Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)

We will have another battle like last year. We need more than tokenism. The debate follows on from the Second Stage of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Bill. We saw from that the tokenism that is involved in some of the ways it was introduced. The huge ideological difference between Fine Gael and Labour will be a problem for the Government. We wish the parties well.

The public voted for change. They gave a huge majority to the parties that are now in Government. People are not getting the change they sought. Part of that demand came on the heels of the claims and accusations made on a daily basis by the spokespersons for Fine Gael and Labour. As I said in other debates, they did not need to promise anything, they would have got in anyway. Nonetheless, they promised much and have not delivered nor can they deliver. It was known that they would be unable to deliver. That is the political reality. It leaves a sour taste in the mouths of the ordinary electorate, especially the young people who are educated and understand politics. They want real debate and meaningful reform, as we all do. The Taoiseach has said on many occasions and he reiterated this morning that he does not wish to be involved in a Punch and Judy show. He accused Deputy Martin of engaging in a Punch and Judy show. We must move beyond that and introduce real reform and accountability in the Chamber.

Last night I saw the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, make announcements on the television news about water charges and property charges. Those issues must be debated in the House. He is a long-time practitioner of the political system and he understands it well. I accept he also wants to see change. We must get change.

The situation with legal advice was the same in county councils. I accept there are legal advisers available but we do not get legal advice. We are always told the Attorney General has advised the Government on this, that and the other. I have experience of the Whip system from my previous term in the House. On hearing that the Attorney General said we could not do such and such a thing I often asked whether we had sought a second opinion. The Attorney General is only one legal mind. I accept all legal experts are qualified but any day of the week one could hire three different, eminent senior counsel to give three different views on any given topic once one would come up with the readies to buy the advice. I often wonder why the advice of the Attorney General must be accepted. That was my experience on so many occasions during the term of the previous Government.

The members of the Technical Group were voted into the House in large numbers. People voted for candidates not in the party system who hold a different view. We have a mixed and varied grouping. A combined effort allows the group to put forward motions such as this one, avail of speaking time and to do other things. We can be different to each other and be honest and open and we do not have a Whip telling us what to do. We are also entitled to research staff. If the Government is honest about reform I do not know why we must wait until the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission decides whether we should get such staff when we are entitled to them as a right.

It is the same with Adjournment debates. It is very difficult to raise a matter on the Adjournment. We are allowed to raise matters under Standing Order 32 calling for the suspension of the Order of Business in the morning but having read out the matters the Ceann Comhairle rules them all out of order automatically. The public wants change. We must make the House accountable to the people on the street. That is our primary duty and that is why we tabled the motion. When it comes to the vote I hope the Government will accept the motion in the spirit in which it was tabled.

See this speech in context