Rory Hearne (Dublin North-West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an group for bringing forward this motion. It is very important we focus on this issue. Similarly to my colleague, I also have differences with some of this motion. We need to understand why there is such frustration among the public regarding the issue of waste in public expenditure. It is because people are lacking basic access to services, especially access to appropriate school places for those with special needs and access to disability services. People are really struggling. They do not feel or see the State delivering for them. That is why, when they see the likes of the bike shed, they are absolutely bursting with anger and frustration, as we saw on the doorsteps during the election. It is understandable.

I will look at an issue in my constituency, that of metro north. This was first promised in 2005. It has now been 20 years since the metro was promised. What happened to it? It was ditched by Fine Gael in 2010 and by Leo Varadkar of Fine Gael in 2011 because it was not considered economically viable at the time the austerity cuts were implemented. It was picked up again and has stuttered along. We need to see genuine commitment to delivering key public infrastructure.

We also need to understand why there has not been this commitment. It is because we have never had a social democratic government, that is, one that values and believes in public services and believes in the State's responsibility to deliver in the key areas of infrastructure, health, housing and transport. What we have had is successive governments led by Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael, parties that have this mixed and confused ideology. They are not sure whether they believe in the State or the private sector for delivery. You can look through a litany of examples over the past 30 years. I have written books on it. I refer to public private partnerships, leasing schemes and outsourcing. There is a confused approach as to whether to deliver public services through the private sector or the public sector. These governments have fallen down the middle.

In some areas, we do things very well. To back up my colleague, it is really important we see the areas in which the public sector is delivering. I refer to the area of education in our schools in particular. Our teachers work so hard. We also see our nurses and doctors. There are public servants and civil servants throughout this country who are struggling in their own ways as they work really hard to deliver public services. They are being held back by our State and how it fails to take that social democratic approach to valuing public services and to see their key role. With all due respect to the proposers of the motion, I have heard them criticise local authorities. We have also heard from the Government that local authorities are not delivering enough. Why are they not delivering? They are not delivering because they have been underfunded for 30 years. They have been cut back and their resources have been decimated.

I would also like the proposers of the motion to consider their language around NGOs. NGOs deliver vital services across the country. I refer to the likes of Women's Aid and Barnardos. I was out in Finglas West visiting a local service delivered by Barnardos. It is a family resource centre that is doing incredible work in very challenging situations. It is supporting parents and children. These NGOs are doing vital work. We must be very careful about criticising that sector. It is important to value it. We need to defend NGOs. They are being squeezed by the State as regards what they are expected to deliver.

I will talk about the issue of social housing. We are continuing to deliver social housing through leasing. We pay private sector bodies, often investor funds, a set income for 25 years approximating to or just below the market rent and, at the end of those 25 years, we get nothing. When talking about waste of taxpayers' money, the social housing leasing schemes are one of the biggest wastes of public money there is. Why is the Government continuing to deliver social housing through leasing despite its commitment to end the use of social housing leasing? One in five of all new social houses delivered this year and next year will be acquired through leasing, where the State gets no asset at the end. We need to reconsider that.

See this speech in context