Ulick Burke (Galway East, Fine Gael)

I thank Deputy Byrne for sharing her time with me. Deputy Kennedy was very selective in his contribution when he said that the people and the international financiers have confidence in the Minister for Finance, Deputy Lenihan. He must have forgotten that two years ago the Minister for Finance told us that the bank guarantee would have little or no effect on the economy. It has destroyed the economy and has been directly and indirectly responsible for job losses, emigration, businesses closing down and the stagnation and loss of confidence in our economy. He said the bailout was to be the cheapest in the world but 450,000 people have lost their jobs and become unemployed, and 100,000 well educated young people have left our shores and emigrated. Some of those young people will not return. It has turned out to be the most expensive in many different ways, second only to that of Iceland.

The Minister originally estimated that it would cost €1.5 billion and it then changed to €4 billion. By March last year it had risen to €12 billion. It then increased to €29 billion and last Thursday - black Thursday - it finished up at €34 billion, and it may increase again. That, together with the bailout of AIB, Bank of Ireland and Irish Nationwide Building Society, will probably increase the figure to €50 billion.

Earlier in the debate we spoke about small figures and the HSE cutbacks in health throughout the country. What would all of those billions of euro, or even a small portion of those billions, have meant to the many people who are lying on trolleys or the 40,000 people on waiting lists who are in pain and those whose cancer care is being denied to them as we speak? Have we forgotten about that? That is the reality.

Originally, the banking problem was one of liquidity, according to the Minister for Finance. It then turned out to be a solvency problem. We were told we had turned the corner in the budget last year. I do not know what corner the Minister for Finance was talking about but could he repeat that in about a month's time when he is delivering his new budget, the first of four?

How could people have confidence in this Minister to lead us back into recovery, about which he spoke? He has been fooled by the bankers and poorly advised by Department of Finance officials. Those people were in place during the boom period and they failed, as did the Government, to see the dangers coming down the track. He has now resorted to accepting the proposals of Mr. Colm McCarthy, lock, stock and barrel.

The Government appears to have no policy in place to create jobs. It is the McCarthy cuts for us for the next four years.

Can the Minister of State provide us with a true picture of the state of finances in the Bank of Ireland? Can he truthfully tell the House and public that there are no difficulties in that bank and that we will not be asked later, when the other issues have been settled, to provide further funding for the Bank of Ireland to bail it out? It is important we know this now, particularly with Anglo Irish Bank gone off the horizon and the current situation with regard to Allied Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide. We need to know the true situation with regard to the Bank of Ireland.

The banks are failing to provide funding, even for small businesses which are the lifeblood of the economy at this time. When we agreed to bail out the banks, we were guaranteed that we were bailing them out in order to allow them provide funds and lend again. They were to lend to the people keeping the country going and small businesses that keep people employed. The Minister of State is aware that in towns like Ballinasloe, Roscommon and Athlone doors of once-thriving businesses on every street are locked and their blinds are down. This situation is replicated throughout the country, not just in the west. Somebody must take responsibility for this.

The Government and the Minister for Finance have failed to direct the banks to make funds available. Not long ago, we were told that significant funding was being provided for that, but nothing has happened. We were told that people refused loans by the banks could appeal to a review body. However, we could count on one hand how many refusals have been overturned by this body, which has been in place for almost 12 months. This body was to solve the difficulties in situations where people were refused finance and was to rectify the situation where they had been denied funds. It is important that the Minister for Finance re-examines the declarations he has made over the past two years and recognises that he has failed as Minister for Finance. I agree he inherited a difficult situation from his predecessor, the current Taoiseach.

Banks say they are currently approving loans. That may be the case but when business people seek a loan of, for example, €100,000, they are only granted €25,000. That is the type of approval that is being given and it is this type of approval that makes up the statistics on loan approvals which is broadcast by banks, particularly Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish Bank. They say they are lending, but businesses cannot take up these loans because they fall so short of their requirements. The required loans may not be for development but may be to help them maintain and continue their business until the tide turns. The Minister said that we turned the corner 12 months ago but it has proved to be a long turn for many business people. It is important that approval is given for the loans sought and that banking returns to what is expected of it by business people.

The tragedy of the current situation is that good business people who repaid their loans and invested money and borrowed and repaid again are being refused loans. These people borrowed and repaid many times, even at a time when interest rates were as high as 18% in the 1980s and early 1990s, in order to invest in and develop their businesses. They paid exorbitant interest rates at times but now all the banks want to do is call in their loans, reduce their overdrafts and deny them such facilities. This indicates how out of touch with reality the Minister is with regard to the current situation.

The Minister must recognise that there are many people in the country with significant funds, people who invested wisely during the boom in safe havens. These people have withdrawn their funds and are now afraid to invest them in banks. The credit unions are the only outlets for many people currently and if it was not for them, many people would be in dire distress. People have lost their jobs but have been supported by credit unions which recognise their dire needs. This is because the credit unions are community based banks rather than profiteers or greedy moguls such as populated the national banks that have caused the trouble here.

All of this money is available to the Government, provided it brings forward a sensible proposal to use it, such as happened in the 1950s when we had the ESB national loan. At that time, the public who had money to invest and wanted to invest in a safe haven, loaned it to the Government which guaranteed it by government bonds which yielded in the region of 4%. I urge the Minister to realise that many people throughout the country have significant funds, particularly people who provided land for major infrastructure, such as roads, who received moneys from the NRA for their lands. That money is lying someplace but it is not safe. It is a pity the Government does not take the initiative and bring back the idea of a national loan and provide a dividend to investors after ten or 15 years. That should be done.

I wish to draw attention to the issue of the media, particularly the print media economists, who are perched here over our heads on a daily basis. They have all become economists, giving advice and criticising those who have not brought forward plans. Last Saturday we saw such comments from the editor of the Irish Independent - somebody mentioned the Sunday Independent in a similar vein earlier - in a front page editorial. It is unusual in journalism that the editorial comment would so openly support such comment, but I remember that on polling day in 1997, the editor had the audacity to call it payback day. What was that but a veiled support of Government, nothing more or less? Sir Anthony's puppets have continued with such comment ever since. We had it again last Saturday but there has been a change. I will cite one or two comments from the editorial and allow the House judge for itself.

The editorial states: "Day after day on the airwaves, we hear celebrity economists offering contradictory opinions on Government strategy". All Sir Anthony need do is open one of the nrwspapers in his group and he will see it. The editorial continued: "The Minister has consistently invited rational debate, but particularly on TV and radio, the debate is frequently distorted by commentators and interviewers who look and sound authoritative, but whose grasp of the country's economic problems, not to mention its sovereign responsibilities, is deficient". Where was this commentator when difficulties were brewing over the past four or five years? Can he look in the mirror and say he pretended to be authoritative on numerous occasions and he failed? Is it any wonder the Government is being misled when it had commentators like him pronouncing on the virtues of these people down the years? He can say it was on television but he should read the pages of his own writers, many of whom are perched above us every day.

See this speech in context