Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This amendment makes a great deal of sense. To ensure that my memory was serving me well, I checked to see whether one of the US Federal Reserve's mandates was employment. It is - the exact wording is "maximum employment". The amendment seems to be a simple, useful, risk-free and costless change.

The focus on economic development and growth is welcome.

However, there are probably a bunch of SME investment opportunities that may have fairly small economic growth potential but quite large employment potential. When the new strategic investment bank is in an ongoing relationship with the on-lenders, they will discuss the criteria under which they will lend money and the types of investment for which they will lend money.

Deputy Boyd Barrett's amendment proposes including in the purposes of the Act the wording "to create employment in the State," and I might suggest the wording "to support employment in the State" or "to maximise employment in the State," because it is about both creating new employment and protecting existing employment. Obviously, it is easier to keep somebody at work than it is to create a new job. It seems it would be useful for the Government and the strategic investment bank to be able to say to lenders that they think there are a significant number of opportunities which would create or protect employment and even though they may not be a huge boon to GDP or GNP, they would create and protect a bunch of jobs, and they think they should be lending to those as well. This amendment is an excellent proposal and I hope the Minister either accepts the wording proposed by Deputy Boyd Barrett or brings forward some similar wording such as "support, protect and maximise employment." I think it is an excellent idea.

See this speech in context