Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. I refer Members to the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009, the pension levy Act, as passed by this House, despite our arguments in regard to some of its content. The preamble to that Act states that it is necessary to cut current Exchequer spending substantially to demonstrate to the international financial markets that public expenditure is being significantly controlled to ensure continued access to international funding and to protect the State's credit rating and reverse the erosion of the State's international competitiveness. This objective remains in terms of the actions we, this Parliament, and the Government take. While the Revenue figures are positive and it now appears we are hitting a floor in terms of Revenue returns, our economy is a long way from recovery. The cost to the Irish Government in terms of obtaining funds and lending is increasing dramatically. Where this will finish, we do not know. There is no doubt but that the Croke Park deal, if it does not go as the Government wishes it to go, will have a significant impact on our lending rates and international perception. Having this debate at a time when public servants are voting on that deal is irresponsible. The Government should have provided leadership on this issue.

The comments of some people, in regard to a failure on the part of Members of this side of the House to be constructive, stick in my craw. Deputy Crawford articulated well this point in terms of the debacle of the Quinn Group. Another relevant point in this regard, one with which every Member of the House will agree, is that of the good Samaritan Bill which was voted down by Government on two separate occasions purely because it was proposed by the Opposition. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Ahern, then appeared in the House a couple of weeks later with his own legislation, for which we were expected to clap him on the back. They were purely partisan decisions in relation to legislation that not one dissenter could argue against.

We have all been embarrassed by the regime in this House which has not been overhauled. All of us, including Minister of State, Deputy Calleary and some of my colleagues, were surprised when we came into this House by some of the structures in place. I welcome the reform introduced during the past number of months in regard to remuneration and expenses. Perhaps the financial situation we are in has allowed some of the structures to be built. I welcome the introduction of vouched expenses and it is something for which I have argued for a long time. It makes perfect sense to have them. However, the media do not report that many of the vouched expenses we have will not be covered under the proposed new regime. Many of us would like to see all expenses fully vouched.

I agree with the argument made by Deputy Treacy that there should be a long service increment. It was introduced several years ago to make the acknowledgement about which Deputy Treacy spoke earlier. It was not right that when I entered the House at the age of 23, very wet behind the ears, I received the exact same salary as Members with 20 or 30 years experience in the House. That was changed, but has now been reversed.

The pension debacle has brought to the fore in the public mind the lack of capacity in Government to provide any semblance of leadership or direction for the country. It is a watershed for the Government and from here on the public will dismiss any call for solidarity in the interest of getting our country and economy out of the septic quagmire that has been created by successive Fianna Fáil governments.

The Government has made a series of flawed decisions. The pay cuts introduced in the budget last December mean that a cleaner pays as a percentage of salary more of a contribution to get us out of this mess than a Minister or a senior civil servant. The pay cuts introduced by the Minister for Finance were significantly flawed, especially when he decided to include a bonus scheme that had already been shelved, in the calculations to determine the pay cuts of public servants. Someone earning less than €30,000, including those on the minimum wage, saw their pay cut by 5% while Ministers and senior civil servants on salaries of €150,000 and more had their pay cut by approximately 3%. That is hard to justify. It is immoral.

I proposed a constructive suggestion to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to deal with the issue of judges' pay and the huge costs to the taxpayer of our asylum system of €80,000 a day. I asked the Minister to contact the President of the High Court and ask judges to sit longer during September to deal with the backlog in judicial review cases. The Minister refused point blank to take that suggestion on board. However, on 12 April the President of the High Court took on that very initiative and has decided that judges will sit during September to deal with the backlog. Constructive suggestions put forward by the Opposition in this Chamber are dismissed out of hand by the Government because they come from the Opposition. Other public servants are to be commended for taking on those initiatives and implementing them.

We have a rudderless Government; its Members will not speak to their colleagues and implement a simple proposal that would first and foremost provide the type of leadership for which the country is crying out and provide the direction that is urgently needed.

See this speech in context