Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)

There are many indicators that should send a clear signal to all Members that this is not a time for politics as usual. One such indicator to which reference was made repeatedly today is that more than 450,000 people are unemployed and this is the human face of the crisis that Members are attempting to confront. However, another statistic emerged on the news this evening. It is an abstract point with which people have had difficulty in grappling but is of great significance, namely, today the bond markets sought a yield of 6.9% or in other words, the cost for Ireland to borrow money has returned right to its peak. In itself, this is a clear signal that we cannot have politics as usual. The real challenge faced by the country is how to bridge the gap between annual spending of €50 billion and income of €30 billion. This debate is useful regarding the ideas that are put into the mix because unless the bond market can be reassured that Ireland will be able to effectively borrow at sustainable rates in January, it will not be a question of whether we must cut €5 billion or €7 billion. We would be obliged to bridge the entire gap in a single quantum leap, which would not be sustainable for the long-term viability of the economy or when balancing the need for growth with the need to get our fiscal policies correct. Our sovereignty, that is, our capacity to manage our own affairs is at stake, with the IMF at the door waiting to come in. Today I tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister for Finance on what the procedures would be in such an eventuality.

I have heard repeatedly in recent days from absent friends in the Green Party and more recently in tweets from the vanguard in Fianna Fáil about the need for consensus, to stretch the hand across the floor and to have greater co-operation on this national crisis. While I agree with that approach to politics, its cornerstone should not be another Tallaght strategy from Fine Gael. Its cornerstone should be that the same policy that applies to bankers, directors and chief executive officers of banks also applies to the Government in respect of accountability. I could hold my nose and countenance the idea, not of another Tallaght strategy, but of a national approach to government with Fine Gael members taking Cabinet seats. I could do so if I saw real intent on the backbenches of Fianna Fáil to have a palace coup and to tell Deputy Cowen and his cohorts, who have lead us into the mire we are in at present, that it is time to go, that democratic accountability applies to them as much as it does to Mr. FitzPatrick, Mr. Goggin and others in the banking sector, as well as directors. If the Government pursues that line with such individuals, it must apply the same or higher standards to its own members. I take with a grain of salt the tweets and public statements I read and hear on consensus when I do not discern the willingness for a palace coup within Fianna Fáil to have that level of accountability.

Were one to need any reassurance regarding the Government's culpability, one should consider the report by Professor Honohan on the banking crisis in which he states, "in short although international pressures contributed to the timing, intensity and depth of the Irish banking crisis, the essential characteristic of the problem was domestic and classic". He then continues with further evidence which, due to time constraints, I will not go into in greater detail.

Within the one minute that remains to me, I wish to deal with the Croke Park agreement. There has been much talk on the sustainability of that agreement, which obviously is something that comes into sharp focus today. However, one should make haste slowly as far as tearing it up is concerned because it contains much that is good. For example, it refers to how the parties will work together to implement it and how the introduction of new, improved technology service provision, and on-line and electronic fund transfers will be the norm. It also says merit-based competition and promotion policies will be the norm and promises significantly improved performance management across all public service areas. It contains a host of things that we have long advocated for the public service.

The number employed in the public service in 2000 was 247,343. In 2008, there were 319,000. That is an increase of 73,000 in eight years, built substantially on the basis of unsustainable tax revenues from the construction sector. We have a real problem there.

The missing chapter in the Croke Park agreement is any commitment to timelines or targets for savings. A document that is full of good intentions is being thwarted by the heavy hand of unaccountability. People who are charged with its implementation are thwarting the benefits that could accrue. When we are looking for billions in savings there is no commitment to timelines for achieving this. Trade unions and employers, whose interests it serves, would need to wake up to this fact. We need targets for its implementation.

See this speech in context