Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I thank and congratulate the Labour Party on this motion. The issues referred to by previous speakers were well known and well heralded over the past five years. It was known to all economists and those studying the markets that this economy was running into difficulties, that we were becoming uncompetitive and losing jobs to lower cost economies. Donegal, for instance, lost 3,000 jobs and this is a matter for the new Tánaiste to get her teeth into. When the question of why this was happening was asked, the reply was that we were a high wage economy, trading in the top drawer.

We should recall the second Boston tea party some years ago. There were a succession of Boston tea parties but we have forgotten about the original. The second took place when we were basing ourselves on Boston instead of Berlin. Obviously, we failed to recognise that we were living in Europe. In the intervening period, every constituency has lost jobs. We have lost jobs not only to low wage economies but to competitive economies.

The reason is that our economy was driven by one thing. We have all spoken of this — why was nothing done? Nothing was done because the Government gained in revenue. Every time a house increased in price, the Government got more in VAT and stamp duty. Everything in the garden was rosy and it was happy. The Government reminded me of a hang-glider who had soared to the highest peaks. Suddenly, the thermals were no longer there and everything is frozen. We are now in a serious situation where young people in our constituencies seek housing to rent or buy. They cannot afford to buy at today's prices and this applies to a whole generation. I have not seen that for at least 15 years. A large group of people cannot afford this and they will not buy because they recognise the pitfalls.

The Government decided to place all its eggs in one basket. When everything in the garden was rosy, it was fine and the Government had billions of euro in surpluses. The Government did not know where to spend it; at least, we do not know where it was spent and it is all gone. We have a shortage of school places and hospital beds, despite co-location and other antics to deflect public attention from reality.

The lending industry inflated the economy more, much as it did to the agricultural economy in the 1980s. In the 1980s we ended up with negative equity on all kinds of farm property. After ten of the best years the country experienced in terms of growth, we end up with the possibility that the bubble could burst completely. We look at locked up housing estates in the countryside where development has ceased. The economy cannot sustain that for too long. There must be movement in the market. If that means prices must drop, this should be done but let us not delude ourselves.

When the Government should have taken action, it could have taken action on credit control. The yarn has been put out that, because of the EU, the Government could do nothing, and that property became attractive because of low interest rates. That did not stop — and does not now stop — Governments in member states from introducing credit controls. There is no reason why people could not expect to buy a house at reasonable value, instead of being ripped off.

It is not very wise for people to suggest that holding on to the houses for long enough will result in someone paying for it. It does not work that way, nor should it.

I refer to some of the daft notions that visited the Government over the past number of years. Let us consider e-voting as an economic example. Where would one get a lunatic scheme like that? Not only did the Government introduce it, it stuck with it. Deputy Noel Dempsey was the father, then poor Deputy Cullen was the surrogate father who pursued it afterwards.

See this speech in context