Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

The point has been well made, but I want to give an example and to hear the response of the Minister of State in regard to it. This concerns the agreement the Government made initially in the memorandum of understanding to sell off the harvesting rights of Coillte, which had been agreed with the troika.

For a long time we tried to discover what the hell was going on, what analysis had been carried out of the plan to sell Coillte's harvesting rights and what the NTMA or NewERA, whichever was supposed to be responsible for the proposed sale, was doing. It was extremely difficult to obtain information and we were screaming for a debate. The only debate on the matter finally took place when we tabled a Private Members' motion. There was a huge external campaign to highlight why selling the harvesting rights of Coillte would be a major mistake and why what was proposed did not add up at any level. Ultimately, under pressure from that big civil society campaign, the Government changed its mind. Up until that point, however, there was nothing which required it to engage in a discussion on the decision, agreed with the troika, to sell off the harvesting rights. We had no right to demand that a matter of such huge import be debated in the House.

To follow on from Deputy Pearse Doherty's point, this is a recent example of how we could not obtain a debate on a major proposal. As matters stand, if this or any future Government decides to dispose of State assets and gives instructions to the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund or the NTMA to facilitate it, we cannot force a debate on the issue. That should be the minimum requirement on the part of any Government in the disposal of State assets.

See this speech in context