Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

It is the context for this. The chief executive of the Central Bank, which is listed among these agencies which are exempt, has decided that there is an emergency in this country and that he will ask his staff to take a cut. It is not just himself and the director of the Financial Regulator - he is taking himself right out of the exemption limit that was available. The Minister will be confirming that with a later amendment. Where is the same sense that we are in an emergency from other agencies on that list? Why do we decide that there is an emergency when it comes to the public service? Why is an emergency status volunteered by the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator, as well they might because they were caught completely flat-footed when it came to regulating the banking sector? Where is the same sense of emergency in Anglo Irish Bank, which was at the heart of the web of destruction that occurred? If we are genuinely in an emergency, there must be a more broadly based effort to confront this than the narrow base offered in this Bill.

I support Deputy Burton's amendment, but I also believe that in a true emergency we must confront costs that apply well beyond the public service. That must be led in a concerted way by the Government, which we simply have not seen. If that happened, there would be some sense that at least the sacrifice that is being asked of public service workers would be matched by others and would contribute to a greater purpose. That is what has been singularly missing from this debate.

See this speech in context