Cutting the number of junior Ministers, the bonfire of the quangos, child benefit as a red-line issue, forcing banks to absorb ECB interest rate rises, no further cuts to public service pay, 105,000 jobs from the NewERA deal, renegotiating the EU-IMF deal and burning the bondholders — all were high-profile, highly popular election slogans and are now abandoned or stuck in reverse after only five weeks. They are merely a small section from a long and growing list of abandoned pledges on which the Government got elected. The Taoiseach seems to be preparing the ground for another U-turn.
Leaders’ Questions
Is there a question to the Taoiseach?
I am coming to it. On another high profile pledge, the much hyped but now hidden jobs budget, perhaps this morning the Taoiseach can give some clarity. Is it a budget, is it a supplementary budget, an initiative, an economic stimulus or simply a revenue-neutral press release?
Or a way of trying to undo the damage of Fianna Fáil.
I am surprised at Deputy Martin although I suppose should not be. He read out a list of issues that are important for the Government, which is one month in office. He did not mention that the Government of which he was a member lost 250,000 jobs during its term of office.
Year zero.
He did not mention that he refused to come in here and deny that the IMF had reached our shores in dealing with our economic sovereignty.
Deputy Martin did not know and he was in Cabinet.
A Deputy
They destroyed the country.
Deputy Martin did not mention, as he complained yesterday, that when the banks unilaterally increased interest charges last year, he did nothing about it.
I will say this to him in respect of State boards. I looked at this question because the Government of which he was a member, right up to the day of the change of Government, made appointments to State boards.
It stuffed them.
I admit that all Governments over the years, in the interregnum period——
Including those of which the Taoiseach was a member.
——yes——
Jackie's family.
——between the Dáil being dissolved and the new Government being formed, made appointments, but I raised it with my predecessor on a number of occasions that there should not be any appointments in that period. The change introduced by the Government will mean that persons of credibility and potential who have something to offer State boards can, through the websites, indicate their expressions of interest and will go before the appropriate Oireachtas committee to discuss their policy and their vision of what they want to do.
Frankly, as to the move to deal with employment and job creation, to have a row as to whether it is a budget or a jobs initiative is a matter on which I will tell Deputy Martin something.
The Government is having the row. The Taoiseach is rowing with Labour.
With 440,000 out of work, a 14% unemployment rate, the person who gets a job as a plumber, plasterer, chippy or whatever will not be worried whether it is a budget or a jobs initiative. He or she will be proud and privileged to have the dignity of going to a job and being able to contribute to society.
I stated yesterday that the jobs initiative to be announced by the Minister for Finance in the House will be revenue-neutral and will add a stimulus to the indigenous economy to give confidence, hope and encouragement to people to spend what has been saved and get back into the jobs market. Does Deputy Martin expect the Government to sit idly by and deny reality and truth, as he did for four years?
(Interruptions).
Too much reality and truth, Deputy Martin walked straight into the wall.
A week ago, the Taoiseach stated that next month the Minister for Finance will introduce a jobs budget. Yesterday on the floor of the House the Taoiseach accused the Opposition of using that phrase and denied that there would be a jobs budget next May. I asked a simple question: will there be or will there not be a budget next May?
I changed the term to "jobs initiative" because some people seemed to get the view that this would be a sort of end of year budget for the following year.
The Labour Party.
There were many comments about increased charges and raising taxes on people.
From the Minister.
Fianna Fáil's fingerprints are all over it.
That is not the purpose of what we are doing here. From that point of view, what the Minister for Finance will announce to the House on behalf of the Government is a series of initiatives to stimulate our indigenous economy, to promote confidence, to provide opportunities for people to go to work, to provide opportunities for employers to be able to get credit to invest in their businesses and to stimulate the national economy. I am sure Deputy Martin will agree with that. Whether one calls it an initiative or a budget, my view is that this is not a conventional budget such as the Minister for Finance will present at the end of the year following a comprehensive analysis and review of how spending is being conducted.
So it is not a budget.
Deputy Martin should wait the few weeks until he sees and agrees with the initiatives it contains. People in his own constituency would be happy to go to work. Whether it is called an initiative or a budget, makes no difference to them.
A well-executed U-turn.
Deny reality and truth — sin a dúirt an Taoiseach nóiméad ó shin. I rith an toghcháin, thug siad a lán gealltanas. Ó shin amach, áfach, ó tháinig sé i gcumhacht, tá siad, mar a tharla inné, ag briseadh gealltanas. Yesterday, the Taoiseach chalked up yet another U-turn. However he put it this morning, yesterday he abandoned his jobs budget commitment.
Yesterday we learned that the forecast for growth had been cut to 0.5%. How much growth is that? Yesterday, we learned that the Government's budgetary targets——
This is Leaders' Questions.
——-of reducing the deficit by 2014 will be missed and will not even be met by 2016. The Taoiseach stated not another red cent would go to the banks. He stated that the bondholders would pay and then he gives them €24 billion. He stated he would reverse the cut in the minimum wage and now he states the Government needs the agreement of the EU and the IMF. He stated the Government would review the universal social charge and now they are imposing a bigger burden on those on lower and middle incomes and those on welfare. He promised to put the EU-IMF——
Could we have a question?
I am coming to that. He promised to put interest payments on the agenda at the EU summit and then he backed down and took it off. He came here and boasted that such was his initiative. Now we are being told through the media that there will be a revised memorandum of understanding published on Friday. There is no doubt in my mind that this will contain more cuts and austerity.
The Taoiseach inherited an economic crisis created by the previous Government, but Fianna Fáil is not in government now. The Taoiseach is in government. He is making the political choices. With respect, he is making the wrong political choices.
Could we have the question?
How does the Taoiseach continue to lumber the Irish people with a colossal debt to reinforce and keep buying into an EU-IMF deal which we cannot afford and how does he hope to continue to cut his way out of recession when it is patently obvious that this situation is not sustainable?
I do live in the land of truth and reality and, in fact, there are elements of the first with which the Deputy could deal. He mentioned the review of the universal social charge. The Government signed off on a detailed and comprehensive spending analysis of every Department and for the first time ever we will get a real view of value for the taxpayers' money being spent by Ministers. That is the reason the Department of Finance has been split into two separate Departments and the Minister, Deputy Howlin, will be dealing with issues of public expenditure and reform. When we prepare the details of the budget for 2012, the universal social charge will be included in that review, as is stated in the programme for Government. Deputy Adams will realise that we cannot review it until the comprehensive analysis has been carried out.
The Deputy also referred to the minimum wage, which is a commitment in the programme for Government. There are two views on this issue. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation could make the change by ministerial order or primary legislation. Our advice is that it is best to introduce primary legislation because it may be challenged. However, the minimum wage is not the only issue that arises and restrictions on employers and the freeing up of the labour market will be addressed in conjunction with it. A review is due in two weeks time and when that review becomes available the Minister will act on these issues as a package.
On the reduction in projected growth rates, this prediction came from a comprehensive analysis of 57 countries conducted by the IMF. It criticised the US and others for not doing enough but indicated that Europe was making progress. I can confirm that yesterday's meeting between the Ministers for Finance and the troika was a very good one and it is only right and appropriate, and expected, that the memorandum of understanding will be updated this weekend once the troika has completed its work and the discussions with the Ministers have concluded. As the Deputy will be aware, projections for growth are difficult to confirm even six months ahead, never mind three years. This is why, unlike the last Government, this Government recognises that we cannot cut and tax our way to prosperity. We have to develop a strategy for growth on the other side because growing our economy is the only way we can provide stimulus for people to get back to work, grow the economy, increase exports and ensure the value of what we produce in our country goes towards providing the kind of economy we want.
From the Deputy's initial comment about muidne i gcumhacht agus ag briseadh gealltanas, táimid ag insint na fírinne duitse agus do chuile duine eile. He can be sure that whatever further discoveries we make in opening the doors of Government and letting in the light, we will tell the Irish people the true scale of the legacy we have inherited.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
The Taoiseach should come here. I heard about the revised memorandum of understanding from the media. I did not hear it from him. I think he is missing the point. I am genuinely trying to understand his negotiating strategy. I am trying to come to terms with how he is trying to achieve the objectives he has set out. I do not understand it and I am sure the Irish people do not understand it. We need to know who is going to pay for this. Is it going to be the rich, those who earn over €100,000 — I know that does not mean rich — or those in respect of whom we can introduce a new third tax band? Is it going to be low and middle income earning families or the 500,000 people who are on the dole? Will it be people on social welfare and all the small people who elected the Taoiseach to bring about change? He is doing exactly the same as the crowd on my left when it was in government but the Irish people sorted that party out.
Thank you, Deputy.
We need to know who is going to pay for this. Try to explain this in terms that a wooden head like me can understand.
Do not be saying that.
What is the Taoiseach's negotiating strategy?
Far be it for me to put a title on any Deputy. The Government's programme is in three parts, namely, growth, jobs initiatives and a comprehensive review of how our money is spent.
What happened to the five point plan?
Five became three.
In respect of the European position, wooden head or none, we have already set out our view that there should be an interest rate reduction. The heads of Government meeting in Brussels agreed with my suggestion that, as the bank stress tests had not been completed in Ireland, it would only be appropriate that the Ministers for Finance should deal with the issue when the truth of those stress tests became available. The recent informal meeting in Budapest was blown slightly off course by the fact that the Portuguese Government has applied for funding under the scheme. In respect of the EFSM agreed from 2013, it is important that its design is appropriate for Ireland in respect of its capacity to provide medium to long-term funding for the country. That must be the emphasis of the European dimension to these discussions. Far from straying from what we said, we are targeting specifically the elements of the programme for Government we have set out.
Deputy Adams does not have a wooden head and he is raising this for political purposes. We have already stated that where savings occur, we will be looking at the lower paid element of the public service and lower paid people. The best antidote to unemployment is a job and the opportunity to have a career and that is where the Government is focused. I remind him that the budgetary presentations we made last year proposed to protect the blind, children, disabled and pensioners. I do not take it from him that he is even suggesting this Government——
The Government has not reversed one of them.
We have not introduced a budget yet.
No interruptions.
——would not focus on the underprivileged, the vulnerable or the isolated.
I call Deputy Ross.
On a point of order——
There are no points of order on Leaders' Questions.
May I raise a point of order?
No point of order. I call Deputy Ross.
Am I not allowed to make a point of order?
There is no point.
No, a point of order is not provided for on Leaders' Questions. Please give Deputy Ross an opportunity to contribute. Deputy Adams can raise matters on the Order of Business.
Quiet over there, Gerry; this is the real Opposition.
The nation has been looking to the Taoiseach to reverse some of the malpractices put into effect by the Fianna Fáil Deputies sitting in front of me. In response to a question from the Leader of the Opposition, the Taoiseach stated that for legal reasons he is unable to reverse the orgy of State appointments made by the previous Government as it left office. That is not good enough. These appointments ought to be reversed even if it means changing the law and if the Attorney General has given advice, the Taoiseach must not hide behind it. He must change the law because the quango culture and the culture of cronyism is still alive and well. I, for one, was particularly disappointed with this morning's media reports——
A question, please.
——that the proposed solution to this problem was not just the advertising of these posts, which appeared to be cosmetic, but to interview the chairmen of various semi-State bodies in front of an Oireachtas committee. The problem is that the applicants can be utterly ignored by the Minister in charge, who can pick one of his or her pals just as Fianna Fáil did in the past.
Has the Deputy a question?
We do not want that to happen.
Let us try it out.
This is Leaders' Questions.
The background is important in terms of cronyism. Can the Taoiseach confirm that we will continue to have a system of political appointments dressed up with some sort of popular input?
There should be some sense of understanding by those who were approached by former Ministers in the final two or three days before the Government changed that they would not accept their appointments if they had any sense of call it what you want. I do not want to go down the road of involving the Government in legal technicalities in removing people from State boards, which is not worthwhile. If the Government was still involved in six months' time in legal wrangles in removing person X from board Y, the Deputy would be very unappreciative of the efforts we had tried to make in the spending of public money. I have set out — I have spoken to the Tánaiste and all Ministers about this — that persons to be appointed as chairpersons of boards, taking into account the need to have a proper gender balance, should have credibility, competence and vision in what they will bring to an appointment. Expressions of interests will be invited on the websites of Departments in respect of a responsibility or a board under their aegis. On the recommendation of the Government, the person to be appointed as chairperson will appear before the appropriate Dáil committee to be set up shortly to present his or her credentials and what he or she will bring to the board in question. There will be a discussion of the policy initiatives he or she will bring to it. I must assume a person who will appear before a Dáil committee will be competent and have the credentials worthy of the appointment. I must assume also that somebody who does not measure up will run the risk of not being approved by the Government for the position.
There is one minute remaining to put a supplementary question.
It appears committees will have absolutely no powers of veto; therefore, the power of appointment will rest with the politician, the Minister in charge, and that political appointments will survive under this veneer.
May I ask the Taoiseach a second question? This is very important in the light of what has happened.
The Deputy is not allowed to ask a second question. He can follow up on the first one.
How will this rest when appointments are being made to the banks because the last Government typically appointed its cronies and pals, ex-Fianna Fáil Ministers and others to the boards of banks, on which there are vacancies? Will the people concerrned have to appear before Oireachtas committees also to be interviewed and asked questions to see if they are competent and not just political hacks?
What we will bring to State board appointments is transparency that has never before been seen. As I said yesterday, I understand the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission, under the chairmanship of the Ceann Comhairle, is anxious to see the work of committees being televised in order that there will be transparency and an assessment of competence by the people. I assume that if a person nominated by a Minister to the chairmanship of a State board does not measure up in terms of his or her performance at the committee, the Government will have to take this into account in giving its approval.
The boards of banks are entirely different from State boards. The Minister for Finance will bring the Nyberg report before the House shortly and make a number of announcements on the governance of the boards of banks. This is an appalling situation, as the Deputy is only too well aware, and changes must be made. They have been referred to in the newspapers this morning by the Financial Regulator and will have to take place. Obviously, the cost to the electorate has been enormous in terms of the recklessness shown and a lack of capacity to do what was right and fair. As was said, they were in a frenzy. There will be changes in the governance of banks which will be presented as part of the Nyberg report when it is brought before the House in the near future.
When the issue of FÁS arose, in which the Deputy was involved as a Member of the other House, the Committee of Public Accounts was unable to call witnesses to give evidence on the facts. That must change. In so far as the Government is concerned, it is acutely aware of the necessity to ensure accountability and transparency and the taking of responsibility on all these issues. This will require change and I am looking at how best this can be achieved.