Dáil debates

Wednesday, 6 May 2015

Sale of Siteserv: Motion [Private Members]

 

9:00 pm

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

As I conclude the debate, I am struck by the empty benches on the Government side, with one Member from the Government parties present. That says it all about what the Government thinks of this Parliament. No wonder they do not answer parliamentary questions if they do not care to show up for a debate such as this. Where are the Ministers? They are agreeing a mechanism whereby companies such as Siteserv install water meters, which will cost Irish Water customers €500 million. There will, no doubt, be substantial additional funds for phase 2 of the water metering project. The Government is making sure that people, through attachment orders to social welfare payments, salaries or other Government payments, will pay for the installation of these water meters.

It is funny that the debate has come full circle in a few hours. The debate started about why a company called Siteserv, which owed the Irish taxpayer €150 million, was given a write-off of €110 million. Included in that sum was €5 million to buy off shareholders. Some of the shareholders owed substantial moneys to IBRC. The essence of the debate is that the Irish people were caught for €110 million to bail out Siteserv. It is borrowed money and they will pay interest on it. The Irish people paid for the bailout of the Siteserv on day one to the cost of €110 million, plus interest that they will pay for years to come. We will see on the news tonight that the Government has probably signed off on a decision to catch Irish households on the double for Siteserv. They caught them once for €110 million to write off debt, but they will impose attachment orders to make sure they pay for the installation of the water meters and they will catch the Irish people and charge them a second time. This is the second bailout for Siteserv, the first being through IBRC and the second by the Cabinet.

This is a sell-out of the Irish people, and the essence of the debate is that there is one law for the rich and another for the ordinary people. This is the Government of big business, which is the Fine Gael way. The last time it was in government, Fine Gael did it this way, and some of those Ministers who were in government the last time are doing it again. Just in case €110 million was not enough when they wrote off debt, they also make sure the company gets paid for water meters. If people do not like it, they will make attachment orders on people's wages and salaries before they receive money to pay their mortgages.

People are struggling to pay their mortgages. The €110 million written off for Siteserv would allow a write-down on mortgages of €100,000 each for 1,100 hard-pressed families. Let us think about that. Where is the bank veto? If those 1,100 people sought a write-down of €100,000 on their mortgages, the Irish banks, which the Minister for Finance owns on behalf of the Irish taxpayers, would use their veto and say that the customers would get no write-down. When they sell houses from under people, they will pay for the negative equity. In the case of big businesses connected to the people who were in government the last time, there is no bank veto, but they will get the write-down and the Government will make people pay on the double. This is about the Fine Gael way of running the country, looking after big business and the wealthy, and to hell with the ordinary people.

The Government will get its comeuppance, but the real disappointment is that, when listening to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, I never heard such a cheerleader for Fine Gael policy. He is more Fine Gael than the Fine Gael members. He has Stockholm syndrome and he has been captured by the trappings of office. He has single-handedly sold the Labour Party down the Swanee in an effort to cosy up to Fine Gael and look after business at the expense of ordinary people. I recommend, if Government Members come into the Chamber, that they vote in favour of the motion.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.