Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)

I support the motion. It is an amalgamated programme between Fine Gael and Labour, which together got 56% of the vote. I understand there must be give and take in any coalition, but the national well-being and the very future of Ireland is at stake here. We need to transform radically the system of governance. This is why I voted for the Taoiseach last week and, indeed, for the Cabinet also.

The economic policies must change. We must renegotiate the so-called EU-IMF bailout and I am very supportive of the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance's stance in Europe. I am hopeful that there are some signs, however slim and double-edged they might be with their threats to the corporation tax rate, that we will stand firm. They have a mandate to renegotiate this unfair and penal so-called loan system which is coercing us to invest much of our badly needed pension funds in failed banks.

We need a fresh approach that clearly shows step by step vigorous energetic leadership, and which sends out imaginative and positive rays of hope to our people. I believe we have industrious people who are interested in the future of our country who are ready, willing and able. They are crying out for leadership to show them the way to bring this country back to its proud place, give employment to people, support their families and encourage young business entrepreneurs to go out there and develop jobs not only for themselves, but for others.

The system of governance we have had in recent decades is shattered. It needs a radical overhaul and I welcome the constitutional changes proposed in the programme. Among other issues, I refer to the proposed referendum regarding judges' salaries. On reform of Seanad Éireann, I do not know whether the Government will live up to the commitments to put it to the people that it be abolished. It certainly needs to be reformed radically. I believe the permanent Government must be tackled. I am delighted there is a commitment to replace FÁS. Although the organisation has done much good work, some of its senior officials have done tremendous damage to its name. FÁS has many thousands of good employees and participants on the ground who are bedevilled by its baggage as a body. It needs a new name and a new direction. I think it is appropriate to rename it the national employment and entitlements service and to provide it is fully managed by a single Department. The Department of Social Protection is the appropriate Department in this context.

I would like to conclude by speaking about public service reform. Our system of government must modernise, adapt to new financial circumstances and begin to deliver better services with fewer resources. We need to introduce an ambitious programme of reform. It should be the most ambitious such programme since the inception of the State. We have no choice other than to make the system smaller and more efficient, for example, by reducing employee numbers and by changing the way the work is done. Rather than reducing front line services, we should make reductions at the top and throughout the layers of bureaucracy that have crept in over the years. Such a system has been cosseted, encouraged and embraced by senior people. Front line staff need to be given more power to make decisions. We badly need to bring new personnel with new ideas into the public service from the outside. Although there are many good people in the service, I suggest that a change is as good as a rest. We need to ensure officials have the skills to implement rigorous policy ideas across all Departments. I welcome the commitment to reverse the cut in the minimum wage, which I voted against. I assure the Deputies on the other side of the House that I welcome this measure.

See this speech in context