Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)

The Minister for Finance has told us that finance is the lifeblood of the economy, while Deputy Bruton described it as the oil in the machinery. I agree with that. The purpose of this Bill is to restore confidence in the financial services industry and to secure the banking sector. Some members of the public will be unhappy with what we are doing, but it is important to remember that this is not just about saving banks, it is about pension funds, people's savings, businesses big and small, and jobs.

I disagree with the Minister on some points. I do not agree that the main problem with the banking sector is liquidity. I think there is a capital problem as well. The banks have squandered their capital on mistaken loans to the property sector and I really wonder whether, in all cases, their assets exceed their liabilities. I will be interested to see how the Minister has been assured of that and how he has come to the conclusion that their assets reach €80 billion.

I also have some concerns which should not go unmentioned. I have a real concern that the taxpayer will be guaranteeing interbank loans. It is not clear to me that there is anything stopping a bank from borrowing €1 billion or €2 billion tomorrow from the Bank of Abu Dhabi or the Bank of China and then lending that out to people who cannot afford to repay those loans.

The Taoiseach has described the purpose of this Bill as going back to business as usual, but we do not need business as usual — we need to change the way we do business in this country. We need to do that through better regulation of the banking sector, although that is not provided for in the Bill. We need better oversight and I want to see more in that regard. We need to know how this will impact on the cost of borrowing. It would appear to me that if we are potentially taking on these liabilities, the cost of borrowing on behalf of the taxpayer will be higher. We will borrow €10 billion this year and probably the same next year, but will the cost of that borrowing be higher? If so, what will the cost be to the taxpayer?

I am disappointed that there are no consequences or punishment for some of the people who are, in part, responsible for this situation — bankers who made inappropriate loans, the Central Bank to a certain extent, and also Ministers who had the opportunity to act to rein in the financial sector, but did not do so for various reasons.

My final concern relates to what has happened here today. Our frontbench met this morning to discuss what was going on, yet there was no indication at all that legislation would be required. We only found that out at Taoiseach's Questions at approximately 4.30 p.m. We were summoned back here at 6 p.m., 7.30 p.m. and 9 p.m. It was suggested by the Taoiseach that we should discuss a draft Bill that had not even been published and we returned here at 10 p.m. We have been told that markets and banking operate on confidence, but I do not have a lot of confidence in a Government that does its business that way. We finally got the Bill — and it is still warm, believe it or not — at 9.45 p.m. We have been asked to read it but it is like being asked to read the Lisbon treaty in 15 minutes. Apart from being stand-alone legislation, it also amends four other Acts: the Competition Act, two Finance Acts and the Companies Act.

We have a national crisis and on this side of the House we are doing our best to offer responsible and patriotic opposition. As a result, and because this Bill changes other legislation, we are by and large supporting this Bill on trust. The Government has asked for bipartisanship and a Tallaght strategy, and they will get it on this one Bill. However, the responsibility for this lies on the heads of Ministers and woe betide them if any banks fall or if taxpayers are left with significant liabilities.

See this speech in context