Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Mr. Wright is quite emphatic in his report on this point when he says, "the Budget essentially paid the bills for these dominant processes". On page 28, the report states:

Had departmental and ministerial advice to Cabinet at the start of the budgetary cycle been accepted and sustained, Ireland would have been better positioned to deal with the current economic challenges.

At the same time, however, Mr. Wright criticises the Department on numerous levels. While he states on page 6 that he does not accept the notion that the Department was not fit for purpose, he also refers to technical deficiencies in terms of economic skills, there being too many generalists among the staff and the approach being numbers driven rather strategically driven. On the other hand, in his letter to the Minister of the time, the late Brian Lenihan, he spoke about how impressed he was with the staff and the broad base of understanding within the Department.

Was social partnership used, in a way, as a scapegoat? I find some of the views within the report contradictory. In one breath, it is said that it is fit for purpose, but in another numerous other situations are outlined, such as the fact that the expansionary monetary policy was not highlighted and there was no proper strategic analysis of construction. It is not stated explicitly in the report, but it is fair to say that the Department was devoid of skills in terms of any understanding of banking and the credit bubble. Yet, the table on page 22 which refers to the difference between what was provided by the fiscal framework by the officials and the Minister in June every year to the Cabinet-----