Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I support the initiative announced by the Government this morning which took many by surprise. However, few options were available to the Government this morning.

If a significant decision had not been taken by the Government today, we may well have been facing the scenario of one or more Irish banks not surviving the day, never mind the week. The options were limited. Nationalising individual banks that are in trouble was not an option for the Government, in my view. Likewise, allowing any individual bank to go under in an Irish context would have caused ripples that we would not have been able to control, in terms of its impact on other banks.

The response from the Stock Exchange today has been reasonably positive, although we should not overstate that. The Government has been making the case that the issue is primarily about liquidity and the availability of funds to Irish banks and there is a lot of truth in that. However, Deputy Rabbitte raised a valid issue. We need an answer to the question as to why Irish banks have been finding it so difficult to access funds and why banks outside of Ireland have become slower to lend money to them.

The radical measure that the Government has taken today will not solve domestic problems within Irish banks in terms of their potential exposure to bad debt, which the Irish taxpayer may now be exposed to in the foreseeable future. The Government's decision must be backed by legislation, although there was some confusion about that today. The Minister said this morning and repeated again this evening that the taxpayer will be protected in this deal. That simply is not the case. The exposure of the taxpayer will certainly be minimised and the Minister will do everything in his power to ensure that is the case. However, to claim that the taxpayers' interests will be entirely protected in this deal is simply not true. The Irish taxpayer is being exposed to potentially enormous debt, should future calamity befall Irish banks and the Irish economy more broadly. On top of the potential debt risk that exists, following the other protections that exist should they fail, is the potential damage that is being done to the cost to Ireland of borrowing money. In that context, I seek more detail from the Minister for Finance. Will the fact that we have become guarantor for a very large amount of money make it more expensive for the Irish Government to borrow large sums of money, as will be necessary for this years' budget?

Let us be clear — this is a gamble. It is calculated, but a gamble nonetheless, using public money in response to the abnormal and extraordinary circumstances faced by Irish banks and the Irish financial system generally. Our job in Opposition is to be responsible at times like this and we will be so. However, the Government should not expect us to wave provisions through without being constructively critical or making suggestions tomorrow. In that context, I appeal to the Minister and the Tánaiste to examine the sensible suggestions coming from Fine Gael and other Opposition parties with an open mind.

The Bill is essentially akin to war-time legislation, responding to extreme circumstances by giving extreme and all-encompassing powers to a Minister to make decisions as he sees fit. To ask an Opposition to accept that is very serious indeed. Tomorrow we will be seeking more oversight, more guarantees around tougher and more comprehensive regulation of the Irish banking system and we expect to receive at least a constructive and responsible response to our requests because they are not unreasonable.

This is not about securing the jobs of bank managers or the salaries of the board members of large banks in Ireland. It is about a much broader issue in terms of the availability of funds that will keep the Irish economy afloat and moving forward.

See this speech in context