Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Clearly, the Bill represents moneys spent and is just a rubber-stamping mechanism. As a result of the fact that the Bill gives effect to what we have voted on during the year, and what has been spent during the year, we are merely engaged in a procedural motion which, in the past, went through without any debate. To some extent it is good we are having this 45 minute debate, although the cost will be almost €1 billion for every minute of our discussion. In order to engage in a serious debate about such expenditure and really to get to the heart of the issues relating to what has led to the need for this €43 billion of expenditure, included in which is a Supplementary Estimate of €1.4 billion, we need substantially more time. In addition, more forensic analysis would be required. It is unfortunate to say the least that the Estimates every year have been highly dubious. They are presented in the full knowledge that substantial additional funding will be required in the near future, particularly for the Departments of Health, Education and Skills and Social Protection in order that they might continue to function and move forward. Each year, therefore, we have a budgetary process during which Estimates are knowingly presented with a shortfall included.

Other criticisms can be levelled at the process. A recent report by the OECD concluded that, "Scrutiny of the budget by TDs is under-developed by international standards, with the Cabinet in control 'to the point of dominance'." The organisation's officials made recommendations and suggested reforms that would allow parliamentarians to better influence and critique financial allocations and priorities. They stated that Ireland did not have a good track record on budget oversight and is at the bottom of the international rankings of the parliamentary engagement point of view. The OECD report suggests that the annual Estimates should be considered and voted on by the Dáil before the start of the budget year. Currently, the Dáil vote takes place after the year has begun. The current Estimates process, as evidenced today, is just a rubber-stamping job. The report also proposed a parliamentary budget office. This office would equip Deputies to engage more effectively on budgetary matters, for example, with policy costings and analysis of taxation and expenditure measures. There is merit in their proposals and hopefully in the future these rubber-stamping exercises will end and real debate will happen.

Rather than having this cursory debate on the Appropriation Bill, why not have the debate that is required on the OECD report or, for that matter, the Constitutional Convention reports, in particular, the convention report on Dáil reform? One of its proposals, which would be of major benefit to the Opposition, is to remove the constitutional bar on proposing amendments even if they are positive. The reason for the bar is that they may lead to a charge on the Exchequer or the people. Let us hope both reports and their proposals and recommendations do not end up like many things here, gathering dust on some shelf.

See this speech in context