Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)

The sell-off of State assets is bad politics and bad economics, and in Sinn Féin's view it is not necessary. That is not Fine Gael's position, which is fair enough. In fairness to the party, it has been clear about that for a long time. However, the Labour Party used to believe that selling off State assets was bad politics and bad economics and was not necessary. There was a time when Labour understood that and championed public services and State ownership of key State assets. The Minister responsible understood that when he was in Official Sinn Féin, Sinn Féin The Workers Party, the Workers Party, New Departure and Democratic Left, but it seems that is no longer the case. The colonisation of Labour has taken place, as the party has succumbed to the charms of Fine Gael. Labour has bought into privatising State assets in the interests of bankers and developers and the right wing ideological demands. Before the last election Labour said it was committed to the concept of public enterprise. It claimed that it was determined to ensure that semi-State companies would play a full role in the recovery of the Irish economy. The dear leader said Labour told us it was opposed to the short-termist privatisation of key assets, such as Coillte or the energy networks. Now a Labour Minister is pushing through a conservative economic strategy and is planning to do what Labour said it would never do.

People find it difficult to accept the commitment to sell off successful self-financing State companies. Nobody wants to buy unsuccessful self-financing companies. They only want to buy something which is profitable and is able to bring them a surplus. The State companies that have been earmarked for sale include Bord Gáis's energy business and some elements of the ESB's power generation capacity, as well as the possible sale of some assets of Coillte and the State's remaining shares in Aer Lingus. These are successful companies that would be, if the Government had its head screwed on, part of the solution to the creation of jobs and delivering growth.

There is no commitment in the memorandum of understanding with the troika for the sell-off of State assets. That may be its wish and desire but there is no legal or other imperative on the Government to do it. The fact is that the Government wants to do it. The Government is in favour of the policy it has announced. When we met with the troika it told us that while it believes in privatisation, a decision on the sale of State assets was not binding on the Government.

It has been claimed that the sell-off will raise €1 billion at some undetermined time in the future and that it will be used for job creation. That must be set against the Government's decision to give away taxpayers' money to unguaranteed bondholders and bad banks. I have never been able to work it out, although I can figure out intellectually why a Government would do this but the mathematics of it are beyond me. A total of €20 billion was given to the banks last year and €3.1 billion will be given to Anglo Irish Bank at the end of next month and then one wonders why there is not money to invest in job creation, public services, front line services in health, and why schools must be stripped of resources. Even if there was some merit in recapitalising banks the fact is that the money is being paid into a zombie bank, what will probably emerge in the fullness of time to be a criminal bank.

It is also a myth that privatisation and deregulation bring competitiveness and efficiency. It was the right wing deregulation strategies of Thatcher and Reagan and others in the 1980s that led to the growing gap these policies created between the rich and poor. People like us will do okay. We might not be wealthy or be able to enjoy a good life but the gap between us and others is widening. The pattern wherever privatisation has been pursued and profitable state companies have been sold off is one of job losses, increased prices for consumers and big profits for private speculators. In Britain the first public company to be privatised under Thatcher was British Telecom. That was in 1984. Within six years 42 other major companies had been sold off. Such an agenda also weakens the ability of the trade union movement to protect workers because the privateers do not want union rights and workers to be organised. Labour backbenchers and supporters should take note and try to figure out what sort of society will be the outcome. Trade union members and leaders should press the Labour Party to come clean on how many other public companies or State assets will be privatised and at what cost to them, their families, communities, consumers and citizens.

It seems that the Government has learned nothing from the experience of privatisation. Níl aon rud foghlaimithe ag an rialtas seo le bliain anuas ar chúrsaí príobháidiú. Mar shampla, Irish Sugar was privatised, leading to the gradual running down of what was a profitable sugar industry and the eventual closure of the sugar factories in Mallow and Carlow. This is recent history. In the Eircom debacle, a State communications company worth €8.4 billion at the time of its privatisation had a net value of just €39 million by 2011. How did this happen? The Labour Party leader, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, has been highly critical of the disastrous sell-off of Eircom. He described what occurred as a debacle and compared it with "being bought and sold like a clapped out second-hand car". It was asset-stripped and considerable profits were made by casino capitalists, but the Irish public paid the price. There was no investment in the development of the telecommunications infrastructure. We still lag behind in this regard. Available download speeds remain below the fastest speeds available in other OECD countries. Once again, the Government either ignores or simply does not care.

When ageing former revolutionaries in a conservative alliance with an unashamedly conservative party end up pursuing these policies, the membership and grassroots of their party must ask where it is all going. From international experience, it is clear that the disadvantaged status of women relative to men in the workplace is worsened by privatisation. There are social consequences to these decisions.

If there is no public airline, public energy body, post services or forestry body, what kind of society will be left? There is no point in blaming anyone else for the Government's actions. It should reverse course, although that is unlikely. It should reconsider the sell-off of Bord Gáis and other key assets and stand up for the rights of working people. It should also utilise these profitable sectors to regenerate our economy.

It is worth reminding Labour in particular - I will remind Fine Gael as well, as it has many good, sound members - of the Proclamation, which states: "We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible." It does not state: "...unless the big bankers, the golden circle and the IMF dictate otherwise." As we approach the 1916 centenary, the Taoiseach will not be returning our economic sovereignty to us. Rather, the Government will be tearing up the 1916 Proclamation.

See this speech in context