Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)

The Minister gave the facts, stating that there have been some benefits from greater engagement - nothing to get excited about - and that progress is being made. All we will ever do when a review is undertaken is to make some progress. Neither of the Government parties claimed that it would do any better than that.

We, in Fine Gael, were clear from the outset in stating that we agreed with the targets and the aim to get the budget deficit down to 3% of GDP by 2015. We wanted to reach it earlier and we were the first to say so. We never veered from that in the course of the general election campaign. However, we always stated there are different ways of reaching the targets and that remains the case.

Built into this programme are many changes. A major change is the comprehensive spending review, which, I am sure, the next Minister to speak will address. That is key. The more progress we make and solutions we find there, the less pain must inflicted in other areas and the less money must be charged. If there are more savings made and new practises brought in to save spending money, then the Government will have to raise less money off the backs of people through ways we outlined and which, unfortunately, will inflict pain.

The figures can be changed in different areas once the end target is achieved. That is what we must do. It will be the work of the Government over the next four, five or six months and beyond. It will involve every Deputy giving his or her ideas. In this regard even the proposals made by Deputy Joan Collins should be considered. Nothing will be ruled out because the Government has stated clearly we will review the programme and make changes where we can.

There is no point in kidding ourselves here, expecting that the Government would change this entire document in its first six or seven weeks in office. It does not work that way. While we would wish it were otherwise we are stuck with the agreement, therefore, it wold be good if were able to change some of its terms.

As a result of the failings of the past couple of Governments led by one party, Fianna Fáil, it is the case that, as they say, "We are where we are". We are in serious debt. Apart from the banking debt, to run this country for the next three or four years we need over €60 billion on top of the money we raise through taxes, etc. Even if taxes on high earners were increased we would still need €50 billion or €60 billion. It is why this support was accepted from the IMF. We need the money to run the country.

With respect, and I debated this with Deputy Adams after the election, Sinn Féin is not clear on where it would raise the €60 billion. It has answers on how to raise the first €10 billion to €15 billion needed for the first year but there are three or four years involved. If one defaults or does not take the support, one would need to raise such funding to run the country or else cut the deficit in the first year, which means being short almost €20 billion this year and each of the next two years. That is where the problem lies.

Our job in Government is to close that gap and get the deficit down. No doubt we will do so but it will not happen overnight. It will take time. It will take everyone's efforts and ideas on all sides to get the deficit down through spending reductions, savings, bringing in new practises and applying common sense in terms of how we do our business.

In the period 2001-08 expenditure was let go mad in nearly every Department, by up to 140% in most cases, 150% in others. It was lunacy. It should not have been let happen, but it did happen and now we must correct it. While it is being corrected money must be borrowed and that is why we are stuck with this agreement. Hopefully, every time we go back for a review we will get more changes and the pain will ease.

There are some successes in this review, if one wants to call them that, which we had signalled before the election we had intended to implement. There is to be some kind of jobs initiative. The agreement and the last budget did little for jobs. We have secured agreement to address that aspect and our initiative will be announced next week. It will not solve everything but it will be a start in the right direction to restore confidence and give businesses a chance to employ more people. All it will involve is a start, with small initiatives in different Departments to give us a chance. Hopefully, we can do more in the budget at the end of the year and also next year. It will only be a start but it is better than what was there previously and it will give some hope to people.

The Government parties have stated they are committed to the targets and guidelines set out in the budget for 2011 and 2012 following which there will be a review to see how we can manage the other couple of years in the light of economic growth and other factors. That was agreed in this review. We now have agreement to review progress half way through the programme and to make changes as we proceed with it.

The other important issues involve the proposed changes to NAMA. I had a serious difficulty with NAMA when it was set up and I was one of the few to speak about it in this House. NAMA was wrong from day one and it is still wrong. However it, too, is now in place. We gave a commitment that we would try to make it work better and more transparently and provide greater tax savings and we will do that.

We also stated that we would make NAMA kick-start the property market or let it bottom out, by making NAMA sell assets. If NAMA holds onto everything, everybody else is waiting before making a move because it is one of the major players in the market. It is built into this document that NAMA must sell at least 25% of what is on its books by 2013. That is another achievement in terms of getting the market moving again.

We have also stopped the transfer of loans of €20 million or less into NAMA, which is a good idea. Those loans should remain with the banks because they contain some assets that others might want to buy and they might be worth more than what NAMA would pay for them. If they were to be transferred to NAMA they would crystalise more losses in the banks. That is another small achievement. These are not big measures but they are measures we stated we would take. We did not promise we would turn the economy around in one day because one cannot do that.

What is most important is that we used the review to try to regain some credibility. Ireland's reputation is mud all over Europe because time after time Ministers came in here and issued figures and plans and spoke of hopes of turning the corner, etc., none of which was true. Every time a Minister made a statement here that turned out to be untrue three or six months later, our reputation was further eroded.

The Government has a major job to rebuild that reputation. It will do it over a couple of years by negotiating, playing the game, meeting people and putting Ireland's case by explaining what we are trying to do as a new Government and how we will try to fix matters. Over time, one rebuilds credibility and trust, which will give more opportunities to receive better reductions in interest rates and greater changes in restructuring debt, and to have even more change than is in the document to try to ease the pain for people who cannot take it. Our job is to rebuild our credibility.

Yesterday evening, I had to laugh when I heard Deputy Pearse Doherty speak about crack negotiating teams renegotiating this in a week. Sinn Féin would be the first to admit that negotiations can take a long time and do not happen in eight weeks. It takes years to effect real change. We have made a small impact in a couple of weeks to put the banking situation on a sound footing and bring some clear direction by making decisions and taking action. This will help us regain our credibility to negotiate further. It is a joke for a member of Sinn Féin to speak about negotiating as if it were something one can do in a week. It is expert in negotiations and I will admit it is good at it; it had different ways of doing it but it achieved results. However that took a long time. Likewise, this will take us a long time as it cannot be fixed overnight.

It is essential that we approach it correctly and do what we stated we would do. We are doing so and we did not misrepresent anything. What is key is to find where money is being wasted in every Department and correct it. To achieve what we stated we would achieve we must reduce the numbers employed by the State. When the numbers increased in 2001 and 2008 so did employment, as more than 70,000 extra people were employed in the public service. These people were given false hope by the previous Government through higher wages and lower tax. This was wrong. People borrowed money and got into debt because they were given false hope. This is where the pain is. As we close the gap and return to the spending and employment levels we should be at people will suffer. We must try to do this as best we can. We know money is being wasted in every Department and that money can be spent better.

We have to change our work practices and what we do, and effecting this change will be the job of Deputy Brendan Howlin. This is how we will put the country back on a sound footing so that we can borrow from the markets as we should be able to do, be in control of our own affairs, be able to decide who we tax and what services will be reduced. I do not like being told what to do either, but we must get ourselves in a position whereby we can take control of this. This will happen only with honesty, credibility and action. We cannot sit back and hope the problem will go away. We must deal with it, which is what we have been discussing in recent days.

I ask everyone on the other side of the House to be realistic and work with us on it. We will have different policies when it comes to taxing people, but there are many areas on which we can agree. We can debate who to tax. It is an issue that if the wealthy are taxed too much they will move their money. We must have balance. It is not as simple as whacking a large tax on people. If pressed, they can move their assets and money. We need to try to work this out. However, it is correct to state that those who can pay should take more of the hit than those who cannot pay. We have to try to achieve this.

See this speech in context