across the country and in my county of Meath. The programme will not alleviate the many problems that exist. One example concerns motor insurance and young people. I pay over €2,500 for insurance and I have worked with lads who pay €4,500. I do not believe this plan will solve the crisis. Under the heading "Insurance and Road Safety", I read about the aspiration to make the insurance market more consumer-friendly. Does this mean that the person taking my cheque for €2,500 will smile at me?

Under the heading "Railways", I read that a blueprint and study are on the way. This does not excite me. It does not do much for the 6,000 or 7,000 commuters leaving my home town of Navan every morning to travel for two and a half hours to work.

I have little faith in this programme because of its lack of measurable goals. An Agreed Programme for Government states: "This Programme for Government is both clear in intent and specific in detail." This is another joke. The programme is the opposite; it is of doubtful content and far from specific in detail. A prime example of this is in the first couple of pages of the foreword, which states that the Government pledges to transform the country it found in 1997. Into what will it be transformed? This is not very clear or specific. If we are to go on the past five years, I fear into what the country will be transformed.

I fear potential headlines in 2006 and 2007 will be as follows: "Infrastructure projects being bypassed instead of the towns"; "All State assets sold to pay off national debts"; "Spiralling inflation leaves tourists as rare as leprechauns"; "National toll roads to introduce car-parking charges on the clogged up M50"; "Business parks left idle as multinationals flee the country"; and "Farm tours being organised for farmers who have no farms of their own." The only bypass my town of Navan will receive is a jobs bypass.

The Deputy must want to go down to 21 seats.

Another headline might read: "Insurance simply not affordable." The Minister is lucky there are no barracks in County Meath. I am 24 years of age—

Deputy McCreevy saved the Minister, Deputy Michael Smith.

I am not a pessimist by nature and it does not do me any good to speak like this, but let us be fair. If we compare what the Government of 1997 promised to the promises of this Government, there is little difference. Talk is cheap. Paper never refuses ink.

It is not too late to set real goals and agendas and to stop shooting for the stars. There is no way anybody will get everything right, but there are valuable lessons to be learnt from the last programme for Government. Sadly, we have not done so.

The Taoiseach will admit that he did not get everything right, but I will not hold that against him. He produced a document with no stated, achievable goals, with nothing to fall back on when things go wrong or no real cast-iron guarantees to our young, old, healthy or sick. In light of this, will the Government rework its programme? When it does so I will be the first to congratulate it. We want a programme that shows real accountability. Let the people see that we in Dáil Éireann want to make a difference.

It is revealing that the programme for Government, in addressing the issue of economic growth, states that it sees "low inflation, responsible fiscal policies and effective investment policies" as central to this. It is revealing because, on all those fronts, the Government has been a disaster.

An example is low price inflation. Price inflation is currently running at double the EU average. IBEC and the Minister's spouse in IBEC are telling the Government that inflation rates are increasing at an alarming rate and that it is becoming embedded in our economy. We have already seen that we are experiencing difficulties in critical markets. Inflation is not something to be smirked at. It is not something vague like the CSO records. We are talking about real jobs. Already, we are seeing a decline in manufacturing employment. In the past 12 months, manufacturing is down 1%. Tourism is following suit. We are seeing real signs of struggle on the competitiveness front. The Government that tells us low inflation is a key issue in the programme for Government is misguided. It does not mention low inflation again in the programme. The first and last thing it has to say about inflation is in that sentence. It is not surprising since the Government's record is so poor.

The Government also says that responsible fiscal policies are crucial to growth. This is the Government which, last year, allowed spending to grow at three times the level of growth of revenue. This year it has trumped that. In the first five months, spending has grown by 27%, double its own estimate. Furthermore, taxation revenue was down in the first five months. The Government says that its record will stand or fall on fiscal rectitude and a responsible approach to public finances.

Where were our Progressive Democrats colleagues when decisions on public spending were being taken? Where were they when, in the first five months, agricultural spending was up 73% on this time last year? Department of the Environment and Local Government spending is up 46% on this time last year while Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation spending is up 54% on this time last year. Health spending is up by 29%. The so-called big spender of health is trailing behind these other Departments.

We had to give money to taxis, Eircom funds—

Where did the Government get the money? In last year's budget, they had the opportunity to face up honestly to the fact that they were not capable of managing the deficit. What did you do?

(Interruptions.)

You dipped into the public—

If Deputy Richard Bruton addressed his remarks through the Chair, he might not invite interruption.

These are the people who—

The Deputy should address his remarks through the Chair.

I am sure the Ceann Comhairle knows the Government concealed the incipient deficit in its spending in the budget earlier this year by raiding, to the tune of €2 billion, various funds in the Central Bank and of PAYE workers who put their money into social insurance. The Government has brought forward corporation tax to try clothe its nakedness.

In terms of health, the Government is proposing to spend €7 billion extra over the coming five years. That is to what the Department of Health and Children says the national strategy amounts. What has the Government done? It said that it is committed to the national strategy, but it will not provide a budget framework. It will not do so in spite of having lectured the Opposition on its failure to provide a budget framework during the recent election campaign. It has the resources of the Department of Finance at its disposal, but the Minister did not even ask his officials in the Department of Finance to cost this programme. The Government is flying by the seat of its pants.

We have got used to this practice. The Minister can, without a blush, say "We do not bother to cost our programmes. We may implement them when the time comes. These were things over which we went to the country and made solemn pledges to the electorate, but they do not matter now. We will just have to wait and see what turns up next."

The Deputy let Deputy Jim Mitchell off the hook.

He had to put a halter on him.

The reality is that nothing will turn up next.

The Minister of State at the Department of Finance told us how investment was so important to this Government. The Government has had huge cost overruns in project after project to which it was committed. Despite that, not one re-evaluation of any of those programmes was undertaken. The Minister tells us he is interested in efficient spending. Instead, all he produces is institutional claptrap about three or four new agencies that will be set up to produce and manage funds. He does not look at whether we are achieving anything for this spending.

Regarding health, the Minister for Finance admits that, having doubled spending on the health service, he still cannot see any improvement in accident and emergency departments, improvements for carers caring in the home or speech therapy services for children who have been waiting four years for them.

Why has the Government not committed itself in this programme to evaluating the reason it is getting public spending so wrong? It is being allowed to rise inexorably. More and more is spent, yet poorer and poorer services are being delivered. These are the issues we expect to see addressed in a serious programme for Government. Priorities and ideas for reform should be set out. Where is the reform in the antiquated education structures, health boards and transport infrastructure? There is no reform in this programme for Government.

Éamon Ó Cuív: It was a success though.

Mr. R. Bruton: It lacks vision and is about as exciting as a reheated lunch. That is what it is, the old manifesto of 1997 reheated and put out again. A big bulldog clip of pious hopes pulls it all together.

Mr. M. Smith: The bulldog knocked out Fine Gael.

Mr. R. Bruton: It contains nothing specific. There are no targets. As Deputy English said in his maiden speech, it is far from clear and specific. It is opaque and vague. It is what we are used to seeing from across the floor.

Amendment put.

Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, Barry.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Connolly, Paudge.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Tony.

Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Finneran, Michael.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Seán.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie. McDowell, Michael.

Tá–continued

McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.McHugh, Paddy.Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Feargháil, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donoghue, John.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Flynn, Noel.

O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Power, Seán.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G.V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Costello, Joe.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Crowe, Seán.Cuffe, Ciarán.Deasy, John.Deenihan, Jimmy.Durkan, Bernard J.English, Damien.Enright, Olwyn.Ferris, Martin.Gogarty, Paul.Healy, Séamus.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Howlin, Brendan.Kehoe, Paul.Lynch, Kathleen.McGinley, Dinny.

McGrath, Finian.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Olivia.Morgan, Arthur.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Séamus.Penrose, Willie.Quinn, Ruairi.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and S. Power; Níl, Deputies Durkan and Stagg.
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
Barr
Roinn