Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

Dáil Éireann declines to give a Second Reading to the Financial Measures (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009 because of the provision contained in the Bill that will allow for the indefinite extension of the bank guarantee scheme by Ministerial Order.

It is nine months since the fateful night of 29 September when the bank guarantee was hatched to save Anglo Irish Bank on the eve of its financial year end. What promises we heard from the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, that day about new capital flows into the banks and, through them, into the economy as a whole. It is fair to ask what the experience of the past nine months has been, a period during which the Minister repeatedly declared that the banking crisis had been contained and offered a series of still unsuccessful fixes. What justifies the belief that he knows what he is doing? He is making it up as he goes along and tonight's Bill is just the latest instalment.

The Minister is demanding near dictatorial authority and even immunity from review and scrutiny. On his record, he does not deserve such power and immunity. The flows of new credit to business have never occurred and the banking crisis has worsened. A professional stopped me in the street and asked me to ask the Minister whether he knows that, by September, only a few professionals will still be employing people because the situation has grown so bad.

The multi-billion euro recapitalisation has come and gone and been digested by the banks without the slightest hiccup. The flow of credit remains as elusive as ever. NAMA is the new panacea to achieve what the guarantee failed to deliver. Now, the Minister wants another prop to cover up the dismal failure of his original efforts nine months ago. He wants to assume a stunning new power to decide on extensions to the guarantee. In effect, he wants to rule by decree as if he were a new Napoleon. Why this and why now? Is it because the Minister and the Taoiseach do not expect to be in office when the September 2008 guarantee expires in September 2010? Is it that they want to impose the burden of the Minister's failed policies on his successor? Perhaps their cronies and political clients in the banks and among the developers want to have this extra lock on policy-----

See this speech in context